An Invitation to Explore the Bible: Hidden Gems and Treasures

By Graham Diggins

This work has been written to strengthen and enlarge the faith of Christians by teaching them the truth while exposing the traditions of the elders that have grown up in Reformed, Reformed Baptist, Protestant, and Baptist Church circles. It has tackled many issues, some of which have been raised inside the church and some that have come from basically an antagonistic, nonneutral, and atheistic humanity.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Xlibris AU
• Release date: Mar 1, 2017
• ISBN: 9781524521189

Graham Diggins

The author was born in Parramatta Hospital in 1949. He was raised at Merrylands, Dundas, and Ermington, New South Wales. He went to high school at Marsden High, Ermington (1962–1967). He won a Commonwealth Scholarship in 1968 and graduated with a BSc from a Sydney university (1968–70). He is a surface coatings chemist with Sydney firms (1971–1987). He got married in 1973. He is a father of four children—1975, 1976, 1977, and 1980. He attended Moore College from 1975–1977. He received a BTh (Hons) from the Australian College of Theology (ACT) in 1978 and a BD (second-class honours) in 1979 from a London university. He visited Japan for business in 1987. He received a DipEd from Sydney Teachers College in 1988. He has been a high school science teacher in New South Wales from 1989 to present.

Book preview

Copyright © 2017 by Graham Diggins.

ISBN:      Hardcover      978-1-5245-2116-5

                Softcover        978-1-5245-2117-2

                eBook             978-1-5245-2118-9

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the copyright owner.

Scripture quotations marked KJV are from the Holy Bible, King James Version (Authorized Version). First published in 1611. Quoted from the KJV Classic Reference Bible, Copyright © 1983 by The Zondervan Corporation.

Scripture quotations marked NASB are taken from the New American Standard Bible®, Copyright © 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1995 by The Lockman Foundation. Used by permission.

Any people depicted in stock imagery provided by Thinkstock are models, and such images are being used for illustrative purposes only.

Certain stock imagery © Thinkstock.

Rev. date: 03/01/2017

Xlibris

1-800-455-039

www.Xlibris.com.au

750381

CONTENTS

Introduction

Abbreviations and Meanings

BOOK I: THE DEITY OF JESUS CHRIST

Chapter 1: What Is Meant By The Word ‘Deity’?

Chapter 2: The God-Man

Chapter 3: Jesus Christ Truly Man

Chapter 4: Jesus Christ Truly God

Chapter 5: Jesus Our Only Saviour

Chapter 6: Sabellianism

Chapter 7: Arianism

Chapter 8: Begotten, Not Made

Chapter 9: The Eternal Generation Of The Son

Chapter 10: The Bible Viewpoint

Chapter 11: Jesus Is On An Equal Footing With God

Chapter 12: Concepts Relating To God Are Linked With Jesus

Chapter 13: Verses Which Equate Jesus With God

Chapter 14: The OT God In Harmony With The NT Jesus

Chapter 15: The NT Interchanges The OT Yhwh With Kurios

Chapter 16: The Lord’s Glory (OT) Applied To Jesus (NT)

Chapter 17: Verses Relating To The Holy Spirit

BOOK II: BAPTIST UNION CHURCHES OF NSW GIVE UP THE BIBLE

BOOK III: THE CHURCH

BOOK IV: THE COCK CROWS

BOOK V: CRITICAL PASSAGES IN HEBREWS

BOOK VI: DISPENSATIONALISM AND ROMANS 11

BOOK VII: DIVORCE – THOUGHTS FROM MALACHI 2:15-16

BOOK VIII: EASTER - OF GOD OR OF MEN?

BOOK IX: ECCLESIASTES

Chapter 1: Agnosticism, Scepticism Or Truth

Chapter 2: Towards An Understanding Of Ecclesiastes

Chapter 3: A Proposed Solution

Chapter 4: Conclusion

BOOK X: GENESIS AND SAMUEL – UNDER THE SPOTLIGHT

BOOK XI: THE GREAT COMMISSION

BOOK XII: THE IMPORTANCE OF BEING A GREEK?

BOOK XIII: JERICHO - THE WALLS OF JERICHO ‘NEVER FELL’

BOOK XIV: JOHN 3:16

BOOK XV: MAN - THE USE OF THE WORD ‘MAN’ IN THE NT

BOOK XVI: MATTHEW’S QUOTE

BOOK XVII: MISSIONARY ENDEAVOURS

BOOK XVIII: MOSES - FACT OR FICTION?

BOOK XIX: THE PASTOR

BOOK XX: PRIESTHOOD – JESUS V AARON

BOOK XXI: SHUSH - A BIBLE TEACHING ABOUT WOMEN

BOOK XXII: THE SON - GOD SENT FORTH HIS SON

BOOK XXIII: WINE AND THE LORD’S SUPPER

BOOK XXIV: TRACTS THAT REMAIN TIMELESS

Tract 1: Born Again

Tract 2: Christmas

Tract 3: Ho! Ho! Ho!

Tract 4: What Is The Church?

Tract 5: What Is A Counterfeit Church?

Tract 6: Church

Tract 7: Why Go To Church?

Tract 8: The Immaculate Conception

Tract 9: The Virgin Birth

Tract 10: Error Regarding The ‘Mother Of God’

Tract 11: Please Don’t Be Misled

Tract 12: Purgatory

Tract 13: Jesus Christ

Tract 14: Priests

Tract 15: Priesthood – Genuine Or False

Tract 16: Ordination

Tract 17: Celibacy – From God Or An Invention Of Man

Tract 18: Women

Tract 19: Women And Priesthood

Tract 20: GST

Tract 21: G.S.T. News

Tract 22: The True Faith ??????????

Tract 23: Where Are You Going When You Die?

Tract 24: Marriage Is From God

Tract 25: Would You Trust A Man Who

Tract 26: Reincarnation

Tract 27: Astrology

Tract 28: A Real Christian

Tract 29: Anastasia

Tract 30: Heaven – Paradise

Tract 31: Hell Is A Real Place!

Tract 32: An Angel Told Me

Tract 33: What’s In A Name?

Tract 34: Suicide – Not The End

Tract 35: Our Daddy

Tract 36: True Reconciliation

Tract 37: There Are No Pockets In A Funeral Shroud

Tract 38: One Untruth

Tract 39: Gambling

Tract 40: How True Is Evolution?

Tract 41: A Fairy Tale

Tract 42: Abortion

Tract 43: God Tells Us

Tract 44: Is This Life All There Is?

Tract 45: Election

Tract 46: Why

Tract 47: History

Tract 48: The Best Thing

Tract 49: Why?????

Tract 50: Natural Or Supernatural

Tract 51: Satan – His Purpose

INTRODUCTION

This work is divided into Books. Each Book addresses a separate theological issue. Some Books are very long and will be further divided into chapters and subheadings so that if a reader wants to study the Deity of Jesus (Book I) and thinks about Sabellianism – the reader can quickly look up that sub topic. Other Books are short in length like Book XXIII on WINE. Book XXIV called TRACTS is quite large. Each tract has a similar length and is on a separate page.

This work has been written to strengthen and enlarge the faith of Christians by teaching them the truth, while exposing the traditions of the elders that have grown up in Reformed, Reformed Baptist, Protestant and Baptist Church circles. It has tackled many issues, some of which have been raised inside the church and some which have come from basically an antagonistic, non-neutral, atheistic humanity.

Church is used here in its biblical sense and not the false approach of the unlearned who equate church with the building. The Bible was written by Christians to Christians who were exhibiting at times an unspiritual approach to life. Their sinfulness was involving them in errors both great and small. We have gained so much from the letters or epistles of Paul, James, Luke, Jude, Peter and John. Their epistles were largely initiated because of the errors and practices of Christians in first century churches. Imagine we only had the four Gospels as our Bible text. We would be stripped of encouragement, learning and the grandeur regarding our God and our salvation. It was not written to non-Christians. But many Christians, forgetting the rich and vast treasury they have in Christ via the Bible, begin pulling out a verse here and there, then applying this to unbelievers as if it was originally written to them. This is not a righteous act to emulate. The classic verse used in this manner after John 3:16 would have to be John 10:10. It says: The thief comes not, but for to steal and to kill and to destroy: I am come that they might have life and that they might have it more abundantly. The first part about the thief is usually omitted from tracts given to unbelievers. The script in Arminian evangelism goes like this. Jesus says he has come to give you, the unbeliever, an abundant life. You must accept him as your saviour if you are to partake of this abundant life. What does this amount to in reality? Either one says or repeats the sinner’s prayer or one signs a pledge to follow Jesus. Can anyone find this practice in the Bible? You cannot, because it is not there. This is not why John wrote his Gospel. This text was written to be a great encouragement to the sheep, who are his people, knowing that they have abundant life because of their association with Jesus in believing in him.

The same error is repeated by modern day song writers who write for churches which have a mixed multitude (converted and unconverted) of attendees. The songs can only really be sung by Christians but it is a congregational singing event. This I believe lulls many near the kingdom and many not so near to think they are part of this Christian worship and therefore in some sense Christians. Now that I have written this, I realise that churches do them even more of a disservice by giving out communion willy-nilly to whoever wants to take it.

Now the point I originally started out with was that this BOOK is an extensive, original teaching document directed to Christians who I believe have lost their way. If we want to honour God and Jesus and the Holy Ghost, then we need to get our house or church in order. We cannot expect showers of blessings if what we say in services and practice is erroneous or even anti-Scriptural. The errors are accentuated by falling in line with false churches and the world that make a great splash with Christmas and carols and fervently follow Easter traditions. May God have mercy upon us and nurture the truth among us so that we can give honour and praise to the One who loved us and loosed us from the clutches of sin, hell and the devil by shedding his blood on our behalf (Rev 1:5).

This means fixing up our doctrines and practices so that they mirror exactly the Scriptures and not the traditions of the elders. God give us the will and strength to so do. Amen.

However, this work has plenty for non-Christians and ‘seekers’, especially the tracts section. There are many gospel thrusts scattered through the pages so do not be afraid to let those with a desperate need to know Jesus read it. And if they have queries about subjects such as the Trinity, then hopefully an answer can be found in BOOK I.

I have included a list of abbreviations. I am sure that many will not need them but they are there for the benefit of all.

Some of the language is highly technical and not written for the faint hearted.

Some pointers to help those reading this book re: the understanding of NT Greek:

• The aorist tense is pronounced ‘air-ist’. It is like a past tense and should be viewed as action in past time. It is action that does not continue. It has been described as action or activity as a once for all happening. Jesus’ death is described as an aorist event. It happens once and that is it. If the present tense is viewed as a continuous line, then the aorist is a dot.

• The perfect tense is translated as a past tense with often the addition of the helping word has or had. It is action in past time with ongoing consequences or affects. Think of it as a dot to indicate completed action and a line which continues onwards. When Jesus says ‘it is finished’ and gives up the ghost on the cross he is not using an aorist tense but the Greek perfect tense to tell us that his cross work happened and there is a lot more that flows out of his death. He really says that it is finished and remains finished. Students of the Bible do not get this understanding from an English translation. It is commented on more fully in the body of the text.

Transliterating Greek letters is relatively easy, except for the letters omega and eta. Omega (ω) is pronounced as long o and is written as o to distinguish it from omicron (ο) which is pronounced as short o and is written as o. When transliterating from Greek letters into the corresponding English letters, I have underlined o to show it is omega. Eta (η) is pronounced as long e and is written as e to distinguish it from epsilon (ε) which is pronounced as short e and written as e. When transliterating from Greek to English I have underlined e to show it is eta.

There are also a lot of Hebrew words used so please bear with this but remember, as always, whilst God’s peculiar and special OT name comes up, it is NOT pronounced Yahweh.

This is something completely made up by enemies of the faith and accepted by the unlearned to such an extent that I regularly tear out my hair and cry inwardly at this practice. I sat through a sermon a while back where the speaker used the word Yahweh 47 times in 32 minutes. For more on this, go to BOOK XVIII Moses – ‘A note on the use of YHWH instead of Yahweh’.

I have copied out many verses of Scripture to make it easier for the reader – he or she does not have to go searching for the text in their Bible. This is meant to help one’s train of thought so they can focus on what is before them. Also, I believe many Christians are not reading their Bibles, so I am hoping and praying that this will encourage them to read their Bibles.

I have used the KJV and made slight changes without changing a single word’s original meaning. Spelling changes have occurred over 400 years. Some words like ‘forever’ were treated originally as two separate words. I have just joined them together. Other words like ‘shew’ and ‘spake’ I have changed to ‘show’ and ‘spoke’. I have removed the archaic verb third person singular endings like -eth and -th so words like ‘sitteth’ becomes ‘sits’ and ‘hath’ becomes ‘has’. Verbs combined with the second person singular pronoun ‘thou’ have been changed from ‘art’ to ‘are’ and ‘makest’ to ‘make’.

A great deal of the Greek vocabulary in the NT is unique to the writers. Where a word or phrase only occurs in one manuscript or letter then we refer to it as a hapax legomenon. This phrase is a transliteration of the Greek ἅπαξ λεγόμενον (hapax legomenon) and means spoken of only once. As far as the NT Greek manuscripts are concerned, if a word or phrase is found only there once, then it is considered a hapax legomenon. It is not yet found nor has been discovered in any other ancient Greek document. This makes finding its meaning difficult but not impossible. It could be a compound word or it is translated into another language and the translated word’s meaning is known.

I am alone responsible for the direction and theology expressed in this book. It is my prayer and earnest desire that Christians would take up a proper bible like the KJV and remove the majority which have a terrible liberal direction (they may be used to indicate what a Christian should not believe).

If something in the Bible disagrees with the common sentiment or activity, then the usual route is for Bible believing Christians to accept that the Bible is wrong as it is expressing a first century AD cultural bias and so should be ignored. The area of women invokes one of these cultural no-nos. The most common one is whether women are to be silent in church or not. The Bible teaching is quickly disregarded. If they can talk, then they can teach and become preachers and pastors. And they have.

ABBREVIATIONS AND MEANINGS

BOOK I

THE DEITY OF JESUS CHRIST

CHAPTER 1

WHAT IS MEANT BY THE WORD ‘DEITY’?

Before looking at a ‘proof’ for the Deity of Jesus Christ, let us examine what we mean by Deity or what does Deity exactly mean? It would be helpful to answer this question before getting into the nitty gritty of ‘proving’ that the Deity of Jesus Christ is the truth, the whole truth, the only satisfactory explanation of all the Bible evidence and the only hope sinners have of being reconciled to God.

Let me also say that God does not need me to defend what He has revealed in Holy Writ. He needs nothing whatsoever from His creatures to establish His truth on His behalf. Woe-betide those who ‘fight’ against His revealed will.

Jesus’ Deity means he is in all respects God. Whatever God is, he is.

We do not mean he is divine, having a spark of godliness so that he can do miracles, live a wonderful life and quote pithy sayings all day long.

We do not mean he is God inhabiting a human body in much the same way that a demon in the Gospels lives inside a person, controlling his or her actions.

We do not mean that Jesus is a stand-alone God (he comes across as a wonderful personality so let’s call him God) or that Jesus is God because he is Jesus the Saviour. We do not call him God because that would be a nice thought or wishful thinking on our part to achieve a fairy tale type result.

His Godhood does not start with Jesus but with the Word of God or in other parlance as the second member of the Godhead. The ‘second member’ terminology is not used to indicate a sub-ordination within the Godhead but rather it is used to help us mere mortals to prepare our minds to understand that certain members of that Godhead have different roles. We are making a differentiation within the Godhead as far as Scripture allows us to delve into aspects of the Godhood. These aspects or attributes are neither found by natural revelation in nature nor by the reasoning powers of rational, mortal man. They are only known as God has revealed them in the Bible, His word to us. Thus, we do not start with Jesus but with the Word of God or Logos, following John, the disciple that Jesus loved (John 21:20).

The WORD of GOD

John 1:1 states that the Word was God.

John later on identifies the Word as Jesus Christ (John 1:17). An interesting verse surfaces in Revelation 19:13 and says this of Jesus Christ: And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.

Being the Word of God covers all aspects of being God-like e.g. omnipotence, omniscience and holiness to name a few. To deny these fundamental tenets about God is to deny what Scripture plainly teaches and what God says about Himself.

John 1:14 says the Word became flesh and dwelt amongst us.

‘Became’ or ἐγένετο (egeneto from ginomai) is aorist tense which points to the ‘process’ of going from Word to flesh as being completed at an instant in time and being unalterable because of what took place. We can state what occurred by using language, but to give a precise answer such as what goes into making the God-man, is far beyond our understanding of the incarnation. Is it perhaps a case on the one hand of knowing some view is wrong, unbiblical and to be shunned? And on the other hand, to not have enough information to positively put forward the 100 per cent absolute truth because we are not God? There was no going back for the Word to a position before the event, the incarnation. The word incarnation comes from the Latin carnis meaning flesh (so literally a going into flesh). The incarnation, involving Mary being overshadowed by the Holy Ghost and found with child (Mt 1:18-20; Luke 1:28-35), does not provide step by step details of how this ‘process’ happened. Apart from it being too complex and difficult for our sinful minds to process, does God need to go into these details? And one is not hinting at the unmentionable, inappropriate actions known from Greek myths about the ‘making’ of demigods like Hercules and Perseus by the chief Greek god called Zeus and the women he impregnated, namely Alcmene and Dannae respectively. Do we not accept Matthew and Luke’s accounts? Does not Luke pen in Luke 1:37: For with God nothing shall be impossible?

It changed the Word forever. He was still truly God but now ‘differed’ from God the Father and the Holy Ghost as God is spirit (John 4:24) and the Word of God was no longer just spirit. This was the ‘cost’ borne by the Word of God if he was to save the elect. No cost, no salvation. This difference did not and does not make him less than God in any way whatsoever. When you worship him, you are worshipping God and not some special, superman type creature.

The joining with flesh was a monumental event, with the aim of saving the elect of God from an eternal death, being for all time separated from God. God did not need to do it to show how much love there was within the Godhead. The argument, from some (names withheld), using love to prove the existence of a multiplicity or Trinity within the Godhead sounds initially okay. God is love and thus there has to be others to love. But it only proves that there may be others to love and the case is yet to be made. Single people may be loving and kind, but do not love anyone else in the same way married people love their spouses. It cannot ‘prove’ that they are equal or that there are a certain number of beings within the Godhood or that these beings have the same or different roles. Rather, the incarnation was accomplished to show the exercise of His love towards His people.

This is wondrous and beyond all human comprehension, but not in the sense that we know nothing or are stunned like mullets or kangaroos before a truck runs them down at night. No, the comprehension has to do with one not knowing why God would bother with us vile, guilty rebels. It is always the motive (even law enforcement officers need to establish a motive to build a case against a law breaker). We would not do it if we were God for we are way too selfish to sacrifice something very important to us. It would be like a human becoming another creature (e.g. an ant) to save those creatures (i.e. ants) from extinction! The question would always be raised – why bother?

NO METAMORPHOSIS INVOLVED

The Word did not metamorphose or change into flesh or a man. He was not altered to become a man in the same way a grub is changed into a larva or pupa, then a moth or butterfly. It no longer is a grub as it flies about. The incarnation did not give the world just a man with a lot of good teaching ideas, together with insight into human nature and some miraculous powers to command storms and raise the dead. No, the end result, Jesus Christ, was still the Word who became flesh, tabernacling on earth with us in human form as a human. In the OT, on the other hand, the Word appeared to men, tabernacled with them, disguising his spirit form by using bodily shapes. This is clearly documented in Genesis 18:1-3. ¹And the LORD appeared unto him in the plains of Mamre: and he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day; ²And he lifted up his eyes and looked and, lo, three men stood by him: and when he saw them, he ran to meet them from the tent door and bowed himself toward the ground, ³And said, My Lord, if now I have found favour in thy sight, pass not away, I pray thee, from thy servant. The text says the LORD or YHWH (singular) appeared to Abraham. Abraham saw three men (plural). He ran to meet them (plural) and bowed down to worship them (plural). Next Abraham addressed them as My Lord (singular). No-one could explain what these three verses mean and maintain that God the LORD was a solitary One. At the very least, one would have to take Abraham (or Moses) to a psyche ward or simply accuse either one of rank stupidity or outright lying.

The OT calls Him LORD. The capital LORD is a translation of the sacred four letter tetragrammaton YHWH or יְהֹוָה, the special name for God. The Hebrew is read from right to left as YeHWaH or more simply as Yehwah. For a fuller explanation, go to BOOK XVIII Moses – Fact or Fiction and the section titled The Name YHWH. There is a note on Hebrew pointing and why Yahweh has no justification for being the vocalisation of the special name given to God in the OT. And there is no justification for supposed evangelical, Bible believing Christians, to use the word ‘Yahweh’ positively from a pulpit or in a Bible study.

As the incarnation was a unique, one off happening and God alone knows all the ins and outs, it is thus hard to quantify or define it in such a way that every believer would say an unreserved amen to what was proposed. It is revealed to us as a fact to believe without bracketed information on every page to follow every different phrase to further explain certain words.

The result of the incarnation was the God-man. This is wonderfully presented in Philippians 2:6-8 where Paul says: ⁶Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: ⁷But made himself of no reputation and took upon him the form of a servant and was made in the likeness of men: ⁸And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

CHAPTER 2

THE GOD-MAN

A full exegesis of Philippians 2:6-8 is found in Chapter X, The Bible Viewpoint but something will be said right now about the God-man. Paul delineates it for the sake of the Philippians and all future generations of Christians. The ‘who’ of verse 6 is Christ Jesus (see verse 5). Verse 6 says he was existing or being (present tense) in (the) form or μορφὴ (morphe) of God. This Greek word gives us by transliteration morphology, the study of the forms of things, especially of animals, plants and words and their structure. At the very least, it is teaching that Jesus Christ and God have something in common. They have the ‘same structure of Godliness’. I really do not know how anyone can express the inexpressible in any other way. If two creatures have the same morphology, then they would be considered to share a commonality of origin. This was widely used by evolutionary thinkers to postulate that one creature could come from another species by examining the ‘hand and limbs’ of differing species. If they were similar, then they had a common ancestor.

Verse 6 further teaches us that Christ Jesus existed (present tense) as God, having the same form and being equal with God. There is no reference to just Jesus. This is true because his name or title, Christ Jesus, refers one back to the Word of God, who is God. Scripture is clear, the Father is God, Jesus Christ is God and the Holy Ghost is God. But there are not three Gods! God is one and monotheism is the correct approach. Mathematically, if it helps, it is not a case of 1+1+1 = 1 which is false, but it is 1x1x1 = 1 which is true. Imagine the chaos if there were three Gods. Think of the competitions men would make of this and which one would be more important? We would be back in Greek or Roman times but now with our god who would favour us above all others and destroy our enemies if we prayed enough or sacrificed virgins to them.

Verse 7 teaches us that he debased or humiliated himself by taking upon himself the form of a servant. Interestingly, Paul does not say he went from the form of God to the form of a man. This might put up in the mind of the hearers that the change was a metamorphosis. The form was like a man whilst not being the same as a man (i.e. sin excepted).

Verse 8 clarifies any misunderstanding that may arise from verse 7 in knowing that Jesus Christ was only in the likeness of men – maybe you will say he was a phantom. It says he had the same schematics as a man (⁸And being found in fashion as a man) and so could suffer death and did go to a cruel death reserved for criminals on the cross. He was really a man in the things that mattered concerning manhood.

It was a joining together of the Word of God and human flesh. The join was forever and irrevocable. It was not an impersonal joining of flesh with Logos which was just Reason. It was very personal, as the Logos was personal, being the Word of God. It was a joining such that the resulting person does not have two natures contained in bodily form which constantly compete against each other for the limelight, whilst maintaining a dysfunctional status within the person. Whether Nestorius (386 – 450 AD) believed this is hard to say because what is reported about him in the fifth century AD comes from those tied up with the State Church. And the State Church of Constantine became the Roman Church in the West and the Orthodox Church in the East within 500 years.

The resulting person is the One we all know and love as Jesus Christ.

CHAPTER 3

JESUS CHRIST TRULY MAN

The word ‘Jesus’ describes this person as being truly a man, therefore he can die. Thus, there is no problem in calling him a man so long as we do not leave his status as just that of a man. I Timothy 2:5 speaks truly when Paul says: For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.

There is only one mediator or Saviour standing between God and men. And this mediator had to be truly a man so that he could die to redeem the elect of God who were also humans.

The Word, being God, could not die. The Word had to become flesh so John 1:14 is absolutely true. Paul also speaks accurately when he refers to ‘one God’, thus upholding the monotheism of the OT (Deut 6:4) against the polytheism of many races, including the ancient Greeks, Egyptians and Romans to name a few.

The fact of his manhood is demonstrated most powerfully in Acts 20:28 where Luke records Paul’s words to the Ephesian elders. The TR and KJV have God in this verse. Even the United Bible Society’s Greek text (eclectic type) second edition (1968) and third edition (1975) have God and not Lord. God is also found in the British and Foreign Bible Society’s second edition (1972), as well as the Vulgate (Latin), including the majority of the Latin texts. It is also the reading in B (Vaticanus) and the darling of the nineteenth century text critics, Sinaiticus or א. But then it is given a C rating meaning they are uncertain about its authenticity. Elsewhere, the fact is that if Sinaiticus has it, then that is the clincher and it is genuine or highly likely the correct reading. This C rating means they do not follow their own reasoning. One is puzzled at their choice of only a C when one reads B M Metzger’s Commentary on the Greek Text (1971). He agreed ‘God’ was a harder choice than ‘Lord’ and more likely the right reading. He attempts to divert attention away from an actual decision by stating that the difference here between the choice of Lord or God was perhaps only one letter, either a theta (θ) or a kappa (κ). It comes from his work on sacred names which are written in a shorthand format. God is written as θΥ and Lord is written as 68067.png Υ, using capital Greek letters where capital u is like a Y. There is also a bar above the letters. These are part of a shorthand way of writing sacred words. The critical apparatus of a Greek text is at the bottom of the page and the actual Greek text chosen is above it. It gives information about what manuscripts, Church Fathers and versions use a certain reading. Now, compare the critical apparatus below the texts of the British & Foreign Bible Society Greek text (1972) and the United Bible Societies Greek text 2nd edition (1968) and 3rd edition (1975) with the Wikipedia article on shortened sacred names, found at http://en.academic.ru/dic.nsf/enwiki/2801815. NOWHERE is there a single case of any of the reported Greek bible texts (like Acts 20:28) using the shortened Nomina Sacra (Sacred Name) forms. To then refer to it is misleading. I have said repeatedly the text critics from the 19th century to the present day are a law unto themselves, but the ‘Christian’ world keeps on accepting their pronouncements and buying their ‘updated’ Bibles.

This reminds one of the disdain for the deity of Jesus when 1 Timothy 3:16 is changed to promote a denial of Jesus’ Deity. There they attempt to remove the notion of Jesus’ Deity by substituting God with who (see most versions). For more information, read Chapter X The Bible Viewpoint, note (1), for an exegesis that supports Jesus’ Deity.

Now to return to Acts 20:28. This verse says: Take heed therefore unto yourselves and to all the flock, over which the Holy Ghost has made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he has purchased with his own blood.

The church which was at Ephesus in the first century AD and every local church is a church of God and not of any man. To call a church Barnabas’ or Paul’s is scripturally INCORRECT but if they say it is the name of their church building, then they even more so contradict and deny the word of God. How many preachers and service co-ordinators deny the direct teaching of Scripture and call their building the church of God? They substitute expressions like ‘Welcome to church’ or ‘On your way to church did you feel envious of other people’s houses?’ How can they teach when they follow denominations and religious organisations which accept and encourage this false teaching? They do not want the truth out amongst the masses that the church is all the gathered, baptised Christians who worship together and work for the furtherance of the kingdom of God. So, desist from teaching error, full stop!

Let us look at the last clause in the text: ‘which he has purchased with his own blood’. The ‘he’ is Jesus Christ if you follow Paul’s speech from verse 18. This supplies further proof that Jesus Christ is a man with blood pumping through his arteries, capillaries and veins. He has to have blood so that it can flow out from his body, causing death because ‘without the shedding of blood there is no remission or forgiveness of sins’ (Heb 9:22). And Paul tells us in Ephesians 5:25 of a similar fact when he says: Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church and gave himself for it. Interestingly, Paul uses ‘Christ’ (Christos) to focus on Jesus’ Godhood and the church. Acts 20:28 uses the expression ‘the church of God’. How many distinct, biblical, NT churches are there? At first glance, one might be tempted to say there are lots of them e.g. Ephesian, Corinthian, Colossian etc and for the Galatians there were multiple churches in their region of what is now modern day Turkey (Gal 1:2). Each is a church because Paul calls them a church. They are a church as they fit the parameters or values for a NT church. However, the Bible is quite clear when it says in Acts 20:28 that there is the church of God which was purchased or redeemed by the blood shedding of Jesus Christ. All other NT and post NT churches come under that one banner. And this is true. All blood bought children of God know this to be 100 per cent true. Two NT texts throw extra light on the church. They are:

(1) Matthew 16:18 which says: And I say also unto thee, That thou are Peter and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. Whatever else the church is, Jesus is convinced it is his church and it is a single entity. Acts 20:28 states it is God’s church. Both statements are true because Jesus is also God in the flesh. It is as simple as that.

It begs the question as to why there are so many Christian sects or denominations today. If you examine the Reformation of the sixteenth century, you have the Anglican Church (King Henry VIII), the Presbyterian church (John Knox), the Lutheran church (Martin Luther) and the Congregational church (Robert Browne) as breakaways from Roman Catholicism. In the eighteenth century, the Methodist church (John Wesley) breaks away from the Anglican church. In the early 1970s Reformed Baptist churches, inspired by Presbyterianism and a book publisher in Britain, start up. In the twentieth century in Australia, in 1977, the Uniting church emerges from remnants of the Presbyterian, Methodist and Congregational churches. Email me at [e-mail] as to why I did not include Baptist Churches as starting from other Establishment churches. It would take another book. Part of the answer lies in genuine Baptist churches correctly baptising believers, refusing to baptise infants AND not being a breakaway movement from another so-called church body.

(2) Hebrews 12:23, 24 which says: ²³ To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, who are written in heaven and to God the Judge of all and to the spirits of just men made perfect, ²⁴ And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaks better things than that of Abel. Verse 24 is included to reinforce the previous comments about Acts 20:28. Comments on verse 23 from my commentary on Hebrews follow:

and church of the firstborn: Literally it says ‘and (or even) a church of first born ones’. One can only guess as to why the AV scholars in translating the Greek made a mistake that even school boys would not make. But it is not the first time they ignored the actual word. Perhaps they thought that what they put down would be easier to exegete. Except for this word by word commentary, I would not have thought to check the Greek because it seems correct when read in the AV. Jesus is the first born of every creature (Col 1:15) and the first born from the dead (Col 1:18). He represents all the saved of all ages thus they become the first-born ones. But Jesus is the first born one par excellence so His connection to the church is very intimate and strengthens the point made in Matthew16:18 that the church is Jesus’ church, therefore to call Jesus God, fits consistently well with Acts 20:28.

CHAPTER 4

JESUS CHRIST TRULY GOD

The word ‘Christ’ means literally Messiah or Anointed One. It points us to a greater understanding of Jesus’ person. It tells us that Jesus is more than a mere man but not a superman or a conglomerate god like Hercules of Greek fame. It magnifies his Person and focuses upon his Godhood as the God-man.

There is no need to stress man or God at the expense of the other when talking about Jesus Christ. A polarising effect has been in play for many centuries, resulting in the emphasis being on:

• either he was just the Father taking two (or three parts) and not a man

• or else he was just a very special man and not God in the flesh

This seems to be a problem with many gainsayers or deniers today. Jesus has to be one or the other; usually the second is chosen and this man has ‘spectacular’ credentials, but call him God and the howls and jeers erupt from the sidelines.

The NT speaks about the man to remind us that God cares about us so much that the Word, being God, became flesh and assumed humanity to the fullest extent possible. He left glory for the gutter lined sinful world. How this can be is perhaps beyond one’s ability to articulate an exact answer. It is part of the faith we hold to be gun barrel straight. Who can plumb the depths of this awesome mystery? Who would even dare to enter into this discussion and say it cannot be so! Most things about this world are beyond our intellectual capacity to give a precise answer or indeed an answer that is one hundred per cent correct.

WHAT ABOUT OUR GREATEST MINDS?

Some of the greatest minds known have not yet put forward an exhaustive and precise explanation, or any explanation, about something as simple as light. Yes, the actual definition is still disputed and I daresay will never be resolved because light is made by God (Gen 1:3-5) and not by man. This has been going on for over 400 years. Isaac Newton (1642-1727) proposed in 1666 that light consisted of particles or what he called corpuscles. Christiaan Huygens (1629-1692) opposed this in 1678 and said light consisted of waves. He was backed up by Thomas Young (1773-1829) in 1805 who experimented on passing light through a slit. Young was supported by the mathematical insights of Augustin Fresnel (1788-1827) in 1815. This held sway until 1905 when Albert Einstein (1879-1955) proposed that light was particulate in nature. He used the term ‘photon’ from the Greek φῶς (phos) meaning light, genitive singular form is φωτὸς (photos). His theoretical proposal came about due to the experimental work on hot body radiation by Max