Job 16:18-22, Job Looks to the Intercession of His Redeemer

Christians cite a couple of verses from Job, especially Job 19:25, but I had never noticed this short passage before:

"O earth, cover not my blood,
     and let my cry find no resting place.
Even now, behold, my witness is in heaven,
     and He who testifies for me is on high.
My friends scorn me;
     my eye pours out tears to God,
that He would argue the case of a man with God,
     as a son of man does with his neighbor.
For, when a few years have come,
     I shall go the way from which I shall not return."

In this chapter, Job is berating his friends for their lack of compassion toward him during this time of his distress. He pleads with a personified earth not to block his appeal, as he then appeals to another intercessor, one who is "on high." As I read that, it struck me how exactly this parallels the New Testament description of the priesthood of Christ, especially Hebrews 7:25, "He always lives to make intercession for them [i.e., believers]," and Hebrews 9:24, "For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf."

Especially interesting to me is that Job doesn't profess some vague concept of an intercessor, a mediator with Jehovah, but explicitly addresses that mediator as God (which is why I capitalized those pronouns above), and his representative to God. This is a profession of the Trinity, God face to face with God (John 1:1)!

I admit that Job can be obscure at points. However, we err to pass over it, as I have done, as void of Gospel content. Here it is, and how blessed I am to have had the Holy Spirit open my eyes to it.

Bishops: the Hidden Admission of the Catholic Church

Titus 1:5-8 in the English Standard Version, says, "This is why I left you in Crete, so that you might put what remained into order, and appoint elders in every town, as I directed you- if anyone is above reproach, the husband of one wife, and his children are believers and not open to the charge of debauchery or insubordination. For an overseer, as God's steward, must be above reproach. He must not be arrogant or quick-tempered or a drunkard or violent or greedy for gain, but hospitable, a lover of good, self-controlled, upright, holy, and disciplined." "Elder" is a translation of the Greek word presbuteros, the origin of the English word "presbyterian," meaning "government by elders." "Overseer" is a translation of the Greek word episkopos, the source of the English words "bishop" and "episcopal," meaning "government by bishops." The use of "elders" in the plural is the origin of the Presbyterian principle of government by a multiplicity of elders, as opposed to a single priest or bishop.

In the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches, the precept of "apostolic succession" holds that the bishop is the successor of the apostles, which is also the justification for papal supremacy and infallibility. Some Anglicans and Lutherans also hold to apostolic succession. This precept is, obviously, rejected by Protestants who hold to presbyterian or congregational principles of polity (i.e., "church government").

The New Jerusalem Bible, a Catholic translation, popular among English-speaking Catholics outside the United States, translates this passage with "elder" for "presbuteros," and "presiding elder" for "episkopos." No mention of a bishop, at all. In contrast, the New American Bible, the preferred translation among English-speaking American Catholics, uses "presbyter," a transliteration rather than a translation, and "bishop." However, in a footnote, the NAB says, "In Titus 1:5, 7  and Acts 20:17, 28, the terms episkopos and presbuteros ('bishop' and 'presbyter') refer to the same persons." The NAB also includes this imprimatur in its introductory material: "free of doctrinal or moral error," so the Catholic hierarchy cannot dispense with it as a mere mistake or unauthorized opinion.

I find this astounding! After centuries of claiming apostolic authority for its bishops, the Catholic Church has come out and confessed, whispered though it may be, that their claims are without biblical justification! Ah, if only they would follow through and depose all of their unjustified bishops, especially that blasphemer and Diotrophes in the Church (III John 1:9), the Bishop of Rome. Then I could accept that the Catholic Church may be a true Church of Christ, rather than that kingdom of Antichrist, which I currently profess it to be.

Nehemiah 9:36-37: The American Government on a Well-Worn Path

"Behold, we are slaves this day; in the land You gave to our fathers to enjoy its fruit and its good gifts, behold, we are slaves. And its rich yield goes to the kings [and presidents?] whom You have set over us, because of our sins. They rule over our bodies and over our livestock as they please, and we are in great distress."

As we enter tax season, do these verses not ring bells for us? Not only has the government confiscated an increasing share of our livelihoods, but it burdens us with the paperwork and expense of documenting that pilferage on its behalf! Even so, Americans seem to miss the obvious parallels.

I believe that Nehemiah chose his wording in these verses deliberately, to remind his hearers and readers of the warnings of the Prophet Samuel (I Samuel 8:10-18), especially a military-industrial complex (vv. 11-12), diversion of labor to government (v. 13), confiscation of the means of production (v. 14), taxes (v. 15, wouldn't we love to pay only 10%?), and even our very persons (v. 17, especially  as military conscription).

Our social-fascist government, whether under liberals or conservatives, is the very curse that Samuel warned of. And, as Nehemiah reminds us, it is because we have brought it on ourselves.

In my particular church, the solution is commonly said to be the election of Republicans. Yet, Ronald Reagan, a Republican president with a Republican Senate, doubled the revenues of the federal government. During the 1990's, the Republicans controlled both houses  of Congress, and yet grew the government. Even under Republican President George Bush, with Republican majorities in both houses of Congress, the federal government expanded more than under any president, of either party, before him. Here in North Carolina, the Republicans control the governor's mansion, as well as both houses of the legislature, yet state spending grew again.

The solution isn't more Republicans. Or more Democrats, for that matter. Rather, the solution is a spiritual change, a looking to God to be our Savior, not to a redemptive state. That will lead to a renewal of a view of government consistent with the VIIIth, IXth, and Xth Commandments. May God speed that day!

Jehoshaphat and the Love of the Worldly

I have written before in opposition to the idea that God loves everybody, without discrimination, from Romans 9:13 and Psalm 5:5, or that we are commanded to do so, from Psalm 139:21. It is that latter theme which has come up in my own personal Bible study.

As I am reading through II Chronicles, I have reached the story of King Jehoshaphat of Judah. In chapter 18, he formed an alliance with the wicked King Ahab of Israel. In II Chronicles 19:2, we see the reaction of God to that alliance: "Jehu the son of Hanani the seer went out to meet him and said to King Jehoshaphat, 'Should you help the wicked and love those who hate the Lord? Because of this, wrath has gone out against you from the Lord.'"

That is a judgment that should send alarms through the souls of all the latitudinarian evangelicals in America. Not only are unequal relationships tolerated, but even promoted, with some blubbery admonition to "love ever'body"! Friendships with unbelievers, business and political alliances, even marriages, in violation of such Scriptures as II Corinthians 6:14-15 and Revelation 18:4.

Holiness takes thought, discernment, not sentiment. No doubt, someone reading this, is saying, "But the Bible says not to judge!" Really? My Bible contains John 7:24: "Do not judge by appearances, but judge with right judgment." And the story of Jehoshaphat demonstrates that God takes that standard very seriously!

Psalm 119:99-100, the Explanation for Why Evolutionary "Scientists" Don't Have a Clue

"I have more understanding than all my teachers, for Your testimonies are my meditation. I understand more than the aged, for I keep Your precepts."

With these words, the anonymous author of Psalm 119 reveals what is at the heart of the continuous controversy over the question of ultimate origins.

As are all men, unbelieving scientists (and their representatives in education and the popular media) are fallen; they are sinners. Thus, their moral natures are corrupted. However, they continue to be men, so they have the ability to reason. It isn't their ability to reason which is misaligned, but rather their worldview, which is built on erroneous premises.

As a rational human being, a scientist, a bureaucrat, or an educator, has the ability to study and describe the relationships among living things, such as between a plant and its pollinator, or between a carnivore and its prey. Where they fail is their inability to acknowledge the relationship of each creature or species to its Creator. Only a believer can recognize that.

The Apostle Paul describes this contrast in I Corinthians 2:14, "The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them, because they are spiritually discerned."

This is the problem with court decisions which have banned the discussion of biblical creation, on the basis of "religious neutrality." Secularism isn't "spiritually-neutral." It is a contrary spiritual worldview, a view which has been given legal preference over orthodox Christianity.

The Answer of Genesis to the Question of Stellar Distances, Light, and a Young-Earth Creation

In the conflict between the belief in a young-earth creation and evolutionism (whether atheistic or theistic), the evolutionist side often refers to the distance to some light sources as proof of an old earth, even billions of years old. Their argument is that, since it takes millions, or even billions, of years for light to reach the earth from some intergalactic sources, then the universe must be at least that old.

Some creationists have claimed that non-Euclidean geometry removes the necessity that light must take that long to get here. And that may be true. I simply don't have the mathematical knowledge to express an opinion on the matter. Fortunately for me, such knowledge isn't necessary, because biblical creationism doesn't require that system.

Rather, I believe that the book of Genesis already includes sufficient information to provide the answer.

In Genesis 1: 2-5, the Bible tells us that God created light on the first day of the creation week. That is, He created light as a thing in itself, not simply as the derivative effect of distant light sources. Those light sources appear independently as His handiwork on the fourth day. Why is that important? Because it indicates that light was already in transit between the newly-created light source in the distance and its being seen here on earth. In other words, those light sources were not created as the initiators of the light we see, but rather as the sources of continuous resupply of that light. Thus, for example, Adam saw light from the direction of Alpha Centauri for 4.3 years before he saw the first light actually produced by Alpha Centauri. In the same way, we will be seeing light from the direction of Andromeda for an eon before we see the first light produced by that neighboring galaxy.

So, I suggest that simple logic indicates that the vast stellar distance pose no issue for the belief in the biblical, young-earth creation. The revelation from God of His actions remains sufficient, unchallenged, and unadulterated.

II Kings 24:4, When Will America Pay the Price for Innocent Bood?

I am outspoken both in my support for capital punishment and opposition to legalized infanticide (euphemistically called "abortion"). I am frequently told that those two positions are inconsistent, since both involve killing people. I find that objection offensive and egregious, because it fails to distinguish between guilty life and innocent life.

I have written before about the parallel between abortion in our society and Molech worship in the Old Testament. But it is on my heart to speak on it again.

At the end of II Kings, the writer relates the account of the final destruction of the Kingdom of Judah by Babylon in 586 BC. The coming of the Babylonians during the reign of King Jehoiakim was God's judgment on the apostasy of the King's grandfather, King Manasseh, "for the innocent blood that he had shed, for he had filled Jerusalem with innocent blood, and the Lord would not pardon" (II Kings 24:4).

We Americans have killed an estimated 52 million unborn (more accurately, preborn) children, just since the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision in 1973 (some states, including my own North Carolina, had legal abortion prior to that time). That river of blood makes Manasseh look like Mother Theresa! I can't help but weep.

If Manasseh's murder of scores of children in his time brought about the destruction of his nation, what judgment has been earned by the blood of 52 million helpless and innocent babies? And what judgment awaits the American church, which has mostly stood quietly while that holocaust has continued? We rightly condemn the German church for its silence as the Jews were trucked away to the gas chambers. Do we not see the parallel to our own passivity as children are being ripped apart and flushed away?