Saturday 30 November 2013

Apollos the Faithful Apologist



“For he powerfully refuted the Jews in public, showing by the Scriptures that the Christ was Jesus.”
(Acts 18:28, ESV)

Apollos is introduced for the first time in Acts 18: 24-28 and is considered to be one of the earliest apologists of the Holy Scriptures. He knew the Scriptures well. Not only that, he was a very fine and accomplished speaker as well. There are three points that distinguish Apollos as one of the early Churches’ great champions of the faith. Let's consider them together.

  1. Apollos, Mighty in Speech! (Acts 18:24).
  2. Apollos, Mighty in the Scriptures! (Acts 18:25-26, 28).
  3. Apollos, Mighty in Spirit! (Acts 18:25).

Tuesday 26 November 2013

Men, Femininity and Gender Reversal


Times are getting even more difficult for men who just want to be men to live in a society that demeans and demonizes masculinity; and bizarre for those men who want to embrace femininity. More and more we are seeing today's women becoming increasingly assertive in their demeanor, while more men are sadly embracing a more passive feminine role. 

I remember a little while ago watching a video online that explored the issue on male behavior  in relationships with women. The reporter asked a number of women on the street, in parks, and malls what they thought about the behavior of men in today's society. What was interesting, many of them had this to say. "Men are too passive," and "men need to be more assertive in their relationships with women." Some other women said, "I would like it if men would lead more in the relationship." Though this does not tell us anything about whether these men have embraced their femininity. What it does tell us is that men are no longer aggressive in a healthy masculine assertive way as their fathers were before them.  

Male femininity as portrayed here in today's Western culture is embraced as a good thing, instead of a shameful behavior.  Though both men and women possess feminine and masculine characteristics, this in no way gives license for a man to become effeminate in his behavior, nor does it give a woman the right to behave in a more masculine way.  Since God created a man to be a man, his very identity requires him to function in a masculine manner. Why? because to act in a feminine way is a contradiction to his identity as a man. The sexual identity of a man testifies to the fact that he should behave in a manner that compliments who he is as a man. The very core nature of a man is to be masculine, not feminine. Sadly, all too often this is the attitude of such men in today's culture who have embraced their femininity as their identity. One online article confirms this in these words: 

"They are not bogged down by others and are proud of their new found identity. Male femininity has its roots in ancient Greece and Mesopotamia and has been an increasing phenomenon from the dawn of the 20th century. Men today no longer have an inferiority complex in declaring their status and the society too, to a large extent has embraced feminine men. Economic openings for them have also gone a long way in their integration to the society. There is no particular reason for men becoming feminine. It may vary from individual to individual but mostly an interest in the 'female way of life' is the root cause of Male Femininity."[1] 

Personally, I believe there is much more to it than the above quote by the author who says it is men who have an interest in the "female way of life" who have embraced this new feminine identity. I believe the real root to this problem can be traced to the dominate influence of feminism and homosexuality in today's society. These influences are largely responsible for gender confusion that has lead to a certain segment of the male population to accept Male Femininity. Here's a quote I had written about gender confusion on my Facebook page a couple years ago:  

"We are living in a society that seems to glory in the confusion of genders. Our culture is increasingly abandoning the distinction between men and women, by feminizing men and masculating women. This of course, deeply affects relationships between both genders. Men are uncertain to what their role is as a man in the relationship; whereas, women are dissatisfied with their role in leading the relationship they know in their heart belongs to the man."[2]  

How could this have happened? This has happened through feminism and homosexuality being indoctrinated in people's lives through the use of the education system, the media, movies and other avenues such as literature that has given it wide acceptance. Even the law and courts are now reinforcing these negative world views in our Western Culture. Over the past 30 or 40 years of these views being promoted and given first a toehold, then a foothold, and now a stronghold in our society has allowed feminism and homosexuality to flourish and become a dominate force in our culture.  

Though my primary focus is on how feminism has affected and oppressed men, with "Gender Reversal" being one of the repercussions of feminist indoctrination; I only mention here homosexuality because it to is responsible as well in influencing men to embrace their Male Femininity that has lead to Gender Reversal.  

Such "esmasculation" of the male identity in today's society is the sad result of many men accepting as normal the effeminate life style that has been influenced by feminism. And make no wonder, since the masculine nature of man is demonized in our society, many men have embraced a more feminine approached to life. In other words, they have denied their true masculine role as men for a feminine role that is more acceptable in today's society.

Yet what people need to realize is the term "effeminate" is one of the sins in the list the Apostle Paul mentions in 1 Corinthians 6:9-10. It is not a compliment for a healthy heterosexual male today to take on the effeminate role. When the Apostle Paul mentioned those who were not going to inherit the kingdom of God, the distinction is made in the KJV between the "effeminate" and "abusers of themselves with mankind," as the "passive" and "active" roles of homosexuals. In the same verse the Darby translation is quite bold when it defines effeminate as "those who make women of themselves." ("effeminate by perversion," Darby lit. Trans.). In a more modern translation, the ESV includes both passive and active partners together in these words, "nor men who practice homosexuality." The footnote for this verse further confirms my point, "The two Greek terms translated by this phrase refer to the passive and active partners in consensual homosexual acts." So men who are considering or have already embraced the "effeminate" life style should really reconsider what they are actually accepting. Do such men really want to associate themselves with the perverted life style of a homosexual? It is indeed sad that our society has come to this. 

I am aware this chapter on “Men, Femininity, and Gender Reversal” may be a point of contention for some of my readers, while others will immediately understand where I am coming from. I do not hold any hostility against any homosexual or transgender person, but with love seek to share the truth with those willing to listen. Unfortunately, many have been brainwashed by schools, the media, movies, T.V., and popular literature to be hyper sensitive to other people’s views that goes against the culture’s narrative. Such hyper sensitive people get easily upset, offended, and closed minded to any views that may differ from theirs. They associate disagreement with them as hate. To such people I make no apologies and would ask that you just simply skip this chapter if the truth is too much for you to handle. 


For more information on the subject, I would also like to recommend to the reader the Special Report on “Sexuality and Gender: Findings from the Biological, Psychological, and Social Sciences” by Dr. Lawrence S. Mayer and Dr. Paul R. McHugh in The New Atlantis: A Journal of Technology & Society, Num. 50, Fall 2016. Another helpful work is Frank Turek’s small book, Correct, Not Politically Correct.


[1] http://emasculated.org/content/emasculated-and-oppressed-men
[2] My Facebook page, October 5, 2011. (Slightly revised from the original).

Tuesday 19 November 2013

I Am The Living Bread!


“Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.”

(Matthew 4: 4, ESV) 

This morning the Lord made His presence known in the Men’s Morning Meeting at St. Thomas’. The Lord gave Art, Derek, and myself bread, but then again the Lord has been faithful in making his presence known each week in our small group. I just found this morning unique in that He gave each of us a different aspect to the same truth being conveyed in this particular study Art was leading us in. Each one of us was given a different point on this morning’s theme text, John 6:51. These three aspects are as follows: Art was given the truth about “Giving Out” the Bread we feed on; Derek was given the truth about “Living Out” the Bread we feed on; and I was given the truth about “Taking In” the Bread we feed on.  

The truth of this order would be as follows:

  1. “Taking In” conveys the truth that just like we would eat natural bread, so are we to feed on the Bread of God’s Word. Bread is no good to us if we do not digest it, so it is with God’s Word. Let us not be just tasters of God’s Word, but rather let us be eaters of the Bread of God’s Word. “Your words were found, and I ate them, and your words became to me a joy and the delight of my heart” (Jer. 15:16, ESV).
  2. “Living Out” tells us the truth that just like natural bread sustains us and gives us the physical strength to live from day to day, so the Bread of God’s Word sustains us spiritually, giving us the necessary strength to “live out” the truth of God’s Word in our daily lives. “But be doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves” (James 1:22).
  3. “Giving Out” implies the truth that a part of “living out” the Bread of God’s Word is to share it with others. This can be done in two ways: first, in ministering and teaching God’s Word to fellow Christians; secondly, in proclaiming the Gospel to needy souls who do not know Christ. (See Matt. 28:19-20; Mark 16:15-16). 

Here are four aspects to consider about the term “Bread” in John 6:32, 33, 35, 51:

  1. THE TRUE BREAD FROM HEAVEN: This truth is interesting in this verse for a couple reasons. First, “the true bread” is distinguished in this text apart from “the bread from heaven.” The bread from heaven that Moses prayed for the children of Israel in the wilderness was angel’s food (see Ex. 16:4-17; Psalm 78:25). It was called “manna,” yet it could not satisfy. The term “manna” means “what is it?” Second, “the true bread” here identifies metaphorically the sacrifice of the Lord Jesus Christ. Three truths can be seen in regards to bread here: (1.) The "bread" prepared by the hands of men speaks of the flesh (1 Cor. 1:29; Eph. 2:8-9); (2.) The "manna" that rained down from heaven to the children of Israel speaks of the law that was to be given; (3.) Jesus "the true bread" speaks of salvation by grace. All three types of bread gives sustenance, but it is only the "true bread" that can eternally satisfy.
  2. THE BREAD OF GOD: Now this truth speaks of the divine aspect and origin of this Bread. This bread is neither angel’s food nor is it the natural bread from man. It is Bread, the Bread of God that imparts divine life. Manna and the natural bread made by the hands of man will perish. It only feeds the natural, earth bound life that is subject to the laws of this present life. It nourishes the flesh, but does nothing for the spirit. The natural man does not receive the things that be of God (see 1 Cor. 2:14). Now the spiritual man born of God receives all things that is of God (see 2 Cor. 5:17).
  3. THE BREAD OF LIFE: The Lord Jesus in this text begins with these words “I am,” making the truth about the metaphor Bread personal. And this Bread imparts life. Not natural life, but rather spiritual life. An abundant life that is both satisfying and eternal. Jesus’ promise to whoever comes to him he/she will never hunger or thirst (6:35). “Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be satisfied” (Matt. 5:6).
  4. THE LIVING BREAD:  The Lord Jesus Christ again makes it personal with these same words “I am.” Jesus says in John 14:6, “I am…the life.” Jesus identifies Himself as equal with God in John 6:32-33, 51 when He says He originated from heaven, which offended the Jews. “This pronouncement exactly reiterates verses 33, 35, 47-48. bread…is my flesh. Jesus refers here prophetically to his impending sacrifice upon the cross (cf. 2 Cor. 5:21; 1 Pet. 2:24). Jesus voluntarily laid down his life for evil, sinful mankind (John 10:18; 1 John 2:2)."[1] This truth is echoed again when Jesus fortold his death to His disciples in the upper room (see Matt. 26:26-29; Mark 14:22-25; Luke 22:17-20; 1 Cor. 11:23-26). 

In ancient times in the Middle East bread was an important part and source of food for the Jew and Arab. Bread indeed is a source of nourishment, but it is no good unless it is broken and eaten. This truth can be seen when Jesus fed the 5,000 with only five barley loaves and two fishes. (see John 6:1-15). The truth here is that only the Lord Jesus can satisfy our need. Just as He provides for our need for physical sustenance, so does He meet our spiritual need for daily sustenance from His Word (see Matt. 4:4; Deut. 8:3). Just as Jesus became broken bread for us, we must become broken bread for others. We must understand that bread never broken can never feed others. This same truth applies to a believer’s life. If we willfully remain unbroken bread, then God cannot bless and multiply our brokenness to feed others. So if the bread of our lives remains intact, it cannot make the necessary contact that imparts the impact that nourishes others. (Matt. 6:11).




[1] John MacArthur, The MacArthur Study Bible: ESV, (Crossway, Wheaton, Illinois, 2010), pg. 1551.