Why don’t the people who are called prophets tell the Jews this?

“Convert to Protestant Christianity, ‘But I say, Did not Israel know? First Moses saith, I will provoke you to jealousy by them that are no people, and by a foolish nation I will anger you.’ (Romans 10:19), we’re here to ‘provoke them to jealousy’ (Romans 11:11). We know that ‘these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy.’ (Romans 11:31). This is the mercy, hear us; this is the refreshing, join us.”

If you start from Scripture, you will believe that God’s truth must be present today, and that we can and should have access to His words perfectly. There are plenty of verses to show this.

But many Christians have been told to think otherwise, that the transmission of Scripture should be viewed as a mere naturalistic process. In that approach, they will decided what words belong in Scripture by a rationalistic argument about empirical evidence. In other words, they are rooted in what they see (i.e. old manuscripts and fragments) and a seemingly plausible story made about them.

Here is but one passage showing that we should have God’s words properly today:

Ro 16:25 Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,
Ro 16:26 But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith:

Continue reading →

The Bible prophesies that Damascus is to be reduced dramatically.

“The burden of Damascus. Behold, Damascus is taken away from being a city, and it shall be a ruinous heap.” (Isaiah 17:1).

Current world events show that that this prophecy is well underway to being fulfilled. The Syrian city of Aleppo is already being reduced to rubble.

That same passage speaks of the diaspora of the Syrians. Multitudes of Syrians are being scattered all over the Earth.

Continue reading →

The civilising influence of Christianity is quite different to the backwardness and brutality that exists within certain Islamic circles.

Just as there is a true form of Christianity, so is there a true evil face of Islam. That is, when Christianity is taken to its ultimate form, there is peace, Reformation, prosperity, healing, respect and holiness. But when Islam is taken to its ultimate form, we see what destruction it brings.

Former Australian PM, Tony Abbott, wrote an opinion piece stating, “Cultures are not all equal. We should be ready to proclaim the clear superiority of our culture to one that justifies killing people in the name of God.”

Of course, the “god” of Islam, Allah, is nothing like the Christian God.

So the solution that the right-leaning secularists or conservative Roman Catholics (and too many Protestants) give is untenable. They say, with Abbott, that Islam needs some sort of religious Reformation, and worse, that this would lead to acceptance of a separation of Church and state, and pluralism.

Let’s agree that this view is superior to those of the communist side of politics.

But the solution for Islam is not any Reformation but this: “That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth” (Phil. 2:10).

Again, the solution for Islamic violence is not secularism. While secularism has done a lot to pacify religions, including Roman Catholicism, the ultimate solution must be another religion. Ideas must be fought with ideas, but the ideas of secularism are not positive.

There must be a proper union of proper Protestant Christianity with the state. This is the best historical model, no matter what time of history we examine, such as, the fourth century Roman Empire, the English Reformation, Cromwell’s Protectorate, Pitt’s Britain or pre-1960s USA.

We should have a patriotic toward our country, we should have an execeptionalist view toward the civilising effects of Christianity within our national culture.

Source: http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/the-religion-of-islam-must-reform/story-fni0cwl5-1227638212523

It is quite interesting to see that Roman Catholics say that Protestantism is divided. There is a true form of Protestantism which exists regardless of the many varieties, and that is the orthodox doctrines in regards salvation, the Deity of Christ and other foundational doctrines.

But Roman Catholicism is itself divided, broadly between modernists and conservatives, but also on various rites and rituals. And there are differences between which “Church” Council mass one might follow (e.g. Trent or Tridentine versus post-Vatican 2). And among the more traditional Catholics are those who not only insist on retaining Latin, but some go all the way to rejecting the modern popes (e.g. Sedevacantists).

And far from holding one set of doctrine and catechism, teachings in Romanism have evolved. After all, teachings have actually developed over time, even quite recently:

Veneration of angels and dead saints — 375 AD
Worship of Mary — 471 AD
Extreme unction — 526 AD
Purgatory first established in 593 AD
Invocation of saints — 600/700 AD
Kissing the pope’s feet — 707 AD
Image worship — 787/788 AD
Canonisation — 995 AD
Infallibility — 1086
Indulgences — 1190/1563
Confession — 1215
Transubstantiation — 1215
Supremacy — 1215
Half communion — 1415
Purgatory — 1438/1439
Seven sacraments — 1439/1547
Apocryphal books — 1547
Priestly intention — 1547
Venial sins — 1563
Sacrifice of the mass — 1563
Immaculate conception — 1834
Papal infallibility — 1870
Assumption of the Virgin Mary — 1950

Also, different Vulgates have been approved over time which differ in various passages. They are the Sistine, Clementine (with sub-catagories), Stuttgart and Nova Vulgata.

Luke 18:7 And shall not God avenge his own elect, which cry day and night unto him, though he bear long with them?
Luke 18:8 I tell you that he will avenge them speedily. Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?

Some people sincerely believe that although God avenges His people, and saves them when they cry to Him, that apparently the question about faith on the Earth implies a negative answer.

Is Jesus coming back when there will not be faith on the Earth? The Biblical answer is that there will be faith when Christ returns, because (after all) who is it that He is coming for?

There must be many saved people because the Gospel must go to the nations (see Matthew 24:14; 28:19, 20). There must be many saved because Jesus said one will be taken and one left (which statistically is about 50% of the adult population). Also, the fact the knowledge of God should cover the Earth as the waters cover the sea would make for about 71% of the Earth’s total population (including children), since that is the percentage of water coverage on the Earth’s surface (see Habakkuk 2:14).

The Church, while on Earth, must grow up.

Ephesians 4:13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:

Ephesians 5:26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,
Ephesians 5:27 That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.

Australians are saying “no” to Islam. But saying “no” is not enough, without a proper basis for a counteractive idea. A person can use secularist and humanist principles to say “no” to Islam, but those ideas do not provide a real solution.

There have been calls to “reform” Islam (from a secularist basis). The best attack that secularism has against Islam is to attack the Koran. Here’s how:

1. There are different ante-Uthmanic versions of the Koran.
2. These were suppressed by Uthman, whose own edited standard version has had various textual variations.
3. The printing of the Koran in the 20th century required the editing of a standard text.

Secondly, secularist scholarship can then introduce questions about translation, and about interpretation. Thus, the secularist has the means of undermining Mohammedanism, and can make emotional pleas about how women are treated or how repressive Muslim society is.

The problem is that the secularist does not have a viable alternative that can either change the heart properly, or bring in true peace. The real solution is to have viable and properly taught Christianity as a witness, to convert people into the Biblical religion.

When a person believes in a jot and tittle accurate Bible, they believe that every spelling at every place is correct. If the Bible says “Immanuel” at one place (Isaiah 7:14), that cannot be substituted with something else, even though at another place we find “Emmanuel” (Matthew 1:23).

This is not an inconsistency at all. The reason for two different spellings is because in the Old Testament, it was written in Hebrew, and so that transliterates into English differently than going from Greek, in the New Testament, to English.

For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. (Matthew 5:18).

Every place must be fully accurate, after all, it is God’s words we are dealing with in English, not just anyone’s subjective opinion.