The Lion Tamers

Different trade’s people often bond together simply because they understand what the others know and do in carrying out their daily activities. I have considered, and continue to do so, comedians such as Jack Benny, Charles Chaplain, Henny Youngman, Milton Berle, and Steve Allen who I like to call, “Mr. Encyclopedia”. In researching this group of people, I have read some three times there are approximately 200 in the world that actually make a living as comedians. In this essay I will take a brief look at people who make their living as lion tamers, the number of which is even smaller.

The comparison between the tamer and the lion, and the servants of the Lord and the adversary of souls, will be made where appropriate. However, lion tamers are the epitome of practicality, and their efforts in this respect will be emphasized. Their actions are what matters. The old saying, “It is the thought that counts,” doesn't have any place in the experience in the cage. And though this will be unpleasant to look at, the reasonableness and psychology of the lion will be brought to light where appropriate.

“You never can trust a cat.” 
 “You never can trust a cat…and you are never careless…A trainer’s life depends on how well he knows his animals.”

Clyde Beatty

This was Clyde Beatty’s philosophy as a circus lion tamer and animal trainer. Clyde Beatty was a PhD practitioner if you will, in the profession and his word on these matters will necessarily be seen as truth. It is for this reason shared by Mr. Beatty, “A trainer’s life depends on how well he knows his animals”, that I have determined it is important to know what the adversary of souls is like and how he operates.

“Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:…”  1 Peter 5:8

A treasure of understanding has been given to us by Sister White, about the psychology of the adversary.  In the first chapter of Patriarchs and Prophets, chapters in the Great Controversy, Early Writings, and chapters and portions of other writings inform us of the intent and the tactics of the adversary like no other place has except the Bible. I think we can also learn much from people such as Clyde Beatty and should follow his example by knowing the animal well, for our life even depends on knowing the animal well.

I would like to take a moment to clarify some terms and definitions. The following quote informs us about two terms and should be read carefully. The two terms I refer to are:  animal trainer and animal breaker.

“Lion taming” and “lion tamer” are both misnomers. A more appropriate term is “animal trainer,” which is not the same as an “animal breaker.” A “breaker” does not break an animal’s spirit, but teaches it to tolerate proximity to a human (the breaker), recognize the breaker’s voice and act on commands. Most breakers can and do train animals. A breaker needs “exceptional concentration” to focus on the animal and block out extraneous information and sounds. “Trainers,” do not break animals, but work with animals which are already broken.                        

Clarke Historical Library article, “Lion Tamers”  (Clarke.cmich.edu)

The lion or big cat is never tamed but is rendered safer for the Lion Tamer to be around because of the actions and manner of the Tamer, and because it is trained to follow certain patterns. 

Something I find interesting in the above quote about breaking animals is the breaker needs “exceptional concentration”, focus, and must block out extraneous information and sounds.  I have had an interest for some time concerning how sound is used as a weapon, if only a distracting one. To a lion breaker and trainer, a distracting sound can manipulate a life and death situation. They cannot allow the slip of distracted attention. There are many forms of distracting sounds in our daily experience, not the least of which take place when we are having conversations with friends and co-workers. 

On a more serious note, in May of 1984 in Virginia’s Mecklenburg prison, six inmates who were on death row escaped from the prison by manipulating many guards. The only weapons they originally had were sound and observation of the guard’s patterns and timing. The prisoners were able to manipulate the guard’s patterns and attitudes with sound and then achieve their ends, and they were successful. They escaped the prison and ended up many states away before recapture. The question is:  who tamed whom?

Little mistakes the Lion Tamer makes are an open door for the lion to go through to take the life or harm the human being.

“…, Zerbini is still a lion tamer ... “I was an idiot — I mixed male lions and female lions    together, which I never should've done,”            

Pat White:  “At one point Pat was attacked through a cage by a young cat.  The incident   lasted five seconds, but she needed help to escape and suffered back injuries, a tiger tooth in her arm, lacerations, scars on her stomach, her left nostril was ripped and the doctors thought her lung was punctured.  Fortunately everything healed.  Pat was “very, very angry” with herself that after thirteen years of working with cats she had let her guard down.”
                        Clarke Historical Library article, “Lion Tamers” (Clarke.cmich.edu)

I like the message from Maranatha Media, in respect to the importance of obedience and how it relates to our Spiritual strength and protection. The Apostle Peter sheds much light on this: “Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:…”  1 Peter 5:8 

The Apostle tells us to what degree the devil is our adversary because he roams about seeking to devour.  However, there is more here than his roaming about to devour.  He is opportunistic.  He seeks “whom” he may devour; meaning he must make a choice and looks for an opening to do so.  Be sober, be vigilant, is a way of employing what we know from the Father and the Son.  Peter is not sending this message to those who do not know the Lord as though being sober and vigilant were unconnected to something else.  

Please consider the following from 1 Kings 13:

13:15  Then he said unto him, Come home with me, and eat bread. [The Old Man]
      16 And he said, I may not return with thee, nor go in with thee: neither will I eat bread nor drink water with thee in this place:   [The Prophet]
      17 For it was said to me by the word of the LORD, Thou shalt eat no bread nor drink water there, nor turn again to go by the way that thou camest.

This prophet of the Lord had done wonderful miracles before King Jeroboam (1 Kings 13). He had done several miracles in Bethel, and he had spoken the same rebuttal to the king as he did to the old man above. Let us consider further what the old man is saying to the prophet of the Lord:

13:18  He said unto him, I [am] a prophet also as thou [art]; and an angel spake unto me by the word of the LORD, saying, Bring him back with thee into thine house, that he may eat bread and drink water. [But] he lied unto him.

Satan is opportunistic in his decisions to pounce. This is why the apostle Peter says be sober and be vigilant.  Keeping these characteristics alive and vigorous reduce and eliminate the opportunity of the roaring lion. The prophet of the Lord had the very word of God spoken to him as his protection and advice: “Thou shalt eat no bread nor drink water there, nor turn again to go by the way that thou camest.” This was the thing he had to pay attention to and be vigilant about.  (vigilant - carefully observant or attentive; on the lookout for possible danger.)

The prophet followed the old man to his dwelling and ate and drank with him there. The very sad ending of 1 Kings 13, is that the prophet was killed by a lion that met him on the way after he had left the dwelling place of the old man. 

            13:24  And when he was gone, a lion met him by the way, and slew him: and his carcase  was cast in the way, and the ass stood by it, the lion also stood by the carcase.

In conclusion 

How could the prophet have been taken in like this? How could it have happened to the very elect; that he would follow what someone says instead of the word of God?  Deductive reasoning provides for the following possibilities: 

I imagine that the old man: probably talked fast, beckoned to be listened to in an hypnotic manner, and was probably loud. Concerning the old man’s statement: “an angel spake unto me…”,  the word of God says that he was lying to him. In addition to the personal persuasion of the old man, he probably wanted to believe him for all the traditional reasons and societal blessed reasons. And one more thing not mentioned above: the old man’s sons may have been with him as he was speaking to the prophet. All of these actions are steps that come closer to causing the prophet to be tempted. If and when he gave any validity to any step, it came closer to causing him to be tempted. By being vigilant in performing God’s word none of the steps would have been successful.  How loud the old man was, how persuasive and hypnotic, and whether he brought twenty people with him would not matter. He had a word from God that stopped any and all of the steps: “Thou shalt eat no bread nor drink water there, nor turn again to go by the way that thou camest.”

 It is very unfortunate that this fate befell the servant of the Lord, however, we are permitted to see why it happened. I pray I may learn  from the Apostle Peter and employ vigilance and sobriety with obedience to God’s word. May this be so for the brethren as well.

Thank you,
Gary Rose

Comment (3)

Have you ever understood and appreciated how many times the Lord in His great mercy has saved you from falling into some open (or secret) sin that would have ruined you? For example, take Proverbs 22:14: "The mouth of an immoral woman is a deep pit; he who is abhorred of the Lord will fall there."

 If the Lord has held you by the hand and preserved you from that "fall," you can sing the Hallelujah chorus a thousand times. (Someone might be reading this who actually fell into the "pit," and he or she feels bad; well, remember that if the Lord "abhors you" He still loves you; what He "abhors" is not you personally, but that kind of behavior; there is hope for you.)
 If in spite of your love for money you have been enabled to remain upright in the face of temptation. Again, you can be profoundly thankful to Him; it's not your "righteousness" that has preserved you, it's His.

Maybe you have wondered how holy beings can sing over and over their praises to the Lord; that's one reason--He has saved them from ruining their lives.
 Isaiah comments about His special care for you, personally and individually: "'No weapon formed against you shall prosper, and every tongue which rises against you in judgment you shall condemn.'" (He hasn't promised that no voice will ever be raised against you--all He promises is that you will "condemn" that accusation and He will defend you from it. "'This is the heritage of the servants of the Lord, and their righteousness is from Me,' says the Lord" (Isa. 54:17).

The Lord is so good to us, because of His much more abounding grace, that we can make progress all our lives; gaining such victories, we can grow day by day "like a tree." The time will come when we will find it is actually "easy" to say "No!" to temptation. Then Titus 2:11-14 (see NIV) will be fulfilled to us and we shall rejoice in it forevermore.

Robert J. Wieland

Comment (0)

Dear friends

Great evangelism in the near future!

Let’s do some brainstorming together on the message below.

After His resurrection, Christ ascended to heaven, and He is today presenting our needs to the Father. "I have graven thee upon the palms of My hands," He says. Isaiah 49:16. It cost something to engrave them there. It cost untold agony. If we would humble ourselves before God, and be kind and courteous and tenderhearted and pitiful, there would be one hundred conversions to the truth where now there is only one. But, though professing to be converted, we carry around with us a bundle of self that we regard as altogether too precious to be given up. It is our privilege to lay this burden at the feet of Christ and in its place take the character and similitude of Christ. The Saviour is waiting for us to do this.--Testimonies to the Church, Vol. 9, page 189, p.4

So last year if we were instrumental in leading 7 people to Christ it would have been 700 if we had been connected with the green above.

Do not ask God to humble you! Why?

We should not pray for God to humble us; for when God takes hold of us, He will humble us in a way that we would not enjoy. But we must day by day humble ourselves under the mighty hand of God. We are to work out our own salvation with fear and with trembling. While it is God that works in us to will and to do of His own good pleasure, we are to co-operate with Him while He works through us.--Review and Herald, July 12, 1887. 

Share with me some ways you think we can humble ourselves under the mighty hand of God and practical examples of how to be kind and courteous tenderhearted and pitiful???????

Hope to hear from you soon!

Romans 9:28  For he will finish the work, and cut it short in righteousness: because a short work will the Lord make upon the earth.

Your fellow pilgrim and stranger on earth,

Stefan

Comment (1)

With Brother Adrian's  Original Love series and the focus of others on Agape versus Eros, I found this article by Brother Bob Thiel timely as it relates to Valentine's Day, a day completely focused on Eros which many Christians participate in. (Frank Klin)

Valentine Card, 1909, Shows Pagan Ties

COGwriter

Although Valentine’s Day is not an actual Christian holiday, many in Islam consider it to be so.  And its observance concerns them.

14 February 2013

ISLAMABAD (AP) — Romance is not dead in Pakistan, but it’s under attack.

Conservatives in Pakistan tacked up posters urging people to boycott Valentine’s Day on Thursday, saying it’s a western-inspired event that’s spreading vulgarity in their country…

For them, Valentine’s Day is nothing but an occasion to encourage illicit relations between the country’s young — unmarried — males and females. It’s a sign that Western culture and values are eating away the fabric of Pakistan’s traditional, Islamic society. Valentine’s Day, they say, is not a Pakistani holiday and not part of the culture here…

—In Indonesia, the world’s most populous Muslim country, government officials and clerics in Jakarta called for young people to skip Valentine’s Day, saying it was an excuse for couples to have forbidden sex. 

14 February 2013

On Wednesday, Pakistan’s Electronic Media Regulatory Authority, or PEMRA, sent a letter to TV and radio stations reminding them that the holiday is “not in conformity to our religious and cultural ethos.” The report warns that “a large segment of society” has complained about “Valentine’s Day celebrations” and blames Valentine’s Day for “depraving, corrupting and injuring morality of Pakistani youth.”…

The letter begins:

It is generally observed that in the past “Valentine’s Day” is celebrated on February 14 by all the satellite TV channels whether an Entertainment or News & Current Affairs channel. PEMRA has been receiving complaints from a large segment of society that Valentine’s Day celebrations are not in conformity to our religious and cultural ethos and has, therefore, condemned its unequivocal propagation through media. Furthermore, such events have been perceived as a source of depraving, corrupting and injuring morality of Pakistani youth as well as violating Code of Conduct developed by PEMRA in pursuance of Rule 15 & PEMRA Rules 2009. 

In the past, I have also reported about concerns from other Islam-dominated lands such as Malaysia (see Islamic complaints about Valentine’s Day should concern professors of Christ).  But, some still observe it in the Islamic-dominated lands–which is why some have taken steps to reduce the influence of this essentially pagan holiday.

Although Valentine’s Day is not an actual Christian holiday (even the Church of Rome no longer officially honors it, see Valentine’s Day: Its Real Origins ), many in Islam consider it to be so. And its observance concerns them.

Here are some other Islamic-related reports about it and its pagan roots:

Celebrating the Valentine Day is not permissible because: Firstly, it is an innovated holiday that has no basis in the Sharee`ah…Christians were aware of the Pagan roots of Valentine’s Day. The way the Christians adopted St. Valentine’s Day should be a lesson for Muslims. In fact, the failure to fully separate Valentine’s Day from its pagan roots explains why Islamic scholars and a number of Muslims avoid adopting traditions of non-Muslims, even though they could possibly be Islamicized…We should avoid anything associated with pagan immoral practices -…- Islam does not encourage flirting or suggestions of romantic relationships before marriage – Love between families, friends and married people does not need to be celebrated on a day with such un-Islamic origins (Ruling on Celebrating Valentine’s Day, January 31, 2004).

What is the ruling on Valentine’s Day?…Firstly: Valentine’s Day is a jaahili Roman festival, which continued to be celebrated until after the Romans became Christian. This festival became connected with the saint known as Valentine who was sentenced to death on 14 February 270 CE. The kuffaar still celebrate this festival, during which immorality and evil are practised widely…Secondly: It is not permissible for a Muslim to celebrate any of the festivals of the kuffaar, because festivals come under the heading of shar’i issues which are to be based on the sound texts…Partially joining in, at the very least, is disobedience and sin…it is not permissible to celebrate the festivals of the ignorant and the mushrikeen (polytheists). (fatwa No. 73007. What is the ruling on Valentine’s Day? viewed 02/04/12)

PAS Youth chief Nasrudin Hasan Tantawi said the Kedah, Kelantan and Selangor governments have directed all local authorities to work closely with police and Rela in order to carry out operations to check immoral activities during Valentine’s Day…He said the National Fatwa Council forbids Muslims from celebrating Valentine’s Day because of elements of Christianity and sin. (Move on Valentine’s Day ‘sins’ Malaysia Star – Feb 8, 2011)

Notice that the Muslims associate Valentine’s Day with Christianity (obviously the false compromising kind), paganism, and sin.

In other words, Valentine’s Day causes the name of Christ (through the term ‘Christianity’) to be blasphemed among the Gentiles (Romans 2:24; Isaiah 52:5)!

Even some of the Muslims can see the hypocrisy in this.

How does this pagan holiday directly help get the true gospel out?

It does not.

And that is the point. Valentine’s Day includes elements of paganism, idolatry, and sexual immorality. Notice what the Bible teaches:

22…You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? 23 You who make your boast in the law, do you dishonor God through breaking the law? 24 For “the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you,” as it is written. (Romans 2:22-24)

1…there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Lord who bought them, and bring on themselves swift destruction. 2 And many will follow their destructive ways, because of whom the way of truth will be blasphemed. (2 Peter 2:1-2)

Does not the observance of Valentine’s Day contribute to blasphemy by the Gentiles (at least the Muslim ones) because many who profess Christ keep it? This should never be.

Valentine’s Day is a worldly holiday of lust–it is not Christian.

Notice something that the Apostle John was inspired to write:

15 Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. 16 For all that is in the world — the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life — is not of the Father but is of the world. 17 And the world is passing away, and the lust of it; but he who does the will of God abides forever. (1 John 2:15-17, NKJV)

None who profess Christ should observe this February 14th “holiday”–it simply is not a Christian holiday. Its observance has caused the way of truth to be blasphemed.

For more information, please consider studying the following:

Valentine’s Day: Its Real Origins Christianity Today suggests that Valentine’s Day is good for Christians to observe. Is this true?

Should Christians Observe Valentine’s Day? This is a YouTube video about the origins of Valentine’s Day and why real Christians should not observe it.

Comment (2)

From the "Dial Daily Bread" Archive: October 30, 1999

Dear Friends of "Dial Daily Bread,"

When there is discussion about disunity in the church, many say that only "Christian love" can heal those divisions. But what is "Christian love"? Just being nice? Many Buddhists, Hindus, and Muslims are "nice." What is uniquely "Christian" about "love"?

The Holy Spirit has injected into the New Testament word for "love" a meaning that non-Christian ideas of love do not, cannot, realize. The reason is that the ordinary idea of "love" presupposes a doctrine held in common by Catholics, Lutherans, Buddhists, Muslims, and Hindus--that is, the natural immortality of the human soul. The ultimate source of that doctrine is paganism. Well, it actually came from the Garden of Eden when "the serpent" told our first parent Eve the lie, "Ye shall not surely die" (Gen. 3:4).

This doctrine makes it impossible to "comprehend with all saints what is the breadth, and length, and depth, and height; and to know the love of Christ which passeth knowledge" (Eph. 3:17-19). It's different than any other idea of love in this world; it is "agape," a love that Jesus was willing to sacrifice eternal life so that we might have eternal life.

His cross was more than physical pain followed by a weekend "vacation." He died the death in which there is no hope, no future, a surrender to eternal darkness of being "forsaken" by God, of enduring what Paul calls "the curse" of God, a "goodbye" forever. It was the death of the cumulative, total guilt of all the world's sins. It was on His part the conscious choice to experience hell itself. "For every man," He "tasted death," the real thing, the anguish the lost will feel at last when they stand before the judgment bar of God.

As our "last Adam," the second Adam, Christ died the second death of "every man" (see Heb. 2:9; Rev. 2:11; 20:14). Isaiah says He "poured out His soul unto death" (53:12). A "love which passeth knowledge"? Yes! But the pagan doctrine of natural immortality makes it impossible for us even to begin to appreciate its dimensions. The idea of agape is being recovered; the Good News is that it will bring true unity within the church.

--Robert J. Wieland

Comment (0)

For many years the existence of angels has been questioned. Our first parents, Adam and Eve, were well aware of the fact that angels exist. The Bible informs us that God placed Cherubim (angels) at the entrance of the Garden of Eden to keep anyone from entering. For many years these angels were visible to mankind as a witness of the awful results of sin. In those days there was no question of the existence of angels. However, today we do not have a visible manifestation of angels for all to behold, which has caused some to question their existence. Yet, what does the Bible have to say about this? 

Even among those who believe that angels exist there are misunderstandings regarding who they are. Some have maintained that angels are spirits of dead people. Is this true? You will notice that the first time angels appeared to mankind (in the Garden of Eden) was many years before anyone had ever died, not to mention the fact that “the dead know not any thing” (Ecclesiastes 9:5). Therefore, it is impossible for angels to be the spirits of dead people. 

Throughout the Bible we find instances where angels have appeared to men. God has often sent His angels to encourage, strengthen, enlighten, or warn His people. Do angels have anything to do with the events in your daily life? Do you have a personal guardian angel who has been appointed by God to protect you? 

This study is designed to examine what the Bible says concerning the work of angels in our lives. I pray that you will be blessed by having a more accurate understanding of the goodness of God in providing us with the benefit of the ministry of angels. 

Let us first look at a few words and phrases used in the Bible that refer to angels. 

The Eyes of the Lord 

The phrase, “the eyes of the Lord” has been used several times in the Bible referring to angels. Zechariah was shown a vision in which he beheld a stone with seven eyes. 

“For behold the stone that I have laid before Joshua; upon one stone shall be seven eyes: behold, I will engrave the graving thereof, saith the Lord of hosts, and I will remove the iniquity of that land in one day” (Zechariah 3:9). What are these seven eyes that are upon the rock? 

John was shown a vision in which he beheld seven eyes as well. He wrote, “And I beheld, and, lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth” (Revelation 5:6). The seven eyes are the seven Spirits of God that are sent forth into all the earth. Who are the seven Spirits of God? 

The writer of Hebrews states: “But to which of the angels said He at any time, Sit on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool? Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?” (Hebrews 1:13, 14). The angels of God are ministering spirits sent forth to minister. 

In the first chapter of Revelation John informs us that the seven Spirits are before God’s throne. He wrote, “John to the seven churches which are in Asia: Grace be unto you, and peace, from Him which is, and which was, and which is to come; and from the seven Spirits which are before His throne” (Revelation 1:4). The seven Spirits are before the throne God. 

John also saw that “all the angels stood round about the throne” (Revelation 7:11). John “heard the voice of many angels round about the throne… and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands” (Revelation 5:11). Many angels are round about God’s throne. The seven Spirits that are before God’s throne are the multitude of angels; ministering spirits sent forth into all the earth. 

Zechariah wrote concerning the eyes of the Lord: “For who hath despised the day of small things? for they shall rejoice, and shall see the plummet in the hand of Zerubbabel with those seven [referring to Zechariah 3:9]; they are the eyes of the Lord, which run to and fro through the whole earth” (Zechariah 4:10). The seven eyes (or the host of angels) run to and fro through the whole earth. This undoubtedly refers to the angels. 

We see the same language used in the second book of Chronicles: “For the eyes of the Lord run to and fro throughout the whole earth, to shew Himself strong in the behalf of them whose heart is perfect toward Him” (2 Chronicles 16:9). The eyes of the Lord, spoken of here, are His angels that run to and fro throughout the whole earth to help those whose heart is perfect toward Him. 

A guardian angel protects each one of us. God said, “For he shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee in all thy ways” (Psalms 91:11). 

The Recording Angels 

Not only do God’s faithful angels watch over and protect us, but they have another duty. “The eyes of the Lord are in every place, beholding the evil and the good” (Proverbs 15:3). God’s angels faithfully record both the evil and the good that we do. 

The angels of God are able to record more than we might think. Solomon wrote concerning this: “Curse not the king, no not in thy thought; and curse not the rich in thy bedchamber: for a bird of the air shall carry the voice, and that which hath [Strong’s #1167] wings [Strong’s #3671] shall tell the matter” (Ecclesiastes 10:20). The Hebrew word that was translated “wings” often represents the angels, as we will see in more detail later. This verse tells us that even the thoughts that we think are being recorded by the angels. This is only possible by the light of God’s Spirit, for God is the only one who can read our thoughts (1 Kings 8:39), and He can reveal them to whomever He will (Acts 5:1-3; 2 Kings 5:20-27). 

“Surely in vain the net is spread in the sight of any bird [Strong’s #1167 and #3671—Margin: “in the eyes of everything that hath #1167 wings #3671]” (Proverbs 1:17). In vain the net is spread before us in the sight of God’s angels. 

We can see how this principle was demonstrated for Elisha. “And when the servant of the man of God was risen early, and gone forth, behold, an host compassed the city both with horses and chariots. And his servant said unto him, Alas, my master! how shall we do? And he answered, Fear not: for they that be with us are more than they that be with them. And Elisha prayed, and said, Lord, I pray thee, open his eyes, that he may see. And the Lord opened the eyes of the young man; and he saw: and, behold, the mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire round about Elisha” (2 Kings 6:15-17). There are many angels working behind the scenes of which we are not aware. Thank the Lord for His continual watch-care over us. 

“Hear attentively the noise of His voice, and the sound that goeth out of His mouth. He directeth it under the whole heaven, and His lightning [Strong’s #216 “light for doctrine, teaching,”* “illumination”**] unto the ends of [Strong’s #3671 — Margin: wings] the earth” (Job 37:2, 3). God directs His illumination (light for doctrine) to His angels, and they bring it to us. 

------------------ 

* Gesenius’ Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament, published by Baker Book House Company, Grand Rapids, Michigan, Copyright 1979 

** Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance, reprinted in 1992 by Baker Book House Company, Grand Rapids, Michigan. 

------------------ 

When God’s people are in trouble “they cry unto the Lord in their trouble, and He saveth them out of their distresses. He sent His word, and healed them, and delivered them from their destructions” (Psalm 107:19, 20). How did God send His word to deliver them? We just read, in 2 Chronicles 16:9, that the eyes, or the angels, run to and fro throughout the earth to help God’s people. God sent His word, by His angels, to help them. 

“He sendeth forth His commandment upon earth: His word runneth very swiftly” (Psalm 147:15). God sends forth His angels with His words, and it runs very swiftly. 

“Bless the Lord, ye His angels, that excel in strength, that do His commandments, hearkening unto the voice of His word. Bless ye the Lord, all ye His hosts [Strong’s #6635]; ye ministers of His, that do His pleasure” (Psalm 103:20, 21). God’s angels are also called His hosts, hence “The Lord of hosts.” 

The same Hebrew word that was translated “hosts” is found in Psalm 68. “The Lord gave the word: great was the company [Strong’s #6635—host] of those that published it” (Psalm 68:11). The Lord gave His word, and His angels published it unto us, and we in turn are commissioned to preach it to the world. 

Isaiah wrote, “Woe to the land shadowing with wings [Strong’s #3671], which is beyond the rivers of Ethiopia: That sendeth ambassadors by the sea, even in vessels of bulrushes upon the waters, saying, Go, ye swift messengers, to a nation scattered and peeled, to a people terrible from their beginning hitherto; a nation meted out and trodden down, whose land the rivers have spoiled!” (Isaiah 18:1, 2). The wings, or angels, are swift messengers. 

Ezekiel was shown a vision in which he heard the sound of cherubims’ wings. He wrote, “And the sound of the cherubims’ wings [Strong’s #3671] was heard even to the outer court, as the voice of the Almighty God when He speaketh” (Ezekiel 10:5). The wings were heard, as the voice of the Almighty God. 

The Chariots of God 

Psalm 18 depicts the experience of Christ on the cross. When Christ called out to His Father, the Bible says “He bowed the heavens also, and came down: and darkness was under His feet. And He rode upon a cherub [a type of angel], and did fly: yea, he did fly upon the wings [Strong’s #3671] of the wind” (Psalm 18:9, 10). This verse is talking about God, the Father, and says that He rode upon a cherub; upon the wings of the wind. It seems strange that God would use angels as transportation, yet the Bible clarifies this even more. 

David wrote, “The chariots of God are twenty thousand, even thousands of angels: the Lord is among them, as in Sinai, in the holy place” (Psalm 68:17). The chariots of God are a multitude of angels. 

The Psalmist wrote, “Bless the Lord, O my soul. O Lord my God, thou art very great; thou art clothed with honour and majesty. Who coverest thyself with light as with a garment: who stretchest out the heavens like a curtain: Who layeth the beams of His chambers in the waters: who maketh the clouds His chariot: who walketh upon the wings of the wind: Who maketh His angels spirits; His ministers a flaming fire” (Psalm 104:1-4). If the clouds are His chariots, and His chariots are a multitude of angels, then the clouds, in this verse, represent His angels. 

Ezekiel wrote concerning his vision, “And the glory of the God of Israel was gone up from the cherub, whereupon He was, to the threshold of the house. And He called to the man clothed with linen, which had the writer’s inkhorn by his side” (Ezekiel 9:3). The glory of God was upon the cherub, or the angel. This is His chosen means of transportation. 

Again Ezekiel wrote, “the glory of the Lord went up from the cherub, and stood over the threshold of the house; and the house was filled with the cloud, and the court was full of the brightness of the Lord’s glory” (Ezekiel 10:4). Again we see that the Lord rides upon a cherub. 

Ezekiel continues his description of his vision: “Then the glory of the Lord departed from off the threshold of the house, and stood over the cherubims. And the cherubims lifted up their wings, and mounted up from the earth in my sight: when they went out, the wheels also were beside them, and every one stood at the door of the east gate of the Lord’s house; and the glory of the God of Israel was over them above. This is the living creature that I saw under the God of Israel by the river of Chebar; and I knew that they were the cherubims” (Ezekiel 10:18-20). Clearly we can see that the cherubims were chosen to transport the God of Israel from one place to another. 

The prophet Daniel wrote, “I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought Him near before Him” (Daniel 7:13). Here we see that the Son of God uses the angels to be transported from one place to another. The clouds of heaven in this verse, as we have already seen, represent the angels of God. 

The Gift of the Spirit 

Days after Christ’s ascension into heaven God gave His disciples the gift of His Spirit in great measure. Luke wrote, “And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting. And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance” (Acts 2:1-4). Could the sound they heard have been the sound of angels’ wings? Could the cloven tongues of fire have represented the angels that were made a flaming fire? (Psalm 104:4; Hebrews 1:7). 

Olive Trees and a Candlestick 

God gave Zechariah a very interesting vision which sheds wonderful light on the ministry of angels. Zechariah described it: “And the angel that talked with me came again, and waked me, as a man that is wakened out of his sleep, And said unto me, What seest thou? And I said, I have looked, and behold a candlestick all of gold, with a bowl upon the top of it, and his seven lamps thereon, and seven pipes to the seven lamps, which are upon the top thereof” (Zechariah 4:1, 2). What does a candlestick represent? 

Christ explained to John, “The mystery of the seven stars which thou sawest in my right hand, and the seven golden candlesticks. The seven stars are the angels of the seven churches: and the seven candlesticks which thou sawest are the seven churches” (Revelation 1:20). Candlesticks represent churches. What are churches? They are groups of people. The candlesticks represent God’s people. 

Zechariah continued explaining his vision. He wrote, “And two olive trees by it [the candlestick], one upon the right side of the bowl, and the other upon the left side thereof” (Zechariah 4:3). When the angel that talked with Zechariah explained the meaning of these two olive trees, he said, “These are the two anointed ones, that stand by the Lord of the whole earth” (Zechariah 4:14). The two olive trees are the two anointed ones (cherubs) that stand before the Lord. 

The cherubs are anointed as described by the prophet Ezekiel. “Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire” (Ezekiel 28:14). The anointed ones are cherubs, or angels. 

The angel that talked with Zechariah began his interpretation of the vision by informing him, “This is the word of the Lord unto Zerubbabel, saying, Not by might, nor by power, but by my spirit, saith the Lord of hosts” (Zechariah 4:6). This vision was given to explain how God’s Spirit is received. 

The angel queried Zechariah, “What are these two olive trees upon the right side of the candlestick and upon the left side thereof? And I answered again, and said unto him, What be these two olive branches which through the two golden pipes empty the golden oil out of themselves?” (Zechariah 4:11, 12). The two olive trees, God’s angels, empty out of themselves the golden oil, God’s Spirit, into the bowls of the candlestick, or the minds of God’s people. God has chosen that His Spirit comes to us through the angelic host. If you remember in Job 37:2, 3, the Lord directs His lightning (light for doctrine) unto the angels, who, in turn, empty themselves into us. 

This truth was explained in the first verse of Revelation. John wrote, “The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto Him, to shew unto His servants things which must shortly come to pass; and He sent and signified it by His angel unto His servant John” (Revelation 1:1). The Father gave a revelation of Jesus Christ to His Son, who, in turn, gave it to His angel, who finally was sent to bring it to John. God has chosen to use this chain of revelation, from the Father, to His Son, to His angels, to His people, who share it with other people. 

Paul wrote that even humans can impart God’s Spirit to others after it has been imparted to them. “He therefore that ministereth to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you, doeth he it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?” (Galatians 3:5). Job said, “To whom hast thou uttered words? and whose spirit came from thee?” (Job 26:4). We have an influence upon people by our words and actions. In this way we minister spirit to others. The spirit we minister depends upon whose spirit is leading us. Whose spirit is coming forth from you? 

Conclusion 

We have seen that God’s angels bring us His word, they record our thoughts and actions, they strengthen us, they protect us, they bring us His Spirit, and they are the chariots of God. Now we can better understand what David meant when he wrote, “I will abide in thy tabernacle for ever: I will trust in the covert of thy wings. Selah” (Psalm 61:4). And again, “How excellent is thy lovingkindness, O God! therefore the children of men put their trust under the shadow of thy wings” (Psalm 36:7) I pray that we would all put our trust under the shadow of God’s wings, for He is well able to preserve us. 

Comment (2)

Today I had just taken my 30 minute Lunch break and decided to sit outside in an isolated court area, just outside the Hospital I work. While I was eating my chicken sandwich, I had some of the crust left over. With a beautiful blue sky, not a bird or cloud in sight I decided to throw two bits of crust out in the open concrete area.  Where I was sitting was enclosed by concrete walls. As I was eating away at my sandwich, a sparrow out of no-where came along, picked up the crumb and started eating. I started to throw out more bits of bread, but no more birds had come to eat the bread. When the sparrow finished his morsel, he flew 10 meters upward and disappeared over the concrete wall. I went into the Library next to the court where I was eating, and 20 minutes later I came back to that isolated area, and all the bread had gone. I realised that more birds had come to eat the rest of the bread from which the first had started off with. It then dawned on me what God, through nature, was sharing with me. It was as if through this experience the Lord was saying:

“When you are in an isolated situation or when you feel that you are all alone, you are not, I am here with you.  My command is for you to take the bread (the Word of God) and throw it into the air- "the birds will eventually eat the bread”  You may at first not see who takes it and it may not see possible for people to receive the message I have given for you, but be not afraid, I am with you.  When they taste and see that the message regarding the Father and Son, they will know that this is what life is worth living for, they will taste it and see that it is good.  At first it may not be apparent, but once they start to eat of the true message from heaven, it will satisfy the thirsting soul. Continue to wait upon me, continue to watch and pray the work will soon be done”

Comment (0)

I have recently watched the great message THE BIBLICAL 911 by Nadar Mansour. It was a wonderful message and I would like to share just a small part of this that spoke to me.

Nadar said about it being Tammuz birthday on 25th December and as we all know the truth about Christmas and most of us would not celebrate it although we may take part in it in a small way e.g. family get togethers or in other ways. I do not celebrate it as such but I do go to family get togethers and I do buy some presents; I have allowed some of the worldly traditions to creep back in, not that I celebrate Christ's birth on that day but as we should every day of the year. Nadar's message spoke to me to do something about this and rethink what I should do next year and what I shouldn't do next year.

So I would like to ask you [anyone who would like to share] what they have done about this day and give any ideas as to best go about spending this day and season and being the witness that we should be. Maybe we can all learn something from each other. This is merely a sharing of ideas not a right and a wrong thing.

Comment (3)

Most people believe that when they die, they will live on in some form, which will be of a more exalted nature than the lives we live on this dreary little planet, which revolves around a rather inconspicuous yellow dwarf star which we call the sun. Thus nearly all men believe the first great lie which the serpent spoke to Eve, which was `ye shall not die'.

`Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:  But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it lest ye die. (Genesis 3:1-3)

The serpent of course represents, Lucifer, or the Devil and Satan as he became known after he aspired to be equal with Christ, and was cast out of heaven after he instigated war in heaven (Revelation 12:7-9).  Scripture tells us  that:

 `Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall. (Proverbs 16:18).

It was in heaven itself where the principal of Eros was first established; for when Lucifer began to take great pride in himself, he consequently became the great usurper and attempted to take the throne of God by force. This is in direct contrast with the unconditional love of Christ, which was demonstrated to us at Calvary:  

`Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God.' (Philippians 2:5-8)

The mind of Christ which the apostle bade be in us is a mind which is totally void of `self', for it gives of itself freely, without the consideration of a hope of a reward in heaven. Nor do those who let this mind be in them that was in Christ Jesus fear the judgement; for this perfect mind of `Agape' that was `in' Christ  `casteth out fear' (1 John 4:18);  for their most important consideration is the welfare of those which the Agape of Christ compels them to reach out to. Christ thought it not robbery to be equal with God, simply because He is equal with the Father. In a legal sense, a robber is known as a usurper when he attempts to seize the power and rights of another without the legal authority to do so. Thus it was when Lucifer attempted to usurp the kingdom of God. But when he failed to do this, he then attempted to usurp the kingdom of earth, and when Adam and Eve fell into sin, so did he wrest this world from Christ, and became `the prince of this world'. (John 12:31).  

The Serpent knew that if Eve could be enticed to leave her husband's side, then he might deceive her into eating of the forbidden fruit . If that were to happen, then perhaps her husband might also do the same out of the love which he had for her. The serpent could then claim this world by default and claim all of their progeny as his own - for none would be able to rise higher than Adam's fallen estate. But the serpent's plans were thwarted when Christ informed him that:

`I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise His heal'. (Genesis 3:15)

Christ informed the serpent that mankind would not be abandoned to the wages of sin which the serpent wreaked upon the progeny of the fallen pair, for He Himself would repair the breach which the pair had made after the serpent beguiled them. As the pen of inspiration informs us:

`The tree of knowledge had been made a test of their obedience and their love to God. The Lord had seen fit to lay upon them but one prohibition as to the use of all that was in the garden; but if they should disregard His will in this particular, they would incur the guilt of transgression. Satan was not to follow them with continual temptations; he could have access to them only at the forbidden tree. Should they attempt to investigate its nature, they would be exposed to his wiles. They were admonished to give careful heed to the warning which God had sent them and to be content with the instruction which He had seen fit to impart . . . ' (`Patriarchs & Prophets', p. 53)

They were expressly forbidden to eat of the fruit of the tree, `lest ye die.' Thus Satan chose to beguile Eve by choosing the medium of a serpent, which was a beautiful creature which flew through the air on wings of shining gold. He believed that his dazzling brightness, companied with the richness of the fruit that was forbidden to the pair, would entice the woman to leave her husband's side and eat of that which was forbidden. The serpent directly contradicted God when he stated that she would not die:

` Ye shall not surely die: For God doth know that in the days ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil'. (Genesis 3:4-5)

When the Serpent deceived Eve with this first great lie, he sought to sow in her mind disbelief in the Word of God, and insinuated that by eating of the forbidden fruit she would instead enter an exalted state of existence by which she would gain wisdom which Christ Himself selfishly desired to withhold from her. If Adam followed her lead, then the pair would be `as gods, knowing good and evil' . By using this direct turn of phrase, the Serpent insinuated that they were in fact equal with God, for they could not die.

The original Hebrew of Genesis 3:6 informs us that after listening to the beguiling words of the Serpent, Eve began to covet the forbidden fruit:

` And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make [one] wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.' (Genesis 3:6)

The phrase `pleasant to the eyes' is comprised of two Hebrew words, which are `ta'vah' and `ayin'. While `ta'vah' means to covet, or to lust, `ayin' is singular and means  eye, such as in the spiritual eye of the mind and soul; for just as in verse five, where Eve was informed by the Serpent that `then shall your eyes be opened', in both instances `ayin is used. This is confirmed in verse 6, which informs us that the Tree of Knowledge was `a tree to be desired to make one wise'.  Therefore, after Eve had spoken to the Serpent, she coveted the forbidden fruit, so that she might attain a more exalted existence by which she might gain wisdom that was forbidden to her. This hidden wisdom is alluded to in verse three, where the Serpent informed the pair that `ye shall be as gods, knowing the difference between good and evil'.

`The Serpent promised Adam and Eve that their eyes would 'be opened' if they ate of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. The key word in this passage is eyes, which in Hebrew can be translated 'knowledge.' Opened can be translated 'broadened.' What the Serpent promised Adam and Eve was that knowledge would be broadened if they ate of the forbidden fruit. But the most foreboding aspect of this scripture emerges from the fact that the Hebrew word for 'eyes' is not plural, but singular. What the Serpent actually told Adam and Eve was that their 'eye' would be broadened by knowledge. The 'eye' that Scripture wants us to consider is not the physical organ of sight, but the eye of the mind or the soul. This singular 'eye' is called the 'third eye' of clairvoyance in the Hindu religion, the eye of Osiris in Egypt, and the All-Seeing Eye in Freemasonry.' (`Scarlet and the Beast, Vol. III, 6-7, John Daniel, 1995, pp. 6-7.)

This first great lie sowed the seeds of the natural immortality of the soul in the minds of men and is the basis of every pagan religion on earth, where `self' is exulted at the expense of all others and religion becomes that of self acquisition. It eventually led to the descendants of Cain believing in pantheism (pan: all; theos: god, thus `all is god').

A common teaching associated with pantheism, or `New Age' belief, as it has come to be known, is that if the `third eye' is opened, then the mind will become receptive to hidden knowledge of the esoteric mysteries. The serpent promised Adam and Eve that if they ate of the `forbidden fruit' of the Tree of Knowledge, then this `eye of the soul' would be opened, and they would be as Gods, and would have access to this hidden knowledge.  

One of the basic principles of Eros, is that when we behold something we desire, we then take it - for it operates from the basic principle that `might is right'. So it was with Eve. When she first saw the brilliant splendour of the Serpent, who had arrayed himself so that the forbidden fruit  further added to his beauty, she was mesmerized, took the fruit and ate of it. Thus she fell from her natural estate of selflessness (which in the New Testament is called `Agape'), and into the mind of selfishness.

One natural attribute of this fallen mind which Eve acquired from Satan, is that it believes that only that which already has inherent value in itself is worth acquiring. This equated with the Greek conception of virtue, which the Greeks called `Eros', for Eros in fact described the Greek conception of love, which is that a man lay down his life for friends. Yet this in fact teaches that only the good are worth saving, and at best is non love, or anti-love; for Christ lay down His life for us, `while we were yet sinners . . . For if, when we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of His Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by His life' (Romans 5:8).

Eros is in fact the selfish mind of Satan - and it is this mind which Eve received from him when she fell and came directly under his control. It's primary concern is of self and of the fear of judgment, for directly after they sinned, the pair hid from God. The woman blamed the Serpent for her transgression, and the man blamed the woman; for both feared to be judged as guilty before God and therefore worthy of death. The `blame game' comes to us naturally when we operate from the principle of `Eros'.

It is this mind which the apostle called the carnal mind, and equates to the `old man' of sin. It is summed up by the famous words Veni, vidi, vici; which is the phrase which the Roman Emperor Julius Caesar used when described his victories; it translates as `I came, I saw, I conquered.' This base principle of Eros has been perpetuated ever since by the treatment of  women as sex objects - a man whose nature has not been subdued by the mind of Christ sees a woman who is beautiful, he desires her, and he then attempts to take her. It has also led to the veneration of the Mother Goddess cult; which is the cult of Gaia; the world soul; where the role of the man as the spiritual leader is reversed with the woman, and the woman instead rules over the man - for Eve ruled over Adam when she was bewitched by the Serpent and enticed her husband to also eat of the forbidden fruit. Modern feminism is firmly rooted in the Mother Goddess cult.  

We find this underlying principle of `Eros' - the selfish minding taking by force that which it has no lawful right to, and thus usurp the kingdom of God by making His commandments of none effect, first being applied when the sons of God `took them wives of all that they chose.'

`And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they [were] fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.' (Genesis 6:2)

 If we look at Eve coveting the forbidden fruit and then taking it (Genesis 3:6) , we find that in the original Hebrew the word which is used for `took'  (laqach') is the same word which is used when the sons of God took themselves wives. Thus we find that by this time the underlying principles of `Eros' had become firmly established and the first great lie then led to the formation of every pagan religion known to man, as mankind began to believe that the soul is immortal of itself and cannot die. Thus the dualism which is intimately associated with it; which is the belief that God is both male and female, as well as good and evil - led to goddess worship as roles became reversed and nearly all of mankind began to believe that they have an inherent immortality which deems that we are `little gods' who cannot die.

As immortality is the sole province of God, the Serpent insinuated that if Adam and Eve ate of the forbidden fruit, the more exalted existence that they would enter into would be the realization of their True Self;  which is `New Age' parlance which infers that they are `little gods' who cannot die. This first great lie lay the foundation for the doctrine of the natural immortality of the soul - and the majority of men and women who have ever lived have believed it ever since. Yet there is another great deception associated with this first great lie which few ever consider. As the soul is considered to be immortal, then the gravity of sin is made of no effect and the `wages of sin' becomes degraded - for when the majority of people think that `the first great lie' speaks of the first death, or (as the majority of Christians believe) - soul death; the death which Christ actually meant when he informed them that they would die - was in fact the second death! There are few today who comprehend this fact. This belief lies at the base of every error which corrupts the character of God, by presenting to us the idea that God is a God of `Eros' - which is to say that only the good are worth saving!  

Comment (4)

St. Augustine of Hippo (354 - 430), first developed the doctrine of  `original sin' in a logical and comprehensive format, and was eventually rewarded with the honorific `Doctor Gratiae' (Doctor of Grace) in 1298 A.D. Augustine was heavily influenced by Manichaeism and neo-Platonism, which declares that everything which is of this material plane of existence is so far removed from the One-in-all pantheistic god, that all things which are tethered to this plane of existence have lost all knowledge (gnosis) of their True, or Realistic (divine) Self. As the body is believed to be essentially evil, it therefore weighs down the soul, which yearns to break free from the confines of the body which corrupt it with its material essence.

Augustine's neo-Platonism compelled him to believe that the fall so hopelessly corrupted the souls of men, that man is incapable of making the `good' decision of choosing God. Therefore:

`Since Adam transmits death to his children by way of generation when he begets them mortal, it by generation that he transmits sin . . . (`Online Catholic Encyclopedia', art. `Original Sin in Scripture' & `The Nature of Original Sin'  http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11312a.htm.)

In other words, Adam's sin is transmitted to us by genetic inheritance, thus making it impossible for us to ever overcome sin, for sin is the very essence of our mortal being. It eventually led to the idea of paying penance in the form of indulgences to the `Treasury of Merit', by which we are able to avoid the sinning of venal sins in the future; by paying penance for the souls that are suffering in purgatory, so the agony they endure in the flames of hell might be lessened. As venal sins are regarded as `lesser sins' that do not involve `grave sin' (such as murder),  then therefore God can be appeased by paying penance for sin. Murder is regarded as one sin by which no amount of penance can lesson one's suffering in hell-fire.  

Thus the idea that we are saved by the sacraments of the Church evolved, which essentially implies that one's belief in the sacrifice of Christ cannot of itself save us; simply because sin is the very essence of our souls. Therefore the idea of salvation by faith alone becomes degraded, as salvation becomes a difficult and arduous process, as we must appease a God Who is angry with us because of our sins. Therefore the only means by which we can achieve salvation is by doing good works that purify our sinful immortal souls, as our doing of good works are meritorious in one's salvation; for Christ is too impotent to save us. In this system we see the Greek logic from which this philosophical conception of salvation is derived, for Plato believed that as anything which is of the material world is corrupt, then the soul is weighed down and corrupted by the body, from which it yearns to break free from. Therefore in this life, men must do good works to purify the soul, so that at death, the immortal soul can return to the original divine home from which it originated, and once again be assimilated into the pantheist One God in All. 

Augustine's doctrine of `original sin' is derived from a rather narrow interpretation of Romans 5: 12, which states that:

`Wherefore, as by one man sin entered the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for all that all have sinned. . .

The following passage further explains this doctrine:

`(2) Adam by his fault transmitted to us not only death but also sin, "for as by the disobedience of one man (i.e., all men) were made sinners (Romans 5: 19) . . .'

(3) Moreover, the Apostle did not affirm that all men, in imitation of Adam, are mortal on account of their actual sins; since children who die before coming to the use of reason have never committed such sins; but he expressly affirms the contrary in the fourteenth verse: "But death reigned", not only over those who imitated Adam, but "even over them also have not sinned after the similitude of the transgression of Adam." Adam's sin, therefore, is the sole cause of death for the entire human race . . . We know that several of the Latin Fathers understood the words "in whom all have sinned", to mean, all have sinned in Adam . . . one man has transmitted to the whole human race not only the death of the body, which is the punishment of sin, but even sin itself, which is the death of the soul. Therefore . . . original sin is "the death of the soul", it is the privation of sanctifying grace.' (ibid.)

The studious reader will note that the `a priori' belief of the `natural immortality of the soul' necessitates that the `death' spoken of here refers solely to the death which we suffer when we reach the end of this mortal coil,  for "the death of the soul" can only refer to the soul being cut off from any hope of salvation forever, while nevertheless burning in endless torment in the fires of hell, for reason that the soul is naturally immortal and cannot die. 

Unfortunately, Augustine's bent toward Manichaeism and neo-Platonism compelled him to ignore the rest of the text, which is summarised in verses 18 and 19, and is in fact completely opposed to the doctrine of `original sin' which Augustine formulated, for this is how the text reads when the summary is included:

`Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned . . .Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation, even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one many shall be made righteous.' (Romans 5: 12, 18, 19.)

Notice carefully that the apostle Paul quite clearly tells us that by the `offence’ of one - that is Adam, judgment was passed upon all men and all men were condemned by the law. Now, if that were all that he were telling us, then this would be ample justification for the doctrine of  `original sin', and instead of the Gospel being good news, it instead becomes bad news, for according to Augustine's doctrine of `original sin', we would be condemned with little hope of salvation, for in Augustine's  view of salvation,  if Christ were to take upon Himself  `flesh' which is in fact regarded by Catholic theology as sin, then Christ would be a sinner by default, for Greek logic determines that the flesh of fallen man is hopelessly corrupt by genetic inheritance, which thus necessitates that therefore Christ must vicariously assume sinless flesh; which effectively quarantines His divinity from being tempted to sin - for temptation is in itself is accorded to be sin! Therefore Christ is declared to have assumed what is known in theological terms as the pre-lapsarian, or sinless flesh which Adam had before the fall. Thus Christ is made to be entirely unlike us, and is placed so far beyond our human experience, that we need the assistance of a Priest so that we may find Him.

Moreover, that most famous Scripture which was uttered by the `beloved disciple’ clearly teaches that `God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son’ to us! If Christ was truly given to us, then He has come all the way down from the lofty heights of heaven so that He might meet us where we need Him; that is in `flesh’ that was tempted to sin - for the doctrines of `original sin' and `vicarious atonement' go hand in hand - if one is to believe in one doctrine, one invariably believes in the other as well, simply because Augustine's Platonism determined that he must believe that as Adam's sin is transmitted to us by genetic inheritance, then therefore Christ must be quarantined from having this sin transmitted to Him by taking upon Himself the `sinless flesh' of Adam before the fall - which is flesh which cannot be corrupted by the material plane of existence in which we dwell; for the Greek philosophers viewed matter as inherently evil and therefore corrupt. This in turn led to a host of other doctrines, such as the doctrine of the `Immaculate Conception', which teaches that when Mary, the mother of Jesus was conceived, at the moment of her conception, `original sin' was not transmitted to her:

`The ancient writer of De Nativate Christi, found in St. Cyrprian's works, says: Because (Mary) being "very different from the rest of mankind human nature, but not sin, communicated itself to her.' (`The Glories of the Catholic Church: The Catholic Christian Vol. 1, Challoner, Brann & Shea, 1895, p. 172.)

Obviously, as this `human  nature' of Mary was totally unlike ours, it must have been `like' the human nature of Adam before He fell - and that same `human' nature was then passed on genetically from Mary to Christ.

`We affirm that the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity, the Word of God . . . . by being born of the virgin, thus taking to himself from her maternal womb a human nature of the same substance as hers. As far as the sublime mystery of the incarnation can be reflected in the natural order, the blessed Virgin, under the overshadowing of the Holy Ghost, by communicating to the Second Person of the adorable Trinity, as mothers do, a true human nature of the same substance with her own, is thereby really and truly his mother.' (`Faith of our Fathers', Cardinal Gibbons, 1917, p. 137.)

Thus we find that this `true human nature' which was transmitted from Mary to Christ is so unlike ours, that it has no real bearing on our humanity at all,  for we are not sinless, like Adam was when he communed with Jesus in the Garden of Eden. For Christ was no actor merely wailing his lines, as the doctrine of vicarious substitution teaches - for although law permits men to be pardoned from their crimes, no law on earth will allow an innocent man to substitute his life for another, for reason that his innocence of the crime merits no punishment - which is at odds with what is taught by the doctrine of  `vicarious substitution', which would be regarded as unlawful in any court of Law. So it is with Christ. If Christ were to merely assume the flesh of Adam before he sinned, then this flesh would not be subject to condemnation and it would be unlawful for Christ to substitute His `sinless' flesh for our fallen flesh. 

Therefore in a legal and forensic sense He cannot qualify as our Saviour if he takes upon Himself this type of `flesh'. But if He is instead `made' in flesh in which Christ is instead subjected to the temptation to sin, then this type of flesh qualifies Him as our Saviour, and He is able to save to the uttermost those who flee to Him for salvation. Scripture tells us that this is the flesh which Christ was `made in, for while He was tempted to sin, He remained sinless, while at the very same time defeating sin `in the flesh', for `in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren' (Hebrews 2: 17). Praise God that the `agape' of the Father and Son is such that the Son came all the way down from the lofty heights of heaven, to meet us where we are, which is in my flesh and your flesh. Thus, that `flesh' of which He is `made' of is our flesh, and as our flesh is subject to the condemnation of the law, then He was `made' to be that which the very law condemns - which is then lawful, for that kind of flesh is subject to the condemnation of the law - and it is that kind of flesh, which is  my flesh and your flesh which He crucified on the cross.

`For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh.' (Romans 8: 3.)

Thus, being made in the `likeness' of sinful flesh, Christ voluntarily brought Himself under the condemnation of the law, so that at Calvary, He did not make a mockery of the law by merely substituting His perfect life for our sinful lives, but on the cross literally became the sin of the entire world - and that is indeed lawful and infinitely qualifies Christ as our Saviour. But here we must exercise a word of caution:

`Now as to Christ's not having "like passions" with us: in the Scriptures all the way through He is like us and with us according to the flesh. He is the seed of David according to the flesh. He was made in the likeness of sinful flesh. Don't go too far. He was made in the likeness of sinful flesh; not in the likeness of sinful mind. Do not drag His mind into it. His flesh was our flesh; but the mind was "the mind of Christ Jesus" If he had taken our mind, how, then, could we ever have been extorted to "let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus?" It would have been so already. But what kind of mind is ours? Oh, it is corrupted with sin also. Look at ourselves in the second chapter of Ephesians . . . the third verse has this particular point in it . . . This man [Adam]  at the first had the mind of God; he forsook it and took the mind of Satan. In Jesus Christ the mind of God is brought back once more to the sons of men; and Satan is conquered.' (`1895 General Conference Sermon of Seventh-Day Adventist's', Sermon no. 17,  A.T. Jones, speaker.)

Indeed, John the Revelator , the `beloved disciple of Christ' begins his Gospel with an emphasis that differs from the other three writers of the Gospel, for he specifically focuses upon Christ Himself tabernacling among us in a `tent' of human flesh: 

`The Word became flesh and dwelt among us (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth' (John 1: 14.) 

However, the translation which reads `and dwelt among us' is not really an accurate translation, as it should read:

`And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us in a tent . . . '

John wrote the Book of Revelation under divine inspiration, in which we find the rich symbology of the Sanctuary service of the Old Testament is relegated to the Sanctuary service in the New Testament, in which Christ is depicted as ministering to fallen humanity in the Heavenly Sanctuary, and intimately connects the `flesh' which Christ assumed, with this ministration to us - for Scripture teaches that us that Christ is near to us, even at the door of our hearts, instead of so far away that we must enlist the aid of a Priest so that we might find Him. Unfortunately though, most Christians believe that anything which pertains to the Old Testament solely pertains to the `Old Covenant of works' which was made between God and Moses and therefore no longer applies, because we are now in the `New Covenant of Grace' - which thus means that this intimate connection between the Sanctuary service depicted in the Old Testament, and the ministration of Christ which is depicted to us specifically in the Book of Hebrews and the Book of Revelation, is broken, and has also been lost to humanity. For if it is true that the `Old Covenant' of works relates specifically to the Old Testament and the Jewish people of today, then why does John refer directly to the Hebraic Sanctuary of the Old Testament when he speaks of beholding `the glory of Christ as the only begotten of the Father', in a `tent' of flesh? For John is suggesting that just as it was in the Tent of the Tabernacle in which the pre-incarnate Christ revealed His glory to the Israelites as the Shekinah Presence, or Spirit of God in the Most Holy Place of the Tabernacle, it was in a tent of human `flesh' that Christ revealed His glory to all humanity.

Other writers, such as Paul the apostle reveal that the way by which the glory of Christ is revealed to fallen man, is by saving fallen man in a `tent' of flesh which is very much like our own:

`Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; and deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage. For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham. Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people. For in that he himself has suffered being tempted, he is able to help them that are tempted.' (Hebrews 2: 14-18)

Paul is emphatic that this is the only way by which Christ could save fallen man, so that He is able to save to the uttermost all who call upon His Name, for reason that whatever is not assumed cannot be saved. According to Scripture, Christ did not take upon Himself the lofty `nature' of unfallen angels who withstood the temptation to sin when Lucifer declared war in heaven, or the `nature' of  the unfallen Adam, who stood in the Garden of Eden and communed daily with God, but was instead born into this world four thousand years later, at which time He took upon Himself a human body which had been subject to the cumulative effects of four thousand years of the degradation of sin weakening the resolve of fallen man to live in harmony with the will of God. For if Christ had taken upon Himself the `nature' of the  unfallen angels, or His temptation was limited to innocent infirmities such as hunger and thirst, it would have been impossible for Him to give fallen man help where we need it most - which is in `the likeness of sinful flesh'.

Therefore if  Christ were to closely identify with His brethren, it was essential that He be made like  His brethren, so that we might be sure our Elder Brother has been tempted by the same temptations which we are tempted with, yet victoriously overcame them by constantly being connected with His Father by the Holy Spirit of the Father. Therefore, while the `flesh' which He assumed was assailed by the `accuser of the brethren' (the Devil) and was tempted to sin, His Divine Mind which He shared with the Father by the Holy Spirit of the Father was a bulwark of righteousness which was more than able to overcome the temptations of the devil. For this reason, in Philippians 2: 5 we are exhorted to simply let this same mind that was in Christ Jesus be in us, for that same mind is our bulwark against the sins that so easily beset us. But we cannot force His mind into our mind; to try to do so is legalism, for our selfish mind must instead die to self, so that by beholding, we may be changed by the selfless mind of agape that is `in Christ'.  It is only by beholding Christ that a heart-felt appreciation of the cross is experienced, and our natural attributes which have resulted from the fall, which is to say the selfish mind which we have inherited from Adam (or `old man of sin' of sin, as Paul calls it); will die to sin and is thus crucified with Christ on His cross. Thus, as we draw closer to Christ, we no longer want to do the sins that formerly entrapped us, as Christ imparts the same `agape' love into our hearts that impelled Him to die on the cross for our sins, for by some mysterious process of alchemy that changes the desire of our hearts, `by beholding, we are changed'(2 Corinthians 3: 18) .

In the original Greek, the word which John uses to describe the flesh is the Greek word `sarx'. He uses this word when He tells us that the `the word became flesh (sarx) and dwelt among us in a tent', and again when he says that:

`Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is of God' (1 John 4: 2).

It is also precisely the same word which the apostle Paul uses when he says:

`Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; and deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage' (Hebrews 2: 14).

Therefore the `flesh' which Paul speaks of is the same `flesh' which John speaks of, for if it were not so, he would have informed us by using an entirely different word! But he does not - he employs the word `sarx', and it was in the `sarx' that Christ was made like unto His brethren, and it was in the `sarx', that He crucified sin! John is emphatic when he stresses that anyone who teaches that Christ did not come in the `sarx' is not of God, and this is the spirit of antichrist:

`And every spirit that confesses not that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof all of you have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.' (1 John 4: 3.)

The reason why this fearful judgment is passed upon those who believe that Christ came in flesh which cannot be tempted to sin, is simply because this reflects their own belief that sin cannot be overcome by the Spirit of Christ dwelling within us. Thus sin is perpetuated forever, and a mockery is made of the declaration: 

`I write unto you, young men, because ye are strong and the word of God abideth in you, and ye have overcome the wicked one.' (1 John 2:14) 

This belief is reflected by the Apologists of the second and third centuries, such as Justin Martyr. Although Justyn  assiduously fought against  a Gnostic sect called the Docetists who believed that Christ was a mere phantom who seemed to manifest Himself in flesh (original Greek; `dokeo' - to seem); but this was merely an illusion, for they believed that it was impossible for God to manifest Himself in `flesh' such as we have, without corrupting His divine nature. Ironically, men such as Justin believed that the `flesh' which Christ manifested Himself could not be tempted to sin, and it is this belief which John regarded as antichrist. And why? Because if Christ had assumed `flesh' which had not been tempted to sin (which is the flesh of Adam before the fall), then this flesh of the sinless Adam which is mysteriously substituted for ours in the form of  `vicarious substitution' cannot save us, for in order to provide a complete atonement for sin, that which is saved must first be assumed - and if Christ came in the `flesh' of Adam before the fall, then this is the only flesh which can be saved, for our `flesh' is entirely different to that of a sinless Adam before he `fell' into sin! The doctrine of `vicarious substitution' therefore leaves us with a `Saviour' who is too impotent to save anybody, for ironically the sinless Adam didn't require saving in the first place!

Comment (1)