Romance Rooted in Purity

~Steve and Stephanie's Story~

Stephanie lived more of a quiet life. Being home-schooled in a Christian home she had never had very many friends her own age. But because she was always taught that having close friends that weren't true Christians was against God's will, she was content to just learn more about God through her mother who home-churched, so to speak, as well as teaching her two other children.

Then, through one of her favorite Bible teachers, Stephanie's mother finally found a church that taught the truth from the Bible. Stephanie started making friends and at the age of 15 was part of the "Collage" group, mainly for college-age and young adults. A man named Steve, 22 at the time, was also part of that group.

Steve hadn't always been a Christian. In fact, some of his younger exploits were not something he was proud of. He had two relationships before that ended up in transgression, hurting them both. But, because of this evident sin, he was more easily convinced he was heading towards destruction. He cut off the second relationship right away, and removed himself from temptation. He turned his life around by acknowledging his sin, asking Jesus Christ to forgive and save him, and to lead his life. Since then he had found the church Stephanie was also attending, and was really seeking God and praying for whoever it was that God wanted him to end up being with.

Steve and Stephanie went to many of the Collage outings, saw each other at church, and they liked to hang out together in group settings. This was the start of a friendship that would last. Steve started to go to Stephanie's house, more and more. Her family had accepted him as a friend. Stephanie would later say that Steve was her best friend.

One day after Steve and Stephanie had known each other for about 2 years, Stephanie's parents suddenly called Steve and asked to speak with him alone. He had a hunch as to what was coming. They asked him to meet them at a restaurant. Once they were all there and seated, Stephanie's parents told Steve that they wanted to talk to him about his relationship with Stephanie - Steve's hunch was right. He then proceeded to nervously take out a long list from his wallet. On it were listed all the reasons why he wanted – and should be allowed – to start courting (not dating, they had both independently read the book "I Kissed Dating Goodbye" by Josh Harris, and agreed that courtship was the way to go with whoever they ended up with) Stephanie, and see if it would lead to marriage. He was so nervous, and Stephanie's parents watched somewhat amused as he talked to them and looked at his long list. Finally, he was finished and they agreed to his proposals, no pun intended.

Stephanie's mother had discussed with her this possibility before, and expressed concern with the fact that she and Steve had been spending so much time together. She felt that, if they did not end up being together, Stephanie would compare everyone she met afterward with Steve. He was such a big part of her life that it would be difficult not to think about him. Her mother and father already decided that, if Steve did not make a move soon, they would have to talk to him about either taking the next step, or seriously cutting down the time they spent together.

So, anxiously Steve went to Stephanie's house. Her brother and sister excitedly listened through the door as Steve and Stephanie talked in the carport. Steve told her that he wanted to court her, and eventually marry her. Stephanie agreed, she literally said, "I agree." She already knew what was coming, and had had time to pray and prepare for her answer. She and Steve hugged for several minutes. They agreed to take things slowly and work in God's timing.

Another thing they agreed on was not to kiss yet. They wanted to keep their relationship 100% pure at all costs. This included dragging Stephanie's brother and/or sister around with them everywhere they went because they required a chaperone, and continuing to hang out together in group settings. Although, they did have one day a month that they could be alone together.

That was in January. So, in May, four months later, on their "alone day" Steve took Stephanie to the beach. As they were standing at the shoreline, he asked her to marry him. Well, what he said wasn't all that romantic. What he said was, "I think it's time to take our relationship to the next level."

A little later that month, they picked out an engagement ring, and it was official. Time to start kissing? No. Once again, they agreed not to kiss until their wedding day! They knew that once they went past the physical boundaries they had already set, it would be even harder for them to stay completely pure. But, they would no longer have chaperones (a relief to all of them, I'm sure) so they were on their own as far as staying pure. They had God's help, but they needed to keep seeking His will. Either way it would require a lot of discipline not to have that kind of physical contact with the person you are in love with!

So, what do you think? Did they succeed in staying pure until their wedding day? Did they abstain from even kissing until their wedding? Well, they were engaged May of 2001. They were married September of 2002. That's almost a year and a half.

With strength from God, and encouragement from family, friends and the church, they did succeed. With her family looking on, the blessing of the church, a beautiful wedding dress, her sister as her maid of honor, best friend as her bridesmaid, and God's blessing because of her total purity, she came down the aisle to Canon in D. It was almost magical.

The pastor talked about how important it is to be pure, and have a pure relationship and the example Steve and Stephanie had set. Then, the time came to take the vows. The pastor said, "Repeat after me. I, Steve, take thee Stephanie...." Steve's voice was broken with emotion, he had to clear his voice to speak. Tears streamed down his face. He loved Stephanie so much, and he was about to be her husband. It was all new. It was all pure. It was wonderful and beautiful!

Stephanie was crying, too. This was the apex of their whole relationship. Everything that was building up to this point was about to burst. They had made it through the past year and a half, and now it was about to pay off.... hopefully. She had never kissed a man before. She was anxious, and excited, but she trusted God and Steve. The rings were placed on their fingers, and the pastor said, "And now, for the first time, and certainly not the last, you may kiss your bride!" Steve took Stephanie's face in his hands, whispered, "Yes?" Stephanie nodded back, "Yes!" and he kissed her for the very first time! It was done. They had accomplished what few have even thought of doing. They had their first husband-and-wife dance to Steven Curtis Chapman's "I Will be There." Stephanie looked into Steve's eyes the whole time, so in love!

Now, have a two-year old son (Josiah Michael), are expecting their second child in August (2008), own a home building/remodeling business, and are working hard for God and their future together.

Also, since their marriage they have spoken at a courtship presentation. Steve said there that even though he had had relationships before, and had kissed someone else before, when he kissed Stephanie, it was undoubtedly the best he had ever had. Of course, Stephanie had never kissed anyone else, but she definitely knew it was good, and it was all in God's will.

So, what this true story has set and example for is this: staying pure in all ways before you are married is not only staying in God's will, but you will enjoy it much, much more when you get married, because you are doing things the way God intended, and there is no risk of disapproval from the church. You have protection from the church because of staying pure. Steve had experienced impure relationships before, he knew what it was like to give into temptations outside the will of God. And he agrees that it is so much better to simply stay within the boundaries of marriage.

Read the Bible daily. You can't go more than a few chapters without reading about how God expects us to abstain from sexual immorality. It urges us to keep ourselves pure. Read the Song of Solomon. See how he tells in detail of different women he was infatuated with. But, then read Ecclesiastes. Solomon says it's all for nothing! He was the richest man in the world, he had thousands of women, but he knew it was all for nothing if you weren't in God's will. It was all worthless. Paul says of the GOOD things he did that he counts it as filth. So, how much worse are the wrong things we do? Let us consider the Word of God, and see how He speaks to us. It is our decision to make whether or not we believe the truth, but it is God's decision what truth is.

"Foods for the stomach and the stomach for foods, but God will destroy both it and them. Now the body is not for sexual immorality but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body."
----1 Corinthians 6:13

"Flee sexual immorality. Every sin that a man does is outside the body, but he who commits sexual immorality sins against his own body."
----1 Corinthians 6:18

"Nevertheless, because of sexual immorality, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband."
----1 Corinthians 7:2

"For this is the will of God, your sanctification: that you should abstain from sexual immorality."
----1 Thessalonians 4:3

"Let no one despise your youth, but be an example to the believers in word, in conduct, in love, in spirit, in faith, in purity."
----1 Timothy 4:12

(Originally written May 2004 by Kristina; updated and posted here September 2005; updated again January 2008 [current post].)

The Only True God

By Dave Hunt

As we all know, the “Lord’s prayer” was never prayed by our Lord. It was a pattern for prayer: “After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name...” (Mt 6:9). To repeat these words over and over (instead of using them as a pattern for prayer from the heart) would be to disobey our Lord and to engage in what He strictly forbade: “vain repetition” (6:7).

Certainly this prayer is only for those who know God as their heavenly Father. It is a grievous error common to pseudo-Christianity to assume the universal Fatherhood of God and brotherhood of man. The typical Unity church service, for example, includes this affirmation repeated in unison, “I am a child of God and therefore I do not inherit sickness.” Such “positive confessions” have led multitudes astray. Paul declared that we become “the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus” (Gal 3:26).

The fact that this relationship with God as one’s Father does not come by natural birth is clear. To those who boasted of being “Abraham’s children,” Christ countered, “Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do” (Jn 8:44). The rebellion of Adam and Eve, by which they became the followers of Satan as “the god of this world” (2 Cor 4:4), made the devil the patriarch of mankind.

That is why Christ told Nicodemus, “Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God” (Jn 3:3). This spiritual birth is an absolute requirement, allowing no exceptions. No one will be in heaven who has not been “born again,” both “of water and of the Spirit” (v. 5).


There is a common abuse of this prayer among American athletic teams. A high percentage of teams across America (especially in high school football) pray the “Lord’s Prayer” either before or after games. Attitudes of participants vary from skepticism, to suppressed ridicule, to a shrugging acquiescence to something that might now and then bring “good luck.” This American tradition is an abomination to God.


Phil Jackson, one of the most successful coaches in NBA history, turned from the Pentecostalism in which his co-pastor parents raised him to Zen Buddhism and the occultism of Lakota Indian “spirituality.” Yet he still repeats the “Lord’s prayer” and has for years encouraged his teams to do so without knowing God or Christ. This unbiblical practice has been one of Satan’s major tools of deception.


Confusion reigns over what it means to be “born again.” The teaching is rather common that Christ’s words, “of water,” refer to the protective amniotic water sac that breaks in natural birth, while “of the Spirit” refers to being born of the Spirit of God at the second birth. The latter is true, but the former is false.


Everyone enters via the amniotic fluid into the human race. “Born of water” must mean more than that. It would be redundant to say that in order to be born again one must have already been born once. Furthermore, that doctrine would place an unbiblical restriction upon entrance into heaven! Such a proposition would mean that there would be no salvation for anyone who had not experienced natural birth. Thus no fetus that died by whatever means before coming to full-term delivery could be considered a real person eligible for the second birth and heaven, thus allowing abortion at any stage.


The biblical teaching of the “new birth” (becoming a “born-again” Christian) has caused much controversy. Roman Catholics, Presbyterians, Lutherans, and others believe this occurs at baptism. As previously noted (see TBC 8/04), every Lutheran church follows Luther’s Small Catechism. At baptism (usually as a baby), one receives a certificate stating, “In baptism full salvation has been given unto you; God has become your Father, and you have become His child through this act....”


In fact, the Bible teaches that baptism (like the “Lord’s prayer”) is only for those who have believed the gospel. Baptism testifies to the faith by which one was born again. Otherwise it is meaningless. Infant baptism defies Scripture, denies the gospel, and is a major net by which “the god of this world” gathers multitudes into his kingdom, providing them with false assurance that prevents them from seeing their need to receive Christ as Savior and Lord.


How could a church defend baptizing an infant that cannot understand or believe? It was necessary to claim some efficacy, as the Catechisms say, “in this act of baptism....” This occult lie of spiritual power innate in and released by baptism, burning a candle or incense, doing rituals, priestly hand motions, voice tones, etc., has been for thousands of years the essence of ritual magic, witchcraft, paganism, etc., which anthropologists now call shamanism.


This pernicious delusion is also known as sacramentalism—a heresy so vital to Roman Catholicism that it has its own Latin term: ex opere operato (i.e., “in the act itself”). To deny this doctrine concerning any official sacrament is to deny Roman Catholicism, for which the penalty is automatic excommunication (tantamount to being sentenced to hell). Here it is from The Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent: Seventh Session...third day of March, 1547, Decree Concerning the Sacraments...Canons on the Sacraments in General [still in full force]:


Can. 4. If anyone says that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary for salvation but...that without them or without the desire of them men obtain from God through faith alone the grace of justification...let him be anathema.


Can. 8. If anyone says that by the sacraments of the New Law grace is not conferred ex opere operato, but that faith alone in the divine promise is sufficient to obtain grace, let him be anathema.


The grievous heresy of sacramentalism continues to seduce in various forms most “Reformed” churches. R.C. Sproul, for example, justifies infant baptism by likening it to circumcision: “The scriptural case for baptizing believers’ infants rests on the parallel between [O.T.] circumcision and N.T. baptism as signs and seals of the covenant of grace....The Old Testament precedent requires it” (Geneva Study Bible, p. 38).

The Ethiopian to whom Philip had just preached Christ from Isaiah 53 (Acts 8:29-35) asked, “See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest” (8:36,37). Philip then baptized him—not by sprinkling or pouring water over him but, obviously, by immersion, for “they went down both into the water” (v. 38). Baptism publicly declares one’s faith, identifying the believer with Christ in His death, burial, and resurrection. One does not sprinkle dirt on a corpse. One buries it.


If “born of water” does not refer to amniotic fluid or to baptism, what could it mean? The second birth is by the Spirit of God and by water (Jn 3:5), symbolic of the Word of God, as in “the washing of water by the word” (Eph 5:26), and “Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you” (Jn 15:3). When we believe the gospel, we are regenerated and washed clean. “He saved us by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost.” Peter declares: “Being born again...by the word of God...which by the gospel is preached unto you” (1 Pt 1:23-25).


Having been brought into the family of God, we address Him as “Father” in prayer. In His high priestly prayer (the true “Lord’s prayer” that Christ prayed), He declared, “And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent” (Jn 17:3). So the new birth involves knowing the only true God—not being “born again” through baptism, especially of infants.


There are millions of so-called gods and numerous prayers to each of them in the various religions they represent. The Bible condemns every one in unmistakable terms:


For all the gods of the nations are idols: but the Lord made the heavens....Give unto the Lord the glory due unto his name....[F]ear before him, all the earth....[H]e cometh to judge the earth: he shall judge the world with righteousness, and the people with his truth. (Ps 96:5-13)


Such language is ridiculed by the “New Atheists” such as Richard Dawkins, who says the atheists must “spread the good news. Evangelism [to convert the world to atheism] is a moral imperative.” Although the Bible clearly distinguishes Christianity from all religions and separates their leaders (Buddha, Muhammad, et al.) from Christ, who is unique, atheists make no such distinction. Consequently, most of their arguments are irrelevant.


The Bible denounces all religions as instruments of Satan to keep mankind in darkness, shut off from the light of the gospel by which alone one can be saved, for “the god of this world has blinded the minds of them which believe not” (2 Cor 4:4).


Atheism is just one of the world’s religions, and Satanic blindness is reflected in its arguments against God and Christianity. A recent secular article about the New Atheists was titled, “The Church of the Non-Believers.” And it is a church—a church to which everyone must belong, if atheists get their way. In their religious fervor to destroy “religious faith” and to convert the entire world to their religion, they are blind to the true faith that motivates biblical Christians.


Dawkins says, “Faith is one of the world’s great evils....[It is] belief that isn’t based on evidence [and] the principal vice of any religion.” Francis Collins, however (in charge of the Human Genome Project involving 2,300 scientists), who turned from unbelief to faith in Christ, says that Dawkins’ definition of faith “certainly does not describe the faith of most serious believers of history nor of most of those of my personal acquaintance.”


Many famous scientists, Nobel Prize winners, and some of the greatest historians and legal experts have turned from atheism to faith in the resurrected Christ—not by mystical or emotional experience but from verifiable evidence. The early pioneers in science, like Kepler, claimed that it was precisely their conviction that there was a creator that inspired their science to ever-greater heights.


“Religion is not only wrong; it’s evil,” atheists fume, unaware that biblical Christianity is not a religion but a relationship with God through Jesus Christ. Leading atheists harangue against religion, blind to the fact that the Bible is not about religion. In its more than 1,000 pages, the phrase “religious faith” is not found once, the word “religion” appears only five times, all in one verse, and the word “religious” twice in the next verse. All but one of these seven references is critical of “religion.” Furthermore, in these few times that it mentions religion, the Bible never means what atheists foolishly denounce.


In their war against God, Dawkins and his fellow crusaders dishonestly equate Christian “fundamentalists” with murderous Muslims. In fact, atheists are themselves fundamentalists, seeking to impose their warped interpretation of the fundamentals of science on the world.


Nor can the New Atheists be ignorant of the fact that the fundamentals of Islam (according to the Qur’an, Hadith, the dogmas and example of Muhammad, and 1,300 years of history) teach that Islam must be forced upon the entire world by murdering all who refuse to submit to Allah. Christ taught and lived entirely otherwise. Yet the New Atheists persist in equating Islam and Christianity simply because each is considered to be a “faith.” Such irresponsible accusations permeate their arguments.


Yes, some who have called themselves Christians (Roman Catholic popes, Eastern Orthodox leaders, crusaders, numerous televangelists, et al.) have been guilty of all manner of evil. In the process, they have violated the teachings and example of Christ. But Muslim terrorists follow both Islamic teaching and the example of Muhammad and his successors who tortured and slaughtered millions from France to China for 13 centuries. Today’s terrorism is just a hint of what Islam would continue to do if it could.


The fundamentals of true Christianity promote love, freedom of choice, and forgiveness, not hatred and violence. The latter are the trademark of fundamentalist Islam. To equate the fundamentals of Islam with those of Christianity is reprehensible.


Atheists also perversely equate Christianity with the fanaticism and violence of the Crusades and Inquisition. Yet the crusaders were not biblical Christians; they violated everything Christ taught and slaughtered His brethren, the Jews, everywhere they went. It is gross dishonesty to attribute the crusaders’ misconduct to biblical Christianity.


From the days of Christ, multitudes of Christians have never given allegiance to Rome but to the Bible and to Christ alone. They were martyred by the millions by the church of Rome for centuries before the birth of Luther. From the 16th-century Reformation onward, millions of Roman Catholics embraced faith in the Bible and Christ alone and were martyred by the hundreds of thousands by the popes and their armies. To fail to distinguish between martyrs and their murderers is unconscionable.


The New Atheists, led by Dawkins, call themselves “the brights” and look upon theists as dimwits. Nobel laureate Steven Weinberg recently said, “The world needs to wake up from the long nightmare of religion....Anything we scientists can do to weaken the hold of religion should be done, and may in fact be our greatest contribution to civilization.” Richard Dawkins says: “I am utterly fed up with the respect we have been brainwashed into bestowing on religion.” Religion? As we’ve seen, atheists are tilting at windmills.


In their fervor to convert the world to their religion, atheists betray their complete ignorance of biblical Christianity. The Bible is not a religious book and does not promote “religion.”


Many Christians try to be “scientific” by adopting theistic evolution as compatible with Christianity. Their compromise does not impress atheists. Unashamedly, Dawkins declares that “evolution must lead to atheism” and “the atheist movement has...a moral imperative...to aggressively spread the good news....”


Dawkins declares, “Should [theists] be free to impose their beliefs on their children? Is there something to be said for society stepping in?” This is dangerous totalitarian talk that makes one fear for parents and children alike.


James Perloff put it well: “But remember; ‘The princess kissed the frog, and he turned into a handsome prince.’ We call that a fairy tale. Evolution says frogs turn into princes, and we call it science....Is that science? Or is it, like the fraud of Piltdown Man, the forgeries of Haeckel’s embryos, the misrepresentations of Inherit the Wind, and the coercions of the Supreme Court, merely part of a long effort to deny God?”


Atheists who end up in hell cannot blame the God they hate for excluding them from heaven. We need to rescue as many as we can from atheism’s lies.

December 31, 2007

From The Berean Call

Happy New Year

From The Berean Call

Encouraging words taken from William MacDonald's devotional book, “One Day at a Time”:

New Year's resolutions are good but fragile, that is, easily broken. New Year's prayers are better; they ascend to the throne of God and set answering wheels in motion. As we come to the beginning of another year, we would do well to make the following prayer requests our own:

Lord Jesus, I rededicate myself afresh to You today. I want You to take my life this coming year and use it for Your glory.

I pray that You will keep me from sin, from anything that will bring dishonor to Your Name.

Keep me teachable by the Holy Spirit. I want to move forward for You. Don't let me settle in a rut.

May my motto this year be, “He must increase; I must decrease.” The glory must all be Yours. Help me not to touch it.

Teach me to make every decision a matter of prayer. I dread the thought of leaning on my own understanding. “O Lord, I know the way of man is not in himself; it is not in man who walks to direct his own steps” (Jer. 10:23).

May I die to the world and even to the approval or blame of loved ones or friends. Give me a single, pure desire to do the things that please Your heart.

Keep me from gossip and criticism of others. Rather, help me to speak what is edifying and profitable.

Lead me to needy souls. May I become a friend of sinners, as You are. Give me tears of compassion for the perishing.

Lord Jesus, keep me from becoming cold, bitter, or cynical in spite of anything that may happen to me in the Christian life.

Guide me in my stewardship of money. Help me to be a good steward of everything You have entrusted to me.

Help me to remember moment by moment that my body is a temple of the Holy Spirit. May this tremendous truth influence all my behavior.

And, Lord Jesus, I pray that this may be the year of Your return. I long to see Your face and to fall at Your feet in worship. During the coming year, may the blessed hope stay fresh in my heart, disengaging me from anything that would hold me here and keeping me on the tiptoes of expectancy. “Even so, come, Lord Jesus!”

2007~2008

2007 was filled with lessons learned; let us pray that 2008 will be filled with opportunities to live out those lessons.

2007 was a time of testing; let us pray that 2008 shows positive results to those tests.

2007 was filled with new experiences; let us pray that 2008 gives us a chance to remember those experiences thankfully, and to count our blessings.

2007 was a time when God revealed Himself through those lessons, tests, and experiences; let us pray that in 2008 we will not forget Him and never take Him for granted.

2007 was filled with surprises, some good some bad; let us pray that 2008 will be a time for us to evaluate our reactions to those surprises, and that God will prepare us for the surprises that lay ahead.

2007 was a strange year for some. Each day held a new challenge, a new question, a new road to travel.

2007 was not always pleasant, not always easy, not always comfortable.

2007 was an opportunity for growth, change, and overcoming.

I pray that 2008 will hold new opportunities, new challenges, and new roads.

I pray that in 2008 we will be stronger, sharper, and ever ready to take up the task that God has given us, willing and able to push forward towards the prize.

I pray that 2008 will be a time for keeping promises, fulfilling goals, and leaving procrastination behind.

I pray that 2008 will be a time for winning more souls than ever to Christ, and beckoning the return of our Lord.

I pray that 2008 will be a time of great growth and strength, physically, spiritually, and mentally.

I pray that 2008 will be a year of encouragement and edification, not forgetting the lessons learned in years past, but using them to our advantage, diligently pressing forward.

I pray that 2008 will be a year for decisiveness, not leading anyone to doubt, but surety in Christ Jesus our Lord.

I pray that 2008 will be a time of fervent prayer, never forgetting our brothers and sisters, a dying world, and our own hearts in need of forgiveness and renewal.

I pray that 2008 will be God's year, not letting the enemy prevail, not letting our flesh or the world hinder us; overcoming our weaknesses in the power of Christ, and thriving on the Word of Life.

I pray that 2008 will not be 2007 , or any other year, but a year of great change and revival among the true Body and Bride of Christ.

In Jesus' Name, Amen.

HAPPY NEW YEAR 2008!

The Cradle & the Cross

By Dave Hunt

Another Christmas season is here. Why December 25, since it's unlikely that Jesus was born at this time of year? The Roman Church simply took the Saturnalia, a licentious celebration of the winter solstice dedicated to Saturn, and Christianized it in order to convert pagan Rome. The actual effect was to paganize official Christianity. For example, statues of Isis and Horus were renamed Mary and Jesus so that pagans could continue their idolatry under Christian names. Pagan customs involving vestments, candles, incense, images and processions were incorporated into Church worship and continue today. No authentic history denies these facts.

Would the world, then, be better off without Christmas? Atheists think so and wish to remove all manger scenes and crosses from public places. Rather than joining the enemies of God in denouncing Christmas, however, might we not better cultivate the bits of truth that shine through the lamentable commercialization and paganism? This is a unique time of year for presenting the gospel to the world, so let us take advantage of the opportunity.

Christ's birth and the details of His life, death and resurrection were foretold centuries before by the Hebrew prophets. No such prophecies preceded the births of Buddha, Confucius, Muhammad, et al. Biblical prophecy fulfilled is the most powerful persuader we have. Paul used it in converting the lost and turned the world of his day upside down. So should we.

In Romans 1:1-4 we see Paul's approach. He refers to "the gospel of God, (which he [God] had promised afore by his prophets in the holy scriptures)." Christianity is not a first-century invention. It is, in fact, the fulfillment of that which, with one voice, the Hebrew prophets consistently foretold for centuries.

There are more than 300 Messianic prophecies in the Old Testament. Why? So Israel could identify Him, when in the fullness of time God would send forth his Son (Gal 4:4). The third chapter in the Bible contains the first prophecy of the Messiah's coming, His virgin birth ("the seed of the woman") and His destruction of Satan (Gn 3:15). The prophets declared that He must be of the "lineage of David" (Jer 23:5; 2 Sm 7:10-16; Ps 89:3-4) and rule upon David's throne. To prove that Jesus met this criteria, Matthew and Luke begin with the genealogy of Joseph and Mary.

Having rejected Jesus, the Jews still hope for their Messiah to come-but they hope in vain. Jesus Christ fulfilled Malachi 3:1 ("the Lord [Messiah], whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple") when He cast out the money changers and merchants (Mk 11:15). The destruction of the temple 38 years later in A.D. 70 made it impossible during the last 1,923 years for any would-be Messiah to fulfill that scripture. Moreover, all genealogic records were lost in the destruction of the temple, so a future "Messiah" would not be able to prove the necessary descent from David.

Yes, the temple will soon be rebuilt. Instead of cleansing it, however, as Christ did, Antichrist will defile it with his image and force the world to worship him as God: "he as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God" (2 Thes 2:4).

Jacob prophesied, "The sceptre shall not depart from Judah...until Shiloh [Messiah] come..." (Gn 49:10). Shortly after the birth of Jesus, about A.D. 7, the sceptre departed when the Jews lost the right to enforce the death penalty. Thereafter, it was forever too late for Messiah to come. By God's grace, however, He had already come; and He will come again to rescue at Armageddon those who rejected Him the first time. They will know Him by the marks of Calvary ("they shall look upon me whom they pierced"; Zec 12:10). The sceptre having departed from Judah, Christ, instead of being stoned by the Jews, was executed by the Romans, whose supreme penalty was crucifixion. Thus was fulfilled yet another prophecy: "...they pierced my hands and my feet" (Ps 22:16)!

But back to the cradle. Caesar Augustus had no inkling of the momentous effect of his decree "that all the world should [return to the city of one's birth to] be taxed" (Lk 2:1). That decree brought Joseph and Mary to Bethlehem in time for the birth of her "firstborn son" (so she had other children) in fulfillment of Micah 5:2: "But thou, Bethlehem...out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel...."

What depth of meaning there is in the simple statement, "when the fulness of time was come, God sent forth his Son" (Gal 4:4)! His birth had to occur before the sceptre departed from Judah; His death, after. His birthplace was determined by a Roman decree; His death and its method of execution, by the Roman occupation of Israel. He had to come before the temple was destroyed and with it the genealogic records.

The "fulness of time" has passed. No one else can meet the Messianic criteria laid down by the Hebrew prophets! That simple phrase, however, carries a much deeper meaning than we have seen above. If the timing of His birth causes us to marvel, the timing of Christ's death is even more precise and full of meaning. Daniel prophesied the very day of His death.

Through the writings of Jeremiah, Daniel learned that the Babylonian captivity would last 70 years (Dn 9:2). God had commanded that each seven years the Hebrew slaves should be set free, debtors forgiven and the land given a one-year sabbath of rest (Ex 21:2; Dt 15:1,2,12; Lv 25:2-4). For 490 years Israel had disobeyed this precept. As judgment, Jews became slaves of Babylon while their land rested the 70 years of sabbaths it had been denied.

While confessing this sin, pondering and praying, Daniel was given the revelation that another period of 490 years (70 weeks of years) lay ahead for his people and for Jerusalem (9:24). At the end of that time all of Israel's sins would be purged, all prophecy fulfilled and ended, and the Messiah would be reigning on David's throne in Jerusalem. These 70 weeks of years (490 years) were to be counted "from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem" (v 25). That crucial date is given to us in Scripture.

Nehemiah tells us that it was "in the month Nisan, in the twentieth year of Artaxerxes the king" (2:1) that he received the authorization to rebuild Jerusalem. When the day of the month was not given the first day was intended. There were several Artaxerxes, but only one, Longimanus, who ruled more than 20 years-from 465-425 B.C. Thus we have the key date from which this incredible prophecy was to be calculated: Nisan 1445 B.C.

At the end of 69 of these "weeks" (7x69 = 483 years) "Messiah the Prince" would be made known to Israel (Dn 9:25) and then "be cut off [slain], but not for himself" (v 26). Counting 483 years of 360 days each (the Hebrew and Babylonian calendar), a total of 173,880 days from Nisan 1445 B.C., brings us to Sunday, April 6, A.D. 32. On that very day, now celebrated as Palm Sunday, Jesus rode into Jerusalem on a young donkey and was hailed as Messiah the Prince! (Zechariah 9:9 was fulfilled at the same time.)

There is, however, an even deeper meaning to the phrase, "In the fulness of time...." April 6, A.D. 32 was, on the Hebrew calendar, tenth of Nisan. On that day the passover lamb was taken from the flock and placed under observation for four days to make certain that it was "without blemish." During the same four days, Christ, whom John the Baptist had hailed as "the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world" (Jn 1:29), was likewise on display before Israel. On the fourteenth of Nisan, "the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel shall kill it [the passover lamb] in the evening [between 3:00 and 6:00 P.M.]" (Ex 12:6). It was during that precise time period that Jesus died on the cross!

It is fascinating to see how God uses man's decrees and even man's connivings against Him to fulfill His Word. The rabbis had determined not to arrest Jesus during passover, "lest there be an uproar of the people" (Mk 14:2). Yet that was when He had to die. Judas was not only Satan's pawn, but God's. Even the "thirty pieces of silver" he so shrewdly bargained for fulfilled prophecy (Zec 11:12-13). As Peter would declare in his Pentecost sermon, "Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain" (Acts 2:23). Paul wrote, "Christ our passover [lamb] is sacrificed for us" (1 Cor 5:7).

The fourteenth of Nisan began, as Jewish days did, at sunset Wednesday evening. That night Jesus and His disciples had the "last supper" in the upper room where they were preparing to eat the passover the following night. At this meal "before the feast of the passover" (Jn 13:21), Jesus told His disciples, "One of you shall betray me" (Jn 13:1). Earlier He said, significantly, "I tell you before...that, when it is come to pass, ye may believe that I am he" (Jn 13:19). The word "he" is in italics and does not appear in the original. Jesus was declaring once again to His disciples that He was Yahweh, the I AM of Israel, who tells beforehand what will happen and makes certain that it comes to pass (Is 46:9-10).

Arrested by the Judas-led troop in the Garden later that night, Christ was taken secretly to the palace of Caiaphas, the high priest. A sham trial before the Sanhedrin, with hastily called false witnesses, convened sometime after midnight, condemned Christ to death as dawn broke. Shortly thereafter, Pilate, the Roman governor, was notified of the emergency. Hurriedly taken down side streets, the prisoner was received into the citadel at "the third hour" (Mk 15:25), about 9:00 A.M., Nisan 14. All over Israel preparations were underway to kill the passover lamb, which was to be eaten that night.

Jerusalem was crowded and in a state of great excitement. Valuing public relations, Pilate consulted his ever-volatile citizens and let them decide the prisoner's fate. Incited by the rabbis, the bloodthirsty rabble suddenly turned against the One who had miraculously healed and fed so many of them. "Crucify him, crucify him" (Lk 23:21). "His blood be on us, and on our children" (Mt 27:25). The horrible chant echoed down Jerusalem's narrow streets.

Shortly before noon the soldiers had finished their vicious, depraved sport. Jesus, scourged almost into unconsciousness and beaten about the face until he was nearly unrecognizable, was led through the frenzied, screaming mob out of the city to "the place of the skull." By high noon, the One whom Jerusalem, in fulfillment of prophecy, had the previous Sunday hailed as its long-awaited Messiah, was hanging naked, in shame and agony, on the center cross between two thieves. Man had crucified his Creator! Angels recoiled in horror and the sun hid its face.

The next three hours of that Thursday afternoon the earth was darkened mysteriously(Mt 27:45) as God "laid on him the iniquity of us all" (Is 53:6). Thursday? Not "Good Friday"? Indeed not. Jesus himself had said, "For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth [i.e., in that part of Hades known as "Abraham's bosom"]" (Mt 12:40; Lk 16:22). The gospel includes the declaration that Christ "rose again the third day" (1 Cor 15:4).

Obviously, had Christ been crucified on Friday, He couldn't possibly have spent three days and three nights in the grave by Sunday morning. We are distinctly told that the angel rolled away the stone "as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week" (Mt 28:1). The tomb was already empty at that point, so Christ must have risen from the dead sometime prior to dawn.

Yet the myth of a "Good Friday" crucifixion persists, with much ritual and dogma built upon that obvious mistake. In this fact alone we have sufficient evidence of Rome's manufacture and endorsement of untruth to cast doubt upon everything else it affirms with equal dogmatism. And what can be said for the Protestants who, by the millions, so willingly go along with this error?

Wednesday, Thursday, Friday-does it really matter? Yes! The day of our Lord's crucifixion is of the utmost importance. If Christ was not three days and three nights in the grave, then He lied. Moreover, His death, to fulfill prophecy, had to occur at the very time the passover lambs were being slain throughout Israel. It is an astronomical fact that Nisan 14, A.D. 32, fell on Thursday.

"And it was the preparation of the passover....The Jews therefore...that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day...besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away" (Jn 19:14,31). Wait! Not a bone of the passover lamb (Ex 12:46) or of the Messiah (Ps 34:20) could be broken. Not knowing why he did it, "one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side" (Jn 19:34), fulfilling yet another scripture: "they shall look upon me whom they pierced" (Zec 12:10).

John explains that the "sabbath" which began at sunset the Thursday Christ was crucified "was an high day." It was, in fact, the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, of which the first and last days were special sabbaths during which no work was to be done. That "high" sabbath ended Friday at sunset and was immediately followed by the weekly sabbath which ended at sunset on Saturday. Thus two sabbaths followed Christ's death, preventing the women from coming to the grave until the third day, Sunday morning.

The rabbis thought that having Jesus crucified proved He was not the Messiah. In fact, it was one more proof that He was! In taking His clothes for a souvenir, in gambling for his robe and giving Him vinegar mixed with gall to drink, the soldiers unwittingly added to that proof the fulfillment of yet more prophecies (Ps 22:18; 69:21). The nails driven into hands and feet by Roman soldiers and the spear that pierced His side drew forth the blood of our redemption-all in fulfillment of prophecy!

It is impossible to remain an honest skeptic after comparing what the prophets said with the historical record of Jesus Christ, from the cradle to the Cross. Proof of the Resurrection, which we must leave for another time, is even more powerful! We have solid reason for our faith in Christ. Knowing the facts increases our joy and gives us courage to present the gospel with boldness and conviction.

From The Berean Call

Note From Kristina: I believe that Christ was crucified on a Wednesday afternoon (three days and three nights before His resurrection; 72 hours), and that Christ celebrated His own special Passover Tuesday night. This way we can reconcile all four Gospels. Matthew, Mark and Luke clearly say that Jesus partook of the Passover meal, but John seems to say that the Passover had not yet occured (e.g., when the high priest and his son would not go into Herod's Praetorium because they didn't want to defile themselves so as not to be able to eat the Passover [John 18]; and when the Jews wanted to take Christ's body off the cross before sunset, because the day was Preparation day for Passover, which was a "high sabbath" [John 19]).

If anyone would like to know more about what I believe concerning the day/date of Christ's death, I will be happy to provide sources and information.

-Kristina