This blue tit allowed me to photograph it.
In part one I talked about the confusion between the doctrine of justification by faith and the letter of James where he states that “faith without works is dead,” and “you must be doers of the Word.” The dating of the letter of James and also its authorship has been debated over the years. There is no detail that can specifically date it, though the general consensus these days is that it was written fairly early on in the church era, by James the brother of Jesus. Though there those who would argue otherwise. On the other hand we are certain that Paul’s letter to the Romans was written before Paul’s journey to Jerusalem in the late 50s AD. The main source of history of the early church is the Book of Acts, and in chapter 15 it records the Council of Jerusalem in circa 49 AD which was a debate between those termed “Judaisers” and Paul who argued for what is now known as justification by faith. The background to this is that men arrived in Antioch claiming to have the authority of James, who had become the effective leader of the Jerusalem Church after the Apostles had been forced to leave Jerusalem because of persecution. Initially, they had great influence when Peter and Barnabas disassociated themselves from the Gentile fellow-believers, but Paul managed to persuade them to re-engage. But in order to persuade the likes of Peter and Barnabas did the Judaisers try and use the letter of James as evidence for their position that Gentiles needed to become Jews to be saved? Luke summarises the debate as ending generally in Paul’s favour. Though none of the speeches used by those in favour of the Judaisers position are recorded but Paul asked in Romans the rhetorical question: Shall we go on sinning, so that grace may increase? This has been a charge brought against those who preach justification by faith since Paul’s time. Paul emphatically denied the charge but that is how human logic using unspiritual eyes sees the Gospel. So I am sure that many of the contributors to the discussion would have raised that point from every possible angle. Especially because it hides that fact that their basic objection was actually a prejudice against Gentiles. The important point being that non-Jews did not have to be circumcised. Luke even records James as agreeing with the basic concept of justification by faith. This was deliberate by Luke to demonstrate that those who were trying to use the Letter of James to undermine justification by faith were taking it out of context. The letter of James is about hypocrisy and if you had been brought up in a family with an elder brother who was perfect you would probably intolerant of it as well. However, the Judaisers, and others who have since adopted their faith plus works view of salvation, did not go away they just became more subtle in their methods.
Today, there is an increasing number of Jewish believers in Jesus as their Messiah. The downside of this is that many of these have a problem with the predominantly Gentile Church, finding many of the practices of the traditional church as alien to them. There is a tendency to attribute any difference between Judaism and Christianity as being as a result of pagan influences. Everything is blamed on the Gentile Christians as if Judaism was perfect. Their arguments sound spiritual but when you try and engage with those who have been influenced by them, you find that they regard the Jewish Torah as being more inspired than the New Testament, and therefore it trumps all of Paul’s teachings. Though they will not formally admit this. They may go on about observing the Jewish Sabbath instead of Sunday, but their observance of “thou shalt not bear false witness” leaves something to be desired.
David Rose, 2018.
Northbound steam special approaching Aviemore on 21st April 2018 hauled by BI class 61264 and Jubilee class 45699.
Most Christians have a problem with the relationship between faith and works. Paul argues in Romans that we are justified by faith, and most believers come to faith listening to such arguments. Then when we become Christians somebody comes along and mentions the letter of James who says that faith without works is dead and we are utterly confused. Especially if it is the same person who told us about Romans in the first place. So how do we resolve this?
Part of the problem is in the order we have come across the two letters. We tend to read them in the wrong order because most scholars believe that the letter of James is the earliest of the New Testament books to be written. So James was not written because he criticised Paul’s reasoning for justification by faith. That may be the impression we are given because it comes after it in the canon of Scripture. If anything it was the other way round because Paul wrote his letters to correct false ideas that were going around, including that of the Judaisers who often claimed to have come from James. Yet Paul did not disagree with anything in the James itself, but, probably, he would have preferred to use the word “fruit” rather than “works.” If you substitute the phrase “fruits of the Spirit” instead of “works” in James chapter 2 verse 26 it makes perfect sense. “As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without the fruits of the Spirit is dead.” The works that James is talking about are evidence of our faith showing that it is alive. It is not an argument against Paul’s doctrine of justification by faith. Nowhere in the his letter does James suggest that one can earn their salvation through good works. All he is saying is that you do not expect to find apples on a dead apple tree. The fruit is a sign of life.
David Rose, 2018
Have you ever wondered why Jesus always seemed to be most critical of religious people, especially those who put a “hedge” about the Law? I suspect that the answer lies back in the book of Genesis. Back then there was only one law given and that was not to eat of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. This law was given to Adam before Eve came on the scene. So he had the responsibility of passing on this instruction to Eve. But in chapter 3 when Satan asks Eve “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden?'” It would seem from Eve’s reply that Adam put a hedge around God’s instruction because she tells Satan “and you must not even touch it, or you will die.” So Adam must have added the instruction not even touch it. Did he mean just not to touch the fruit or the tree? But Eve seemed to have taken it as the whole tree. Now Adam was without sin at that point so in adding a hedge around God’s instruction was not sin itself. However it gave Satan an opening to put doubt in Eve’s mind. There is a parallel today in our health and safety culture in Western society, where by being risk averse it brings the opportunity for ridicule when absurdities of safety rules are pointed out. Forgetting how many lives and injuries have been prevented by the same rules. Putting a hedge around a law seems a sensible thing to do, but hedges grow, and then instead of questioning the hedge Satan ends up by questioning the law itself. The hedge instead of protecting the law becomes the means of its breaking. As a result sin came into the world.
By the time that Jesus started His ministry the Jewish religious establishment, as a reaction to the events that brought about the Babylonian exile, had developed their own interpretation of the law. Hedges were built up around every law but they also devised loopholes to get round them as well. Jesus ruthlessly exposed their hypocrisy time and time again. Jesus never broke the law, but he continually broke their interpretation of the law. As a result they began to plot how to kill Jesus. And in so doing they brought about the very thing that had been prophesied in Genesis chapter 3 that “the seed of the woman will crush the serpent’s head.” Which, of course, was a consequence of putting a hedge around the first law of not to eat the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. Because of Adam’s hedge Jesus would have to die in the cross. No wonder he hated the other hedges of the scribes and Pharisees. Yet when we give instructions to others how often do we not add a similar injunction:- “So, don’t even touch it!” Life is full of well-meaning things that have unfortunate consequences.
David Rose, 2018.
This long-tailed tit came into my garden while I was writing this post.
One of the stories in the Gospels which most people are familiar with is that of the paralytic man whose friends had to make a hole in the roof to let him down so he could get near Jesus. It occurs in Luke Chapter 5 verses 17-26. Why could they not get near him because of all the religious people who had come to see Jesus. How many other needy people gave up and went away because of all the religious types in their way? Now, most of us would be very pleased if people came from miles around to hear us speak as the Scribes and Pharisees came to Jesus. But our natural instincts would be to try and please them. But instead Jesus set off their alarm bells rather than tick off their mental check lists. The thing is are we any different? If Jesus had just healed the man they would have been wowed, but he said “Your sins are forgiven.” There must have been a deathly silence after this because instead of ticking a box in their minds, the tick was replaced by a cross. With one mind they were all thinking one word “blasphemy!” Only God can forgive sins, they thought, but Jesus was God and he was challenging them. So he then proved he had the power to forgive sins by healing the man.
Now, we may not physically impede those are trying to get to Jesus in their need, but with negative attitudes, unjustified criticisms of other Christians and churches, etc. We put up psychological barriers which can deter people by putting Christianity in such a bad light. Considering that secular forces are reinforcing these negative perceptions of Christianity in the media we should be looking long and hard at how others perceive our thoughts and actions. In the West religion is increasingly seen in negative terms as a cause of problems rather than the answer. They forget how many have died at the hands of atheists. On the other hand we must not be afraid of listening to challenging messages and not just those that tickle our ears and egos. We must admit our imperfections, yet strive to become more Christ-like, however much we fall short. That is why we need to listen to the Holy Spirit and not overrule Him. Otherwise we revert to Pharisaism. It is by God’s grace that we are saved and not by our own merits. Nor must we assume that others are beyond redemption. It is our role to lead others to Christ and not stand in the way.
David Rose, 2018.
This is a picture of a female red-breasted merganser and it was the first time had seen one. At first I was unsure of what I was seeing. It is slightly smaller than a goosander of which I am more familiar. In fact there was also a male goosander within sight of this bird which confused me because on the one hand you could tell by its size that it was smaller, yet I was worried that there might some variation in the plumage of a female goosander that I was unaware of. So when I got home I checked my bird identification books and found that the closest to what I had photographed was a female red-breasted merganser (only the male has the eponymous red breast). I still had my doubts though. While the feathers that stick out of the back of its head are characteristic of the merganser, maybe I feared this was just a scruffy looking female goosander so to make sure I decided to consult a work colleague who is more expert than myself in these matters. When I showed this picture to him he immediately confirmed that this was a merganser though when I had first broached the subject he was somewhat sceptical. So as a result it was several days before I felt it safe to post this picture on Facebook. However, another person posted a picture that he claimed were red-breasted mergansers which were in fact goosanders.
So what are the lessons that we can draw from this? Simple, check your facts before you post your comments on social media. However, there is an aversion in some Christian circles to scholarship. All you need is The Holy Spirit so you don’t need to bother with reference books. I once turned up at a Bible study on Matthew with a Bible commentary on Mathew and the person leading looked at it as if he had never seen or heard of such a thing as a commentary. I was shocked. Sadly, just because atheist intellectuals virulently attack Christianity, and traditional centres of Christian learning have watered down their theology, all academia and learning is tarred with the same brush. It is just that the secular media only reports on things that appear to question Christianity and put it in a poor light, ignoring those who still support Biblical values. But that is no reason why Christians should use sloppy nonsensical arguments because of woeful ignorance. “After all logic was invented by the pagan Greeks” seems to be their reasoning. It is not that God is illogical but that His logic is higher than man’s logic, and thus better than the greatest of the Greek philosophers. Let’s face it, it is very easy to get our facts mixed up with our faulty memories, so spending a short piece of time checking the facts is better than having admit you have got them wrong.
David Rose, 2018.
The parable of the ten virgins at the beginning of Matthew 25 is a parable that many Christians are familiar with but there are some questions you need to ask yourself. 1) Who is the bridegroom? Christ. 2) Who is the bride? The Church. 3) Does the bride have any difficulty getting into the marriage feast? No. So if you are a Bible-believing Christian why are so many of us worried about being one of the foolish virgins being left out in the cold? In part this may be due to those who argue that a Christian can lose their salvation, and see this parable as evidence for a loss of salvation. But as the bride is symbolic of the corporate body of Christ, are the ‘virgins’ to be interpreted as individuals or bodies? The virgins are symbolic of persons known to the bride but not necessarily the groom. There are many pseudo-Christian sects about that in this day and age the secular public think as being Christian (such as the JWs and Mormons). Could those be the foolish virgins? If so who are the wise if they are allowed in? Maybe what Jesus is trying to get at here is that there are out there whom you would label as heretical because of their views in one particular area or another but they may not be as bad as we might like to think. The virgins were the bride’s “fellow-travellers,” a phrase that has fallen somewhat out of fashion these days, but before the collapse of communism it was often used of left-wingers who sympathised with the communists but were not actually members of the party. Of course when communists did come to power the fellow travellers would often be the first to be lined up and shot. Just merely being associated with the church will not guarantee salvation. So what was the difference between the wise and the foolish virgins in the end. Now most commentators argue that the oil is a metaphor the Holy Spirit. But that does not necessarily mean they were all speaking in tongues. The Holy Spirit’s role in salvation is first to convict the sinner. So by responding the wise virgins received the seal of the Spirit. All ten had fallen asleep but maybe there was also an unbelief among the foolish virgins that the Bridegroom would not come for his Bride, hence the lack of preparation. People looking at the Church today can see many obvious imperfections and doubt that Christ would have anything to do with it.
But let us consider the positive things about this parable, the Bridegroom meets with His Bride and takes her into the feast. The five wise virgins get into the feast because they are with the Bride. To get in we need to be with the Bride. True, mainstream denominations seem to be compromising in many areas to such an extent that we may begin to doubt that a particular denomination has ceased to be a part of the Bride. And there those that are always looking to criticise and find fault for the sake of it. They would write off all ten of the virgins on one ground or another. But the five wise virgins still get in. The thing is if we witnessed the scene beforehand we might have come to wrong conclusions about who would have been considered wise and who would be foolish. The virgins strictly speaking were not invited by the groom by name, he was inviting the bride and she was expected to come with her friends and they would get in only because they were with her. So the bridegroom was never coming for the five foolish virgins only the bride so make sure you are part of the Bride then all your fears are baseless.
David Rose, 2018.
People are always decrying Christmas for its commercialism, whether it is Santa Specials on steam railways like this one, or big businesses with billions over turnover. Equally, there are those who dismiss Christmas as purely pagan. The danger with this type of argument is that if it is taken to extremes it questions the sovereignty of God. In Genesis Chapter 1 every stage of creation as being good or very good, yet if you accept everything that is coming from those who attack traditional Christian festivals for their alleged pagan origins seem to give the impression that Adam and Eve were confined to the Garden of Eden because everything outside was pagan and demonic. True, a lot of pagan imagery reflects the seasonal variations but God created the seasons. So one can argue that the pagans have borrowed their imagery from God’s creation in the first place, in that case the Church is only reclaiming what was rightfully theirs anyway. When people hear the teaching that everything is pagan they become very fearful of offending God in some trivial that they lose their freedom in Christ.
A second thought concerning Christmas is about the shepherds. Apparently, by the time of Jesus’ birth shepherds had become very low status and looked down upon by other Jews. Interestingly in Genesis chapters 46-7 when Joseph met with his father and brothers in Egypt, Joseph told his brothers that “Shepherds were detestable to the Egyptians,” It would appear that when the Israelites entered the promised land and settled down they forgot how their ancestors originated their wealth. The Jewish religious leaders claimed they were the sons of Abraham when they confronted Jesus who questioned that they were true sons of Abraham. In John chapter 8 verses 39-41 Jesus said “If you were Abraham’ children, then you would do the things Abraham did. As it is, you are determined to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God, Abraham did not do such things.” If you accept that the “Angel of the Lord” who met with Abraham in Genesis chapter 18 was actually the pre-incarnate Christ then Abraham gave hospitality to Christ himself. Whereas the priesthood and most of the other religious leaders did not even entertain the thought that Jesus could be the Messiah. So when the birth of Jesus was announced to the shepherds that night maybe it was because they were continuing in the same business as Abraham.
David Rose, 2017.
I took this picture several years ago during a very cold and snowy winter. But it would be difficult to repeat it now. Not just because there is a lot less snow. But also because the land this side of the fence has changed hands and been bought by the neighbouring householder and contractors have been fencing it off with head-height timber and felling some of the trees either side thus all but ruining the view for the general public. It seems that the line from the old Joni Mitchell song that “you do not know what you’ve got until its gone” is suddenly very appropriate. True, one could still take a picture from the other side of the gate, but what one would not have are the trees that frame the shot. It is a shock when something you think as timeless suddenly comes to an end. Even so how many times have we been aware of a time limitation only to realise too late that the time has passed. Like vouchers which are often given out like confetti. Occasionally you are reminded of some voucher that you have been given only to find that it had expired or that the conditions did not apply in your case. But there is one offer that is time limited which we need to take up before it is too late. And that is the offer of salvation which Christ paid for on the cross. We have to repent and accept what Christ has done for us, and we only have this life in which to do so. Get right with God now and do not leave too late.
David Rose, 2017.
The account of the attempt to push Jesus off a cliff near his home town of Nazareth is recorded in Luke Chapter 4 verses 28-30, following on from His reading of Isaiah 61 in the synagogue there. “All the people in the synagogue were furious when they heard this. They got up and drove Him out of the town, and took Him to the brow of the hill on which the town was built , in order to throw Him down the cliff. But He walked right through the crowd and went on His way.” There have been many suggestions over the years as to what actually happened. One explanation that I have heard of in recent years is that of an “event horizon,” whereby spiritual forces somehow intervene in the physical and temporal universe. Though I find this as an admission that there is no natural explanation without actually saying how the heavenly realm actually intervened. A few weeks ago I heard Terry Crist of Hillsong Church Phoenix (on the Hillsong Channel) state his opinion that he thought that Jesus became invisible so He could just disappear through the crowd. Personally, I don’t buy it, no disrespect to him but I think there is another possible clue as to how it occurred earlier in the same chapter. While Jesus is being tempted by Satan, the Devil quotes part of Psalm 91. “He will command his angels concerning you to guard you carefully; they will lift you up in their hands so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.” Of course, we are all aware of how the Devil used, or rather misused, this quote but surely it refers to an instance where angels would intervene to prevent harm happening to the Messiah rather than voluntarily jumping off a high building. So maybe it was an invisible force of angels that blocked the way to the cliff-edge, forcing those man-handling Jesus to let go, and then make a path through the crowd for Jesus to escape. If you have a better explanation I would to hear it.
However, there are some Christians out there who seem to treat the promises of God in such a way that they can do the spiritual equivalent of jumping off high buildings and are surprised when they do not get a soft landing. The promises of God are not excuses for lazy spiritual practices, such as, lack of Bible reading, lack of prayer and meditation on Christian things, etc.
David Rose, 2017.
At this time of year in Britain we remember the dead of the Two World Wars and subsequent conflicts. The Christian Church as a whole has historically a problem with when the prospect of war arises. There is a strong element of pacifism within the Church. When King David proposed to build the first temple in 2 Samuel chapter 7 the Lord spoke to Nathan the prophet to say that it was not for David to build the temple but his son. The reason given later by Solomon was that David was a man of war. Despite David writing most of the Psalms pacifists will leap on this as support for their position. Yet come to chapter 11 when David encounters Bathsheba preachers line up to decry David for staying in Jerusalem and succumbing to temptation. It seems to me that David is in a no-win situation. Either he is a warmonger who can’t build the temple or he doesn’t fight and is a moral failure. Later in 2 Samuel chapter 21 David was nearly killed when fighting the Philistines and had to be persuaded not to go into battle in future as he was getting too old. So maybe David’s fault in staying in Jerusalem was in being premature in delegating the fighting to Joab. After all the siege of Rabbah did not take much in manoeuvring of forces, rather just a case of not letting any of the Ammonites escaping before they were starved into submission. In fact David had stayed in Jerusalem when the war broke out against the Ammonites the previous year, only coming on the scene after reinforcements were required. Yet he did not fall into temptation then. There is nothing wrong in delegation, yet the way I have heard some preachers teach on this episode you might begin to think that there was.
Actually the more I think about it, his downfall was as much as his inactions as his actions. He was idling on the roof of his palace when he saw Bathsheba. His mistake was in misunderstanding how God would fulfil His promise to David. David must have come to the conclusion that none of his existing sons were up to the job of building the temple and sought to provide another woman to be the mother of that child. Bathsheba seemed to be the “perfect ten” to David when it came her looks which seemed to have blinded him to the obvious complications of her being another man’s wife. I sometimes wonder which is the most extraordinary thing about this whole episode, that God allowed David to sin in this way, or that even after he was exposed as an adulterer and murderer by Nathan, God allowed David and Bathsheba to have another son who would build God’s temple.
David Rose, 2017.