The 3 Ws of sin, and the remedy.

In my daily Quiet Times I'm currently reading through Leviticus and today read about the bullock for a sin offering in chapter 8 v 14-17.  In verse 17 we read that the bullock's hide, flesh and dung were burnt outside the camp.

This speaks clearly of the three aspects of sin that is so prevalent in all of us if we are not careful.

1.  The hide speaks of The Winsomeness of Sin.

The hide is, of course, the skin.  When people say that a person is attractive to them, they often make reference to the outside form, i.e. the skin.  So it is with sin - it is attractive to the senses and draws us to it.  We think of Eve, in the garden of Eden, how she saw that the forbidden fruit was "pleasant to the eyes" (Genesis 3 v 6).  Sin has an attraction BUT, there is a payback, both in this life and for eternity.

2. The flesh speaks of The Willfulness of Sin.

The flesh speaks of that which is wilful. While it is possible for a person to sin in ignorance, for the most part people commit sin deliberately.  They do what they know to be wrong, and oppose the Bible as it teaches them wherein they have erred (hence one reason why Christians are persecuted).  In Eccles. 7 v 29 we read that God made man upright, "but they have sought out many inventions".

3. The dung speaks of the Wastefulness of Sin.

People seem so concerned about not wasting their lives and wanting to achieve so much (a so-called "bucket list") but what about their souls?  In Mark 8 v 36-37 we read of the Saviour teaching that the value of a soul is worth more than all the wealth of the world.  Conversely, people who live without Christ have wasted their lives and their souls.

So much for the 3 Ws of sin, but what is the remedy?  In this verse (Lev 8 v 17) we read of how the various items (hide, flesh and dung) were burned "outside the camp".  What does that remind us of?

Turn to Hebrews 13 v 10-12 and we read that the burning of animals outside the camp is a picture of Christ and how he suffered "outside the gate" in order to be a sacrifice for our sins.

When reading through the Old Testament we are apt to think that so much of it is not relevant to us - but it is!  Particularly is this so when we read these wonderful pictures of Christ and His work for us on the cross.

May the Lord be pleased to open our eyes to find these pictures and appreciate the Saviour more. 

Revival or revolution

I recently watched a dramatised documentary on the French Revolution and, while, I can understand the deep resentment caused by the dire poverty of the 1700s (the Aristocracy living in opulent splendour) it became apparent as time went on that this cataclysmic event was inspired, not by a genuine attempt to right social wrongs, but by a strong humanistic motive.  The leaders were godless men who had no time for the teachings of the Bible and harped on about the "Rights of Man".  After having killed the king and his wife, they then instituted a great terror which meant that anyone who was suspected of having any sympathies for the "old order" lost their heads, quite literally!

This terrible time then culminated in the leaders turning on one another in an orgy of blood-letting.  As this madness was creeping into England, God, in His mercy, brought a revival and, instead of many thousands being butchered on the guillotine, as in France, the same number were being saved from their sins through faith in Christ as their Lord and Saviour.

As the 1800s progressed the effects of those two events (revolution in France and revival in England) became clear - France had a century of huge instability coupled with political upheaval and heavy military defeats; England had a time of economic growth and saw an expansion of a world-wide empire.  While not everything about the British Empire was good, it did facilitate the spread of the Gospel as missionary endeavour increased exponentially.

Fast forward to the present time and what do we see?  The residual benefits of the 18th century revival have lone gone; a largely godless Parliament has, over the last 50 years, passed a string of anti-Christian laws which show a blatant disregard for the teachings of God's infallible word.  The effects of this are obvious for all to see - a government in perpetual crisis, rampant wickedness and immorality, unnatural perversions being openly promoted and encouraged, the persecution of evangelical Christians, a rapidly rising crime rate and, while people are being openly butchered on the streets in broad daylight, a Police "service" that is more concerned with soothing the hurt-feelings of perverts than going after the real criminals.

As we approach 2019 it appears that the situation, despite the best intentions of well meaning "do-gooders", is going to get worse.  The only hope, as it was in the 1700s is revival - the politicians, police and liberal church leaders have all failed.  Only God can save this country now.

One hopes that, despite the fact we have treated Him so badly, He will yet have mercy on this land, there is no other way the country can be saved - "....in wrath, remember mercy" (Habakkuk 3 v 2)

The Gospel 3 The Devil 0

Last weekend saw the event known as "Lancashire Festival of Hope" with Franklin Graham preaching over 3 nights and people getting saved.  There is nothing unusual in that, you may think; after all, Billy Graham, Franklin's dad, often took Gospel meetings in the UK.  However, what struck many people about this event was the sheer volume of opposition.

After Franklin spoke at his Father's funeral and made it clear that there is only one way to Heaven, there was a wave of hatred unleashed against him by the secular media, liberal "Christians", the Muslim Council of Britain and others who had a grudge against the clear teaching of John 14 v 6.

When Billy Graham was preaching, Britain had a reasonable respect for the Bible and the Christian faith, and so Billy's message didn't appear "extreme".  However, with the advent of strong political correctness the Gospel message that he preached is now regarded as "offensive", and Franklin hasn't enjoyed the same degree of respect his father had, despite preaching the same message.

Examples of the opposition he encountered, when it was announced that he intended to come to England, are as follows: MPs asking the Home Secretary to ban him from the country (that plea, thankfully, fell on deaf ears), anti-Christian bigots asking Blackpool council to ban him from preaching at the Winter Gardens venue (which is council owned), this, too, failed.  However, these bigots had more success when demanding that Blackpool Transport ban adverts for the meetings from the side of their buses - the ads. were duly banned BUT this spectacularly backfired when it simply gave more publicity to the meetings and ensured a huge number turning up; so many, in fact, that an overflow room had to be used.  Moreover, there were tens of thousands tuning in on Live Stream to hear the Gospel preached.

Over the 3 nights of the mission (Sept 21,22 and 23) Franklin faithfully preached the Gospel with fearless courage and urged people to repent of their sins, many did, praise the Lord!

The devil tried to ban this event, but he failed, and failed and failed again - truly it was a clear case of The Gospel 3 The Devil 0 !!

The hypocrisy of anti-Christian bigots.

My last article  centred on the hypocrisy of an atheist (scroll down for details) and this one is about the hypocrisy of anti-Christian bigots who claim to believe in free speech but, when that freedom is exercised by Christians who disagree with them, then the goalposts move!

Yesterday, news came through that the Home Sec. (Sajid Javid) has, quite rightly, ruled against imposing a ban on peaceful anti-holocaust demonstrations outside the murder clinics where these atrocities are taking place.   I don't, personally, get involved in pro-life activities as my calling is direct evangelism, but I do believe that people who peacefully protest against this ongoing wickedness are absolutely right, and should be commended for their courage.  Attempts have been made to ban such protests even though there is no evidence of violent conduct being perpetrated by the protesters.

Indeed, the council at Ealing has shamefully imposed a ban on free speech by criminalising such protests, and that wicked action is being challenged in the courts.  Not content with that, the anti-Christian bigots are seeking to make it easier to ban such protests  all over the country but, as already mentioned, the Home Sec. has declined to endorse such a move.

The howls of protests against the Mr Javid's sensible decision do not surprise me - they resemble spoilt children throwing  tantrums and stamping their feet, poor dears!  However, it is a serious matter for a number of reasons:

Firstly, human life is precious.  As Psalm 139 clearly states, human life begins in the womb and has been created by God.  Destroying such life is a wicked crime against a defenceless baby,

Secondly, free speech is precious.  The bigots who oppose the anti-holocaust movement would be the first to complain if someone told them they had to shut their big mouths!

Thirdly, because standing up for the defenceless babies has a clear Biblical warrant (Proverbs 31 v 8-9, particularly the King James Version) it is obvious that these pro-killing people are being motivated by Satan.  I truly hope they come to repentance before they die as they will face an awful judgement.

The sentiments outlined in that 3rd point underline my deep concern, not only for the unjust treatment meted out to peaceful Christians who oppose killing babies, and not only for the babies, themselves; but also for the souls of these poor creatures who are allowing themselves to be used as tools of the devil in promoting the ongoing holocaust, and denying the right of peaceful protest by right minded people such as the pro-life movement.

May the Lord be pleased to inspire more people to stand up against this modern day holocaust, and may He be pleased to convert the apologists for this abomination from the error of their ways.

The blatant hypocrisy of an atheist.

One of the most prominent atheists of our day is, of course, Richard Dawkins.  His infamous "God Delusion" is one of many books which pour scorn on the Christian faith, in general, and the Bible in particular.  His zeal and vigour in promoting anti-Christian rhetoric is probably without parallel in modern times (with the possible exception of Stephen Fry's pathetic "God is a capricious monster" interview).

Moreover, Dawkins is also a coward - when he had a chance to engage in a moderated public debate with William Lane Craig, (in his own back yard, to boot) he chickened out.  Not to be outdone the organisers went ahead with the event at the Sheldonian Theatre and even left a chair out for our absent friend  - but, just like the "Missing Three Quarter", he done a bunk.  To be fair, one should have sympathy with Geoffrey Staunton's motive (do your research) but certainly not with Dawkins.

Atheism and cowardice are bad enough, but what really takes the biscuit is hypocrisy and our old adversary (yes I know I called him a friend just now, but I was being sarcastic!) has come up with the goods once again.

The devil loves to mirror Christian theology with his own wicked counterfeits and this is no exception.  Why do I say this?  The answer is absurdly, but tragically simple, compare the two -
we have a glorious trinity of Father, Son and Holy Spirit; Satan's alternative appears  to be Atheism, Cowardice and Hypocrisy, and Dawkins fits the bill perfectly.  (The real Unholy Trinity is, of course, The Devil, The Beast and the False Prophet but I'm writing tongue-in-cheek!).

His folly as an atheist is well known to everybody (unless you live on Mars!) and also his abject cowardice when challenged by someone who can face him down, but hypocrisy?  How can we call him out on this?

The answer, again, is simple - Dawkins has gone on record as saying that it's a form of child abuse to teach children the Bible and the Christian faith.  He seems to think it is damaging to the child, but he has now produced a book on atheism that specifically aims at targeting .....children.

Not content with maligning the Christian faith and falsely accusing Christian parents of child abuse, he now wants to poison the minds of children with a doctrine which has been responsible for an incalculable level of suffering, both in this world and that to come.

If children read this wickedness and, as a result, turn away from God and end up in Hell, Dawkins will have their blood on his hands.  It is bad enough to reject God and His word for oneself, but to turn others the same way is just about the most evil thing a person can do.

What should be our response to all this?

Firstly, while it is right to have antipathy towards Dawkins' activities we should, indeed, be full of compassion for him, as a person.  As one who has been blinded by Satan his plight should arouse our pity rather than our contempt, he is a poor creature of the first order.

Secondly, our concern for his eternal destiny should move us to be much in prayer - that God, in His mercy, may be pleased to open his blind eyes and set him free from Satan's snare as we read in 2nd Timothy 2 v 24-26.

Thirdly, we should be confident that, as the Gospel goes out, to children and adults, then God will overrule the schemes of Diabolus and draw precious souls to Himself; indeed, we know from John 6 v 37 that every single one of those given to Christ will come to Him - not even Dawkins can stop that!

Anti-Christian bias from the BBC (quelle surprise!)

News has come through, today, that Cliff Richard has been awarded substantial damages against the BBC because of the appalling way they handled unjust allegations against him back in 2014.

It appears that, when Cliff was facing an investigation for alleged crimes (which have since been proved baseless), the BBC filmed a Police raid on his home in Berkshire.  (How did they know the raid was taking place? Were they tipped off by an anti-Christian copper?).

No-one is disputing that broadcasters have a duty to report news but it is clear that, in this case, the "reporting" was well over the top and constituted a form of harassment.

Why do I say that this shows a bias against the Christian faith? Simply because Cliff was accused of a sex-crime that was supposed to have taken place at a Billy Graham rally in the 1980s.

I've felt for a long time that the BBC have a bias, bordering on hatred, against Evangelical Christianity, but this case proves that beyond all reasonable doubt.  Indeed, any rational, fair-minded person looking at the record of this supposedly, impartial, broadcaster would have to conclude that when it comes to being neutral and unbiased, the BBC are woefully short of their remit.

This latest scandal is one of a long line of outrages perpetrated by the media against the followers of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ; but should we really be surprised?  After all, didn't Jesus say, in John 15 v 18-20, that the world would hate us because we are His?

What should be our response to today's news?

Firstly, we should be pleased that, at long last, a judge has seen fit to make a judgement that, for once, has not been anti-Christian;

Secondly, we should continue to live for the Lord and spread His Gospel, knowing that,as we do so, souls are being saved, and Christ's kingdom extended;

Thirdly, we should pray for our detractors - remember the hatred that Saul had for the believers, but God was merciful to him in saving his soul (Acts 9).  May He be pleased to convert opponents of the Gospel.

Finally, in September, if the Lord wills, Franklin Graham will be coming to England to preach the Gospel.  Be prepared for a huge amount of bias when the BBC report this event unless, of course, they've learnt their lesson from, today's judgement (stranger things have happened!).

The New Testament is to be a criminal offence.

In 1st Cor. 6 v 9-10 Paul states that people who engage in certain practises "will not inherit the kingdom of God".  He then follows this up with verse 11 that states "such were some of you.....".

In these 3 verses we see the power of God to transform people, including those involved in the most vile and unnatural perversions.  Indeed, the glorious history of the Christian church includes many who can testify to the saving power of God in changing their lives and renewing their minds (Romans 12 v 1-3).

However, the Government have announced that what they call "gay conversion therapy" is to be outlawed.  I'm not sure I agree with therapy, but I do believe in the Holy Spirit's power to change people's inclinations, habits and lifestyles, thus enabling them to live their lives in accordance with God's infallible word.

Once this new law goes through it will be illegal to quote the New Testament passage above and we, as Christians, will have a choice to make - do we obey God's word or the law of the land?

Romans chapter 13 and 1st Peter 2 v 13 make it clear that we are to be law-abiding people and not seek to break the law of the land (sadly, though, many professing Christians flagrantly break the speed limits - shame on them!).

However, when there is a clash between the law of the land and the Word of God, then our first allegiance is to the latter, even if we fall foul of the former, and face persecution for so doing.

Given that many professing Christians are seeking the "best of both worlds" and seem comfortable to make this world their home (are they true Christians, I wonder?) I suspect that many will seek, once again, an accommodation with this wicked culture in which we live rather than be willing to make a stand for truth.

As I conclude this article 2 verses of scripture come to mind - Acts 5 v 29 has Peter stating that we should obey God, rather than man, and  the Saviour's words in Matthew 10 v 33 where He warns that people who do not stand for Him, and thus deny Him, will be denied before His Father who is in Heaven - what side are we on, God's word , or the word of man?

The importance of personal integrity.

I recently read a secular book about prisoners on death row in the State of Texas, and was encouraged by the comments made about the chaplain, one Jim Brazzil.   He was a Southern Baptist minister who had been in pastoral ministry for some 25 years before becoming a prison chaplain. In particular I was impressed with 3 facets of his ministry, and wanted to share these with you.

Firstly, he had such a sincere concern for these condemned men that, not only did he give them much time in the months leading up to their deaths, but he also spent 3 hours with them before they were executed, even going into the death chamber, and being with them to the end.

Secondly, the spiritual care  he gave to each man was the same as that offered to a six-year old girl he prayed with, in hospital, as she was dying of cancer.  Given the fact that these prisoners were murderers who, in some cases, had wiped out entire families, that level of dedication to his calling is truly remarkable.  It reminded me of  Matthew 9 v 36 where we read that Jesus had compassion because they (the crowd who followed him) "were like sheep without a shepherd".  Perhaps this is why so many of these hardened men were willing to sign his Bible.

However, impressive though these matters are, what really struck me was the high level of personal integrity displayed in the following fact - when Warner Bros. offered Mr Brazzil 2.5 million dollars for the serial rights to his story so they could do TV programmes about him, he refused them; the reason he gave being that he didn't want to cheapen the work he was doing for God.

Given the constant scandals of televangelists who frequently make outlandish appeals for money, to fund their lavish projects, I consider Chaplain Brazzil's example to be highly commendable.  

It was this, perhaps, more than anything else that convinced even non-Christians among the prison staff, that this man was worthy of the utmost respect.

Is it not the case that the biggest complaint levelled against professing Christians by the world is that so many who claim to be followers of Christ are simply nothing more than money-grabbing hypocrites, in it for what they can get out of it?  When confronted by the integrity of  men like Jim Brazzil, opponents of the Gospel have no case.

If we are people known for a high level of  personal integrity then, even if many do not like our message, they will have to acknowledge that we are sincerely seeking to live up to the faith we profess to have.

May the conduct of Chaplain Brazzil be an example to all of us in our daily lives, lived before a watching world -   2nd Cor. 5 v 20

Ireland votes for a holocaust.

News is coming through that the people of the Irish Republic have voted to "liberalise" the abortion laws in the country, thus paving the way for a holocaust of 1,000s of babies who will be butchered as a result of this.

In the referendum campaign the promoters of this wickedness shamefully used the death of a pregnant Indian women, Savita  Halappanavar, as a pretext to forward their murderous intents.

This unfortunate lady fell ill while in Ireland, and the doctors refused to carry out an abortion because they deemed that her life was not at risk.  Her subsequent death was NOT the result of Ireland's strict pro-life laws, but due to the incompetence of the doctors, they didn't have the medical nous to recognise that her symptoms suggested her life was at risk.

However, the pro-killing lobby don't deal in facts, they deal in lies and duplicity for one very simple reason - they are agents of Satan whom he is using to pursue his vile agenda.

I truly pray that God, in His mercy, doesn't punish Ireland for trampling underfoot the teaching of His word in Psalm 139 verses 13-16, which clearly states that human life begins in the womb.  History has shown that when a state ushers in laws such as this, then dreadful calamities result; an example being that, when British parliament voted for such in the 1967 this was followed by an outbreak of "foot and mouth" disease and the onset of the troubles in Northern Ireland which led to 1,000s of deaths.

It is my sincere wish that God will be merciful to Ireland but, given that His word and His honour have been violated, I fear for the people in that land as they suffer the consequences of what they have done.

In the meantime our response should be two-fold.  We should pray for those women and their supporters, who have killed their children, that they would come to repentance and faith in Christ.  God is merciful to those who are truly repentant and accept Christ.  Also, secondly, we should be even more zealous to spread the truths of the Gospel, wherever we are, because it is only in the Gospel that people living sinful lives can be radically transformed, and know the joy of sins forgiven.

Manasseh - a trophy of Grace.

It has been my privilege to have been involved in open air outreach for some 40 years, and I've had the joy of pointing hundreds of people to Christ over that time. 

Given the hardness of peoples' hearts and, in some cases, their open and flagrant perversions, it is tempting to wonder if the Gospel really is effective in changing people. The answer to such unwelcome meanderings of the mind is to look at examples of God's power, not only in every day life, but also in God's inerrant word - the Bible.

One such example is Manasseh.

In 2nd Chronicles  33 we read of him becoming king of Judah at the young age of 12 and not dying until 55 years later - quite a long life for that time.  It was not long before the wickedness of his heart become apparent in the rampant idolatry he practised, which was so depraved he even sacrificed children to pagan gods.  Indeed, his vileness was such that he even surpassed the heathen nations around Israel and Judah.

It is not spiritually healthy to spend too long dwelling upon the awful things he did but it is necessary to acquaint ourselves with these facts for one very important reason - God's grace is magnified in his life as the Lord turns his heart to Himself in true repentance, a repentance which shows itself in the changed life.    This is recorded for us in verses 12 - 16.

What an encouragement for us in our own work of spreading the seed of the Gospel.  We may often wonder if someone has steeped themselves in wickedness so much that they simply cannot be saved; and yet we remind ourselves - if God can save one as depraved as Manasseh He can save anybody.

In the light of that glorious and wonderful truth - let us continue to spread the Word, believing that the Gospel has lost none of its power; as the Bible says "For I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God unto salvation, to everyone that believes..." Romans 1 v 16.  

It's not the waiter's fault if the diner complains.

I recently read an interesting illustration that I would like to share with readers and it runs as follows:

A chef prepares a meal, in a restaurant, and the waiter serves it to the customer.  There is nothing wrong with the meal; indeed, it is perfect, but the diner is one of those "glass half-empty" people who will find fault with anything.  He duly calls the waiter over to him and berates him for the alleged poor quality of the food, it's not to his satisfaction etc etc.  The waiter gets a bit fed up with this and asks the diner if he would like to take up the matter with the chef. After all, the waiter simply served up the meal, it was the chef who prepared it.

As one reflects upon this it becomes apparent that there is a parallel with the Christian telling people what the Bible teaches.  There is nothing wrong with the Bible, it is, in fact, infallible, but it teaches a number of unpalatable truths that make for uncomfortable reading.  It teaches us that God is Holy and we are sinful; it teaches that we deserve judgement for our sin and no amount of good deeds will put that right.  It teaches that there is only one way to get right with God and that is through faith in Jesus Christ, the Son of God, as our Lord and Saviour.

It also teaches that there are certain practises which, though they are regarded as fine by the majority of people, are deemed to be sinful in the sight of this Holy God.

When Christians are faithful to declare the truth of the Bible they will often be met with hostility, harassment and persecution. Indeed, we may even find ourselves falling foul of the "thought Police" who seem to regulate what one may or may not believe, with the same level of zeal as the old East German Stasi.

What should be our response when facing  such abuse? 

Coming back to our illustration I would suggest the following answer; just as the waiter simply challenged the diner to take up the matter with the chef, so we can simply point out that God has written His word, it has been carefully prepared (and preserved) and all we need to do is to "serve it up".  If people don't like its teachings the answer should be straightforward viz. take up the matter with God, it is His word, not mine.

There is no need for us to be cowed into silence by the "liberal fascists" who insist on telling us that we are bigots because we believe things they don't like.  Our responsibility is to boldly lay out before people what God's word says, and then trust Him to work on people as it pleases Him to do so.

The Bible clearly teaches (in Romans 10 v 17) that faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God; therefore let us re-double our efforts to spread its teachings and leave the consequences to Him.

Alleged contradictions in the Bible #4 - the period between the death and resurrection of Christ.

Continuing on with our series of alleged contradictions in God's infallible word, we come, now, to one which has often been pointed to as an obvious error. 

It runs as follows: In Matthew 12 v 40 Jesus made it clear that the Son of Man would be 3 days and 3 nights in the heart of the earth; this is a reference to the time between His death and resurrection.  However, in Luke 24 Jesus was speaking with the 2 disciples on the Emmaus road on the first day of the week (which was Sunday) and they made mention of the fact that it was the 3rd day after His death had occurred (verse 21).  Therefore, His death occurred on Friday, and the resurrection on Sunday.  How can this be 3 days and 3 nights?

On the face of it the matter does look awkward for proponents of Biblical inerrancy - however, as with all such questions the answer is simple, absurdly so.

It was a principle in Bible times for people to refer to a part day/night as a whole day/night.  Two examples of this are as follows:

In 1st Samuel 30 we read of David and his men arriving at Ziklag, their city of residence, and finding it ransacked.  The Amalekites had raided the city and carried off the women and children.  When the men gave chase they came across an Egyptian who had been a servant of the Amalekites.  Verse 12 says  that he had not eaten "for 3 days and 3 nights".  In verse 13 he said that his master had dumped him aside "3 days ago".  A clear reference to the principle of counting a part day/night as a whole day/night.

The 2nd example is in Esther.  In chapter 4 v 16 she says that she will fast for 3 days, night and day, before going to make a petition to the king.  In chapter 5 v 1 we read that it was "on the 3rd day" that she went before the king.  Another reference to a part day/night being counted as a whole day/night.

When opponents of the Bible come up with these alleged errors the issue is not an academic one but a moral one.  They know that if the Bible is true then they will have to change their way of living and stop pursuing their sinful lifestyles.  Therefore, they scour the Bible in a vain and pathetic attempt to find justification  for refusing to come to repentance, but such a search is futile and doomed to fail.

The best course for these poor creatures is the stop fighting and surrender to Jesus; they will then find a peace "that passes all understanding" (Phil. 4 v 7) and have assurance of eternal life.

Where is Hawking now?

News has come through informing us that Stephen Hawking has passed into eternity. 

This man was a so-called "atheistic scientist".  That is a contradiction in terms because true scientists believe there is a God.  He was stricken by a terrible disease which ravaged his body and I wouldn't wish that upon anyone, not even atheists, (even though the Bible rightly calls such people "fools" - Psalm 53 v 1).   However, what is worse than having a body racked with disease is having a crippled soul as, indeed, was the case with Hawking.

He promoted the evolution fraud and passed it off as a fact, even though there is not even enough evidence to call it a theory.  It is, in truth, a Satan-inspired creed.

In addition to his follies in believing such nonsense, this poor creature also publicly ridiculed the idea of an afterlife as the stuff of "fairy stories" - he knows differently now.

Given that the Bible teaches that non-believers in Christ end up in Hell, should we say that Hawking is now there?

The answer is - we don't know if Hawking is definitely in Hell because there is always the chance that before he died he had the good sense to repent of his wickedness, and accept Christ as his personal Saviour.   I truly hope he did so,  I suspect we shall have surprises in Heaven.

If, however, he did not so repent then he is now facing an eternity of indescribable torment at the hands of the God whom he spent his life denying, and he is paying the price for promoting the filth of evolution (or evil-lution as I call it).

People like Hawking, and his ilk, are  full of their own pride and self-promotion BUT they will one day die, then where will they be?  In the words of Deuteronomy 32 v 35 - "...their foot shall slide in due time".

Our response to Hawking's death should be that we re-double our efforts to spread the Gospel in the hope, that, even people afflicted with the cruelties of atheism, may yet be given grace to repent and receive Christ as their Lord and Saviour.

Alleged contradictions in the Bible #3 - The position of the Incense Altar

Continuing on with our series of alleged contradictions in the Bible we come now to one that is often not noticed even by faithful believers in the Bible's infallibility viz.

The position of the Incense Altar in the Old Testament Tabernacle.

We are, no doubt, aware of the construction of the tabernacle in the OT and how it all points to the person and work of Christ.  Students of this subject will know that the main building was divided into 2 parts - The Holy Place and The Most Holy Place (aka "The Holy of Holies").

In the first part of the building was the Candlestick, the Table of Showbread and the Incense Altar, behind the veil in the 2nd part was the Ark of the Covenant and The Mercy Seat.

In Exodus 40 we are told that the Incense Altar was to be placed in the 1st part of the building before the veil BUT, in Hebrews 9 v 1-4 we are told that the Incense Altar was to be found after the veil and in the same part as the Ark of the Covenant.

People who study the Bible in an attempt to find "errors" will seize upon this as a "Gotcha" moment par excellence and, to be fair to them, it does look as if there is a clear contradiction.

However, as with all these so-called discoveries of "mistakes" in God's infallible word, this one, too, has a simple explanation.

Remembering the principle of keeping all verses in their context please note the following:

The book of Exodus contains instructions for the building of the Tabernacle and its objects and states that the High Priest was to minister at the Incense Altar on a daily basis.  As he was not to enter the Holy of Holies during the course of the year this would, of necessity, be placed in the Holy Place.  However, once a year, on the Day of Atonement, he was to enter the Most Holy Place and sprinkle the blood of atonement upon the Mercy Seat which was on top of the Ark and, on that day, the Incense Altar would have been employed within the veil, in the same room - how do we know this?  Look again at Hebrews chapter 9 and read down to verses 6 and 7.  The general arrangement of the furniture was as stated in Exodus 40 but on that one day, the Day of Atonement, the High Priest would enter the Most Holy Place.  Therefore, in order to "do the job" properly he would have had to take the incense altar with him to offer incense.  It is clear that the opening section of Hebrews chapter 9 was a reference to the work of the priest on the Day of Atonement.

Remember too, that the Altar of Incense is a picture of Christ's intercessory ministry for us (see 1st John 2 v 1) and on the Day of Atonement, as the High Priest sprinkles the blood upon the Mercy Seat it is a picture of Christ entering into the presence of God the Father and presenting the blood that He shed.  Would it be stretching the point to believe that, just as the sprinkling of the blood on the Mercy Seat is a picture of Christ presenting His blood to the Father, so the Incense Altar is a picture of Christ representing us before the Father, and what better day than that precious Day of Atonement? 

To say that the Incense Altar was not taken into the Most Holy Place would be to allow that there is a contradiction in the inerrant Word of God. As there is no such contradiction, this is the only answer, and it is a really simple one.

It is my hope to continue this series of alleged contradictions in the Bible; if any of my readers have a query, or difficulty that they would like answered, please leave a comment.

Alleged contradictions in the Bible #2 - How many were slain in the plague?

Continuing on with our series of alleged contradictions in the infallible word of God we come now to one that, at first glance, looks like a glaring error but, on closer inspection, explains itself.

In Numbers 25  we read of God wiping out 24,000 people for wickedness.  Being a sovereign God He is perfectly just in doing so.  After all, He is the one in control, He makes the rules, and if people wilfully disobey Him, despite being repeatedly warned, then they can't complain if He deals with them.

However, the problem arises when, after having read (in Number 25 v 9) that 24,000 were killed, we come to the New Testament and read (in 1st Corinthians 10 v 8) that 23,000 were killed.

This is another "Gotcha" moment from the unsaved.

"Your Bible claims to be God's word and yet we have an obvious error" - not so fast, my friend, read the wording very carefully:

" Neither let us commit fornication, as some of them committed, and fell in one day, twenty and three thousand".

Did you notice the words "in one day"?

This shows, once again, that when reading the Bible it is imperative to read every word (after all, doesn't the Bible say "every word of God is pure"?).  It is quite obvious what has happened here - 23,000 died in one day, and the other 1,000 died later.

So, once again, the Bible is proved to be correct and the efforts of puny men to disprove it fail, and fail miserably.

Watch this space for the next instalment as we prove that the Bible is what it claims to be, the inspired and inerrant Word of God.

Alleged contradictions in the Bible #1 - the timing of Jesus' crucifixion.

Following on from my last blog post when I answered the question "Aren't there contradictions in the Bible?" I am intending to write a series of articles on alleged discrepancies in God's infallible word.

Of course, because the Bible is both infallible, and inerrant, there are NO discrepancies or contradictions; indeed, there has never been a proven fact of science or archaeology that has shown the Bible to be in error.

The subject I've chosen for this article is on the timing of Jesus' crucifixion.  The order of events over that time was that Jesus was arrested in the Garden of Gethsemane, was brought before various people and, when he was brought before the governor Pilate, He was led out in front of  a crowd who howled for His blood. After Pilate pronounced sentence viz. that Jesus should be crucified, He was then led through the streets to His execution.  From the moment Jesus was brought before the crowd to the time He was put on the cross would have been several hours and yet there appears to be a serious problem as I will now explain:

In John 19 v 13-14 we are told that Jesus was brought out before the crowd at the  6th hour; however, in Mark 15 v 25 we are told that Jesus was crucified at the 3rd hour.  How could he have been put on the cross 3 hours before being brought out to the crowd?

This seems to be a"gotcha" moment as far as the opponents of the Bible are concerned.  However, there is a simple answer and it runs like this:

In Mark's Gospel the times given are all in line with the Jewish reckoning of time; that is - the day starts at 6am and the 3rd hour is 9am, the 6th hour is noon, the 9th hour is 3pm.

In John's Gospel the timing follows the Roman reckoning, that is -  there are 2 blocks of 12 hours as in our own clocks today.

Bearing that in mind we see that Jesus was brought out before the crowd at 6am (the Roman time mentioned in John 19 v 14) and was crucified at 9am (the Jewish time mentioned in Mark 15 v 25); therefore, there is no problem, and certainly no contradiction or discrepancy.

Once again, the Bible is proved to be trustworthy and we can depend upon it as being true in every detail.