Our pick of the week's events.

Society & Politics

• Anti-Semitic graffiti sprayed on Norfolk shopping centre: South Norfolk police have arrested five teenagers after a swastika and anti-Semitic message were sprayed on the walls at Long Stratton shopping centre. Read more here.
  
• ‘Israel Apartheid Week’ cancelled at University of Central Lancashire: The event, part of the broader IAW movement, was called off after a campaign from Christians United for Israel (CUFI) and Israel Britain Alliance (IBA). Read more here.
  
  • Pro-Israel groups prepare to combat Israel Apartheid Week: leading Israel advocacy groups are gearing up to fight 2017 Israel Apartheid Week in universities around the UK with positive education. Algemeiner reports.
• ‘Relationships Education’ clause would force all schools to promote same-sex marriage: New Clause 5 has been tabled as part of the Children and Social Work Bill, and provides no parental right of withdrawal. The Coalition for Marriage are calling on Christians to email their MPs - click here to request more information.

Church Issues

• Three street preachers on trial in Bristol: Mike Overd, Adrian Clark and Michael Stockwell were arrested in July 2016 and charged with public order offences. Adrian Clark's case was dismissed today, but the two other cases continue. Read Christian Concern’s coverage here.
• Help Steve Maltz crowd-fund his most important book yet, Livin’ the Life: are you able to contribute? Steve is looking for 30-40 people to each pre-order 10 copies. Click here to get involved, or click here to read the book’s introduction.

World Scene

• Washington DC becomes seventh US state to legalise assisted suicide: despite Republican attempts to block it, the Death with Dignity Act came into force on Saturday. Read more here.
• Over 100 Jewish headstones vandalised at St Louis cemetery: attack in Missouri on Monday comes in wake of a nationwide rise in anti-Semitic threats, including bomb threats being made to multiple Jewish organisations in tandem. Read more here.
  

Israel & Middle East

• ISIS affiliate captures villages near Israel/Syria border in surprise attack: several villages and the large town of Tasil (c.11km from the Golan Heights), were taken from moderate Syrian rebels on Monday. Some territory has since been reclaimed. Read more here.
  
• Two more ISIS rockets fired into Israel from Sinai: ISIS has claimed responsibility for two rockets fired into southern Israel on Monday, in an ongoing exchange near the border with the Gaza Strip. No damage or injury was caused. Read more here.
• Help Israeli farmers recover from last year’s forest fires: United with Israel launch a tree-planting project to help Israeli farmers recover their crops this spring, after the terrible forest fires last year. Click here to help plant trees in Israel!
  

Upcoming Events

• ‘As One’ National Prayer Conference (13-15 March): Swanwick, World Prayer Centre. “Listen to God and pray in the new season.” Click here to find out more.
  
• Hope for Our Nation (18 March): Christian Concern host a day event at the Emmanuel Centre, Westminster. “Do you want to see society changed by the gospel of Jesus Christ? Come and understand today's challenges, and be equipped to bring hope to our nation.” Find out more and buy tickets here.
  
• ‘What are we teaching the Children?’ Conference (25 March): Find out how current education policy is influencing children in Britain and how Christians can respond, with Voice for Justice. Emmanuel Centre, Westminster. Click here for information and tickets.

Recommended Sources

At Prophecy Today UK we are aware that the world is moving very quickly and it is difficult to keep up with all the latest developments – especially when the material circulated by our mainstream media is increasingly far from reality and definitely not devoted to a biblical perspective!

Though we are not a news service, we want to help keep you informed by passing on updates and reports as we are led. This will be a selective, not an exhaustive, round-up, which we hope will be helpful for your prayers. Click here to browse our News archive.

We also recommend the following news services for regular updates from a Christian perspective:

• Christian Concern (UK)
  
• Christian Institute (UK)
  
• JNN News (Barry and Batya Segal, Israel)
• Family Watch International
• Barnabas Fund
  
• Kehila News (Israel)
  
• Saltshakers (Steve Maltz, UK)

Did Jesus follow or reject the oral law? David Bivin concludes his assessment of the Jewishness of Jesus.

Last week we began to look at how Jesus not only lived as an observant Jew but was readily recognised as such by his contemporaries; discovering evidence for this in Jesus's upbringing, the acceptance of Jesus as a 'rabbi' by those around him, his relationship with his disciples and his method of teaching and preaching.

Attitude to the Oral Law

Jesus also appears to have adhered to the oral law in his attitude towards such practices as sacrifices, fasting, almsgiving, tithing and blessings. Notice, for example, how he gave tacit approval to the offering of sacrifices in Matthew 5:23-24: “If you are offering your sacrifice at the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your sacrifice there in front of the altar. First go and be reconciled to your brother; then come and offer your sacrifice.”

Jesus also commanded the lepers whom he healed to perform the ceremony for their cleansing prescribed in the Bible. This ceremony included the offering of sacrifices as well as ritual immersion. He told the ten lepers to show themselves to the priest and specifically charged another leper, “Show yourself to the priest and offer the sacrifice Moses commanded” (Matt 8:4).

Fasting

Jesus also took for granted that his disciples would fast when he commanded them to “put oil on your head and wash your face, so that it will not be obvious to men that you are fasting, but only to your Father, who Is unseen” (Matt 6:17).

Jesus was accused of not living the ascetic life of John the Baptist, which might give one the impression that he did not fast a great deal. However, if he were practising what he preached about the concealment of fasting, those who accused him would not have known whether he did so or not. Certainly, Jesus could not have criticised those who made a show of their fasting if he himself did not fast.

In recounting the parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector, he criticised the Pharisee, not because he fasted twice a week, but because of his overweening pride.

Jesus appears to have adhered to the oral law in his attitude towards such practices as sacrifices and fasting.

It is also inconceivable that Jesus did not fast on the Day of Atonement each year throughout his life 'to afflict his soul.’ This was interpreted by the rabbis to mean a total fast (abstinence from both food and drink) of approximately 25 hours. Scripture specifies exclusion from the community as the penalty for anyone who did not afflict his soul on that day (Lev 23:29), and states that anyone who did any work on that special occasion would be “destroyed by God” (Lev 23:30).

It should also be noted that after his baptism, at the beginning of his public ministry, Jesus fasted for 40 days (Matt 4:2). So Jesus was one who fasted.

Giving and Tithing

In the same section of the Sermon on the Mount where Jesus criticised the hypocrites who only fasted that they might be seen by men, Jesus also criticised those who made a public display of giving to the poor.

He must have been a generous giver himself. We can assume this because Jesus taught that one should lay up treasure in Heaven rather than on earth, and that if one's eye were 'bad' (that is, if one were stingy), “his whole body will be full of darkness” (Matt 6:19-23). Again, “When you give to the needy” said Jesus (Matt 6:2), not 'if you give to the needy'.

Jesus assumed that his disciples were almsgivers, and one may confidently assume that the Master was as well, even without there being any specific New Testament example of such action.

Any discussion of almsgiving raises the related issue of tithing, and since tithing is as much a biblical commandment as giving to the needy, there should be no question but that Jesus both tithed and gave to the poor.

Jesus assumed that his disciples were almsgivers, and one may confidently assume that the Master was as well.

Some Christians maintain that Jesus criticised the Pharisees for being so pedantic as to tithe even the spices and herbs in their gardens, and consequently they therefore assume that Jesus opposed such tithing (Matt 23:23). This is an error resulting from a faulty reading of the text. It is similar to the misunderstanding some people have that money is the root of all evil. What Scripture states, however, is that it is “the love of money” that is “a root of all kinds of evil” (1 Tim 6:10).

Jesus did not pronounce his woes upon the scribes and Pharisees for tithing mint, dill and cummin, but rather for keeping only such 'lighter' or less serious commandments, whilst failing to observe the 'heavier' or more important ones.

In the written law, the commandment is that one should tithe only on grain, oil and wine. But the rabbis (at the time of Jesus and just before), ruled that anything used for food had to be tithed.

Jesus, when speaking of this tithing of the herbs in the garden, says that it should not be neglected (Matt 23:23). His statement leaves no doubt about how Jesus felt about tithing, and more importantly, how he felt about the observation of the commandments as they were interpreted by the rabbis.

Saying of Blessings

A few verses previously, in Matthew 23:3, Jesus explicitly instructed his disciples with regard to their attitude towards the scribes and Pharisees concerning the keeping of the oral law: “You must obey them and do everything they tell you.” The sole scriptural basis for the many blessings that an observant Jew still says daily is Deuteronomy 8:10: “When you have eaten and are satisfied, praise the Lord your God for the good land he has given you.” Literally, the text says, “And you shall eat, and you shall be full, and you shall bless.”

The sages found in this verse justification for saying a blessing before the meal as well as after; and on many other – indeed almost all - occasions. The general rule is that anything that a man enjoys requires a blessing.

There is a blessing to be said before a public reading from the Torah, and another at the completion of the reading; a blessing after immersing oneself in a mikveh and a blessing upon seeing a great scholar.

There is an obligation to bless God for calamity and misfortune, as well as for prosperity and good fortune. For rain and for good news one says, “Blessed is he who is good and who gives good.” For bad news the form is, “Blessed is he who is the true judge.”

Jesus did not criticise the scribes and Pharisees for tithing, but for keeping such 'lighter' commandments whilst failing to observe more important ones.

There is evidence that Jesus adhered to the ruling of the oral law in his use of various blessings. In conformity with the rabbis' interpretation, Jesus not only recited a blessing after meals but also said the blessing before meals. This blessing is:

Baruch atah Adonai eloheynu, melech haolam, ha-motzi lechem meen ha-aretz ('Blessed art Thou O Lord our God, King of the universe, who brings forth bread from the earth').

If you learn that blessing, you can bless the Lord for each meal the way Jesus did!

Blessing the Food or Blessing God?

It is recorded that at the last Passover meal observed by the Lord and his disciples in Jerusalem, Jesus “took bread and blessed and broke and gave to his disciples” (Matt 26:26). Since in the Greek text there is no direct object following the verbs 'blessed,' 'broke' and 'gave', English translators have usually felt it necessary to supply the word 'it' after each of these verbs.

English readers therefore receive the impression that Jesus not only divided and distributed the bread, but blessed it as well. But this is simply a misunderstanding of the Hebraic and Jewish connotations of the word 'bless'.

Because of this recurring 'blessed, broke and gave the bread' in the gospels, it is a common Christian misunderstanding that Jesus actually blessed the bread. But in a Hebraic setting one does not bless things, one blesses God who provides the things. The blessing that was said in Jesus' time before one ate was praise and thanksgiving to God who so wondrously provides food for his children.

Even in his supernatural, resurrected body, Jesus, when eating with the two disciples in Emmaus (Luke 24:30), did not neglect the required blessing before the meal.

We might note at this point that it is a similar mistake to assume that Jesus multiplied the loaves and the fishes by blessing them (Matt 6:41). What Jesus did was simply to bless God before the beginning of the meal. The miracle was not a result of the blessing, for food did not multiply on other occasions when Jesus gave thanks for the provision of food.

Even in his supernatural, resurrected body, Jesus did not neglect the required blessing before the meal.

The matter of blessing before eating may be a good example of how the Western Gentile Christian's lack of knowledge of Jewish customs has led to a misunderstanding of precisely what Jesus did. In this case it has led to the development of the Christian practice of 'saying grace before meals' in which we 'bless the food', rather than give thanks to God for it, and which as such, has no foundation either in Jewish culture or in Jesus's own practice and teaching.

It is also an example of how a Jewish book, written for Jews, can create confusion for later, non-Jewish readers. Luke made it clearer for his Greek-speaking readers when he referred to Paul's practice in Acts 27:35: “He took some bread and gave thanks to God in front of them all. Then he broke it and began to eat.”

Did Jesus Wear Tzitziyot and Tefillin?

The New Testament makes it clear that Jesus, like all observant Jews of the 1^st Century, wore tzitziyot, which is the Hebrew word for the tassels or fringes that hung from the four corners of the outer garment or robe of a Jew at that time. This is commanded in Numbers 15:37-41 and Deuteronomy 22:12.

That Jesus wore these tzitziyot is illustrated by the story in Matthew 9:20 of the woman who had suffered from a haemorrhage for 12 years and who was healed when she came up to Jesus and touched 'the fringe of his garment.' The Greek word kraspedou, translated as 'hem,' 'border,' or 'edge' in English translations of the New Testament, is the word used for the tzitziyot.

There is no explicit evidence offered in the gospels that Jesus also wore tefillin on his forehead and right arm. Called 'phylacteries' in the Bible (Matt 23:5), these are the two leather boxes which each contain four passages of Scripture inscribed on tiny parchment scrolls. These boxes are bound by leather straps, one on the forehead and one on the arm. The arm box contains a single parchment on which all four passages are written, while the head box is divided into four compartments, each of which contains a parchment with one of the four Scripture passages written on it.

Wearing these phylacteries was the rabbinic way of observing the commandment in Deuteronomy 6:8 to bind the words of the Lord as a sign on their hands (the correct translation is 'arm'), and on their foreheads. It might be argued, of course, that this is metaphorical language and that one is not meant to literally bind all or part of God's word to a person's arm or forehead.

Jesus, like all observant Jews of the time, wore tzitziyot, the tassels that hung from the four corners of the outer garment.

Nevertheless, Jews living in the time of Jesus viewed the wearing of tefillin as a biblical commandment and they were part of ordinary Jewish dress. Putting on the tefillin only at the time of prayer, as is practised by Orthodox Judaism today, is a later custom. In Jesus's time they were worn throughout the day and removed only for work or when entering a place which was ritually unclean. Tefillin dating from the 1^st Century have been found in the caves near Qumran on the shores of the Dead Sea, and are almost identical to those worn by Orthodox Jews today.

In Matthew 23:5 Jesus criticised some of the Pharisees because “They make their phylacteries broad and their fringes long”. But rather than criticising the wearing of tefillin and tzitziyot, Jesus was condemning the religious hypocrisy that led to an exaggerated size being worn that would be obvious to others.

While Jesus condemned such ostentation, we have no reason to believe that he did not himself wear them. Had Jesus himself not worn phylacteries, as well as having the fringes on his garment, he surely would have been attacked on that count by the religious leaders of the day.

Rediscovering Our Hebraic Roots

In general, one gains the impression from the gospels that Jesus dutifully adhered to the practices of observant Jews of his day and that his attitude towards these practices was guided by the interpretations of the rabbis as expressed in the oral law.

During my research I have come to see that Jesus was a Jewish rabbi or, if we do not want to use the word 'rabbi' (since it was not a title in those days) we can say that he was a Jewish teacher.

Large sections of the Christian Church find this difficult to accept and to understand, and their difficulty illustrates how dim is our recollection of the Jewish origins of our faith, and to what extent we have been assimilated into the pagan culture that surrounds us.

One wonders what kind of dynamic organism the Church might have been throughout the ages had she clung more closely to her Hebraic roots, rather than embracing and becoming amalgamated with the pagan Hellenistic philosophy that persists to a very great extent in the Church up to this present day.

What kind of dynamic organism the Church might have been throughout the ages had she clung more closely to her Hebraic roots!

The Church’s only hope, of course, is to see Jesus, but this time to see him and know him personally as he really is: an observant Jew, a Jewish rabbi, the Jewish Messiah of God and - one might add - God himself, Immanuel.

The Gentile Church must become Hebraic in its thinking and approach to understanding the New Testament and should purge itself of the pagan influences of 19 centuries. May we who are members of Christ's Body but who are not of Jewish parentage rid ourselves of the arrogance of which Paul warned the Roman Christians:

Do not boast over those branches. If you do, consider this: You do not support the root, but the root supports you…Do not be arrogant, but be afraid. (Rom 11:18-20)

First published in Prophecy Today, Vol 9 No 5.

Paul Luckraft interviews author Marion Daniel, whose books have been reviewed recently on Prophecy Today.

Marion has written two books to date but this was not the main reason for requesting an interview with her - for she is more than an author. In fact, that is a relatively small part of how God has led her and impacted her life.

She is better known as the founder and leader of a significant ministry, Sozo Ministries International, on which God clearly has his hand, and which will be featured next week on Prophecy Today. But Marion’s personal story is the best place to start.

From Harm to Healing

Marion describes her early background as nominal Anglican. She went to Sunday School and would say she had a moral upbringing, but that at most she was a God-fearer rather than a true Christian believer. However, in the early 1970s she came to salvation and was also baptised in the Spirit, a real life-changing experience.

Later that decade, a car accident impacted her life in a totally different way. Strangely, at first there was no immediate effect from it - no real pain or physical consequences. But ten years later, she began to suffer symptoms in her shoulders and spine that required further investigation. Eventually it was traced back to the accident, and when X-rays revealed that she had spondylosis (a form of spinal degeneration) it was clear that something serious and traumatic had occurred at the time. The diagnosis was stark – she wouldn’t get better.

At this point in her life Marion was attending church regularly, but her main church did not have a focus on divine healing, so she was given no hope there either. However, Marion herself refused to accept that God can’t heal today. With the help of a local Gospel Church, which was more Spirit-led, she began to explore what the Bible had to say on the matter of healing. It was soon obvious – if Jesus is alive, he can still heal! The Cross makes this possible today, and it should be part of Christian reality for all true believers.

If Jesus is alive, he can still heal!

Now that she had been properly instructed on such matters, her faith level was raised and the truth made clear. She was ready to receive personal healing - it was just a matter of when and how. The opportunity came at a meeting in Brighton, led by a visiting preacher from New Zealand called Steve Ryder. After prayer Marion experienced a clear spiritual transformation - something internal, which meant that although healing was not instantaneous, her body soon followed down this path of regeneration to wholeness.

Seeds of a Ministry

Marion now realised that not only could God heal, but that he did! And this was something she wanted to share. Her boss at work was not only sympathetic but encouraging, and became a significant part of what would follow. Not only did she become a prayer partner but once healings started to happen at work she realised that Marion had a larger ministry in this respect, and remarkably agreed to keep her on the payroll while allowing her to give up her usual work in order to pursue her new calling.

Now released for a wider ministry, the 1980s was a time of growth as fresh opportunities arose, slowly at first but with increasing momentum. Marion recalls her time ministering healing in Devon at a holiday village there each spring and autumn. Looking back, she now realises that this was an important training period.

Also during this time, she held monthly healing meetings with perhaps a dozen or so people attending. But this was also a season of charismatic renewal within the wider Church and things were soon to take off.

Marion realised that not only could God heal, but that he did! This was something she wanted to share.

Establishing Sozo Ministries

During her next phase of ministry, Marion began hiring places in order to reach more people, but it was soon clear this was to become even bigger - and before long, Sozo Ministries was established. Aided by her parents, her sister and family and her younger brother Alan, Sozo Ministries was set up in 1983 and became a registered charity later that decade.

A school in Romsey was hired for the big healing and deliverance meetings held every three weeks. Another building in Romsey was bought and renamed Sozo House in order to provide offices and smaller meeting rooms.

As part of the overall ministry, Sozo offered conferences and other teaching meetings. Marion’s two books, written in 2008 and 2010, were based on topics taught at these conferences. Turning such material into book form was a new challenge but New Wine Press agreed to publish both and these two slim volumes are now part of the many resources that Sozo provides through its bookstore.

New Vision…

By now the ministry was well-established, but further big changes were to come, both physically and spiritually. In 2013 Sozo moved from Sozo House to a new site, Dunwood Oaks, in Awbridge. This opened up fresh possibilities - not least of which was the chance to develop and extend the building for larger meetings, and to eventually move away from hiring the school in Romsey.

But equally significant was a new vision which would emerge from an unusual and extraordinary deliverance session, that was to change Marion and the rest of her team as much as it did the person being ministered to.

To be continued next week…

Read our reviews of Marion's books here and here.

N.B. Marion Daniel and Sozo Ministries International are in no way affiliated to Bethel Sozo or the International Bethel Sozo Organization.

I don’t know about you, but often when I pray the Lord’s Prayer, I say the line “Thy Kingdom come” emphatically and with sincere devotion – but all the while the meaning of it, in my heart, remains somewhat vague. We all want God’s Kingdom to come – but what exactly does that mean? How do we move from a spiritual-sounding concept to concrete reality?

Taking Hold of Theocracy

The world is full of different attempts at government and governance, some of which evidently work better than others, but none of which are perfect (hence the multitudes of political theories critiquing that which already exists and suggesting alternatives). But God’s ideal form of government has been laid out for thousands of years in Scripture: it is a theocracy, a Kingdom where He is the one and only King, ruling in majesty and power, yet also in humility and love.

It is a Kingdom where we, as His subjects, are raised up from the ashes of sin and death to be His sons and daughters, being changed into His likeness and the likeness of His Son, Jesus Messiah, who is our perfect example, and through whom all this has been made possible.

It is this Kingdom that we must somehow grasp in this world, in the practical details of our lives.

Extension of God’s Rule

When we pray “Thy Kingdom come”, we are asking God to extend His rule and reign further and further over every part of our lives, including all those parts we hold back and consider to be ‘ours’, or which we hide out of shame. We are asking that every single part of ourselves comes under His authority and is subjected to His rule – surrendering our rights to dictate the outcome, which might be building up, tearing down, refining or simple change.

Ultimately, we are asking that every part of us comes to exist for a new purpose: the praise of His glory.

We are also asking God to extend this glorious Kingship in the lives of those around us, in the Church, in our nation and in the world…and by extension, we are agreeing to be part of this process, for Jesus Himself has chosen to make us His hands and feet in this world.

The Narrow Path

This journey for which we are praying leads us on a difficult, narrow path. The ‘now’ of God’s Kingdom rule extending into our lives stands in tension with the ‘not yet’ of the full Kingdom to come (where we will live as perfect subjects of our perfect King, and when the entire world will bow before Him) and also in tension with the darkness, evil and rebellion visible in the world, out of which we are being drawn, and which is governed temporarily by “the powers of this world’s darkness” (Eph 6:12).

We exist in the midst of these tensions, as living ‘works in progress’, which at times can be an immensely frustrating and disappointing experience. But God has planned it this way for great purpose.

If we were transformed from sin to glory in one fell swoop, how could we testify to His faithfulness and His willingness to journey with us through thick and thin? How could we witness to His patience and His lovingkindness - to His grace? How could we be His children – when the fundamental meaning of childhood is a journey: from youth to maturity, from naivete to wisdom, from weakness to stature and strength? And crucially, what would keep us humble if all our weaknesses were suddenly gone?

From Glory to Glory

God, in all His sovereign wisdom, has ordained this journey “from glory to glory” (2 Cor 3:18, KJV) – for our learning and blessing, yes, but also as part of His plan to reach the rest of the world.

We are to be living, walking, talking examples of redemption-in-progress, who know that their future is secure and who are faithfully seeking to take hold of that for which they were called (Phil 3:12-14).

The whole point of the ‘now but not yet’ aspect of the Kingdom is that others may see the treasure of the Lord shining out through imperfect jars of clay – that God Himself might get more praise. It is vital that others see normal human beings – people just like them – on that road of being transformed and filled with the things of Heaven, for that is the road God desires them to walk also.

Oaks of Righteousness

Unlike our ‘I want it now’ culture, God is a God of long-term investments (even though He is also God of instant miracles!). There is a reason why He chooses to talk of His children in terms of trees like the oak and cedar – trees which take the span of a human lifetime to reach maturity, but which then last in strength and splendour for centuries.

So, in praying “Thy Kingdom come”, we are effectively saying “Lord, take me further on the journey. Thank you for what you’ve done – but don’t leave me here. Finish what you’ve started – and use me as part of your unfolding plans to redeem others”. Whilst we are praying for the return of Jesus Messiah, when we will all be changed “in the twinkling of an eye” (1 Cor 15:52), we are also declaring our agreement to walk the long and narrow road in this life, hand in hand with the Father. In this way, "Thy Kingdom come" should be more than just a phrase we pray fervently and with faith - it should be a devoted lifestyle and an attitude of humble surrender, in a spirit of unwavering hope. That's how it becomes reality.

I consider that our present sufferings are not comparable to the glory that will be revealed in us…we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies. For in this hope we were saved; but hope that is seen is no hope at all. Who hopes for what he can already see? But if we hope for what we do not yet see, we wait for it patiently. (Rom 8:18, 23-25)

Author: Frances Rabbitts

Our pick of events that have happened this week.

As same-sex issue divides, who will speak up for the truth?

The Church of England has once again failed to give a moral lead to the nation.

Their Synod (parliament) has voted against the Bishops’ recommendation that, in the face of huge pressure to allow same-sex ‘equality’, they should continue to take the traditional view of marriage.

Those within the Church desperately trying to honour the clear biblical teaching – that a man shall leave his father and mother and be united to his wife (Gen 2:24) – have reached a discouraging impasse.

Heresy Within, Confusion Without

Is it not time to say: ‘enough is enough’? Undermining the authority of the Bible only leads to heresy within and confusion without. Sure, the watching world sees a Church divided, and some would say that is a bad witness. But there are surely issues over which it is impossible to compromise.

Endless debates create much heat, but bear little fruit. What, after all, is there left to debate? If the choice is whether or not to follow Scripture, then the advice from the Apostle Paul is: “Come out from them and be separate, says the Lord. Touch no unclean thing, and I will receive you” (2 Cor 6:17). Those pushing for same-sex marriage are surely touching something ‘unclean’.

At the end of the day, we will all stand before God to give account of the decisions we have made or haven’t made (Rom 14:12).

Undermining the authority of the Bible only leads to heresy within and confusion without.

Danger of Deception

The letters to the seven churches of Asia Minor recorded in the Book of Revelation give as much emphasis on teaching as on behaviour – the key doctrines of Christian belief are hugely important.

The Apostle John, in his first letter, reminds his hearers that those who were spreading false teaching had come from within the churches. “They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us,” he wrote (1 John 2:19).

Heresy was a great danger in the early Church, just as Jesus predicted it would be in these latter days. When his disciples asked him about signs of the end of the age, the first thing he said was: “Watch out that no-one deceives you” (Matt 24:4).

Yes, Jesus prayed passionately for unity among his followers. It was never meant to be unity at any cost, however, but the sort of oneness about which Paul spoke in his letter to the Ephesians when he explained that the apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers were there “to equip his people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature…” (Eph 4:12f).

The context is clearly about developing maturity within the body of Christ as disciples learn to walk in harmony with the Word of God.

But because the modern Church has failed to give a moral lead on the issue of homosexuality, the entire Western world is now in the grip of ‘redefining marriage’, if that is really possible.

Jesus prayed passionately for unity among his followers, but it was never meant to be unity at any cost.

Seek The Truth

We have seen the same thing happen over Israel. Undermining the authority of the Bible has led to the heresy of ‘Replacement Theology’, teaching that the Church has replaced Israel in God’s affections. As a result, there is very little understanding of Israel in the UK Church today, and yet God’s end-time purpose is for Jew and Gentile to work together for the Gospel! How far we have fallen behind God’s programme!

Tragically, the Church has succumbed wholesale to worldliness, ignoring the Bible’s directive: “Do not conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind” (Rom 12:2).

Isn’t it time we re-committed ourselves to seeking the truth, perfectly demonstrated in Jesus Christ – “the way, the truth and the life” (John 14:6)?

The Synod’s vote this week shows how compromised the established Church is on the issue of gay marriage.

It must seem utterly amazing to people outside the church that Christians could spend such a long time discussing the issue of same-sex relationships.

To young people in particular, it appears to be a non-issue – not even worth discussing. For most of them sex is sex – it’s just a fact of life and it’s entirely optional whether you have it with the opposite sex or the same sex.

So why has the Church of England Synod spent so much time this week discussing a ‘non-issue’?

Most young people, other than those educated in faith schools or home-educated, have been subjected, over the past two or three decades, to a process of social engineering that has radically changed the structure of society. The change has seen a fundamental shift from the centrality of the family as the building block of society to a form of individualism that diminishes the family to a kind of ‘optional extra’ that can take any shape or form.

In the brave new world of reconstructed families, marriage has no special significance and is just one of those relationships that can be entered or dissolved at the desire of the individuals involved, regardless of the effects this might have upon the lives of others.

In the brave new world of reconstructed families, marriage has no special significance.

The Truth of Scripture

It is against this background that the Church of England, as the established church, has been struggling for several decades. At root, it is a theological issue that is determined by one’s attitude to Scripture. If you accept the Bible as the unchangeable word of God, you believe that marriage is part of God’s act of creation and that it is only between a man and a woman who pledge themselves to each other in a lifelong covenant of love and faithfulness.

You accept that marriage is at the heart of family life for the pro-creation and upbringing of children and that this form of society is ordained by God for the health and well-being of humanity. It is not just the ideal – it is the only form of sexual relationship between the genders that is acceptable in the sight of God.

This is where the problem arises with LGBT people who defend this lifestyle but who also desire to be part of the Church. They often emphasise that love is part of the very nature of God and therefore assume that God will bless any form of love relationship between human beings whom he has created in his own image.

This is why homosexual people have been so persistent in pressurising Church leaders of all denominations to recognise same-sex marriage, which is now legally recognised by the state. Those living an LGBT lifestyle want to be assured of God’s blessing upon their relationships.

Not Denying Difficulty

Of course, these decisions are extremely difficult because they involve people’s hearts, identities and lives. No Christian hates or wishes to hurt their friends or family who choose to pursue an LGBT lifestyle. However, we must all also consider the wider implications of their decisions upon the health and well-being of the whole of society.

I saw at first hand the cost to Dr Rowan Williams, then Archbishop of Canterbury, when he made the decision not to appoint Jeffrey John (who was openly gay) as Bishop of Reading. On the day before his meeting with Jeffrey John and Richard Harries, the Bishop of Oxford, I spent three hours with him in prayer and seeking the Lord.

It was an agonising decision for Rowan, not simply in terms of affirming biblical truth but because he had been friends with Jeffrey since college days and yet he knew that such an appointment could split the Church and have implications for the worldwide Anglican Communion. The wider repercussions of Church decisions are far-reaching and long-lasting even in this secular age when so much of our Judaeo-Christian heritage has been eroded.

Marriage is not just the ideal – it is the only form of sexual relationship between the genders that is acceptable in the sight of God.

It is a plain sociological fact, demonstrated by hundreds of research findings, that faithful loving marriage produces the healthiest form of society. It is also true that family breakdown has disastrous consequences - not only for individuals, both children and adults - but also for the physical and mental health and even the economic prosperity of wider society.

Members of the House of Clergy, meeting earlier this week. See Photo Credits.This Week’s Synod Vote

The situation faced by the Synod of the Church of England is complicated by three major factors:

• Biblical truth
  
• The pastoral care needed for individuals, and
  
• The demands of the LGBT lobby
  

All three are represented within both the hierarchy and the Synod of the Church of England. There is no easy path for the Synod, which is reflected in what happened this week when all  three groups had members who voted against the report presented by the House of Bishops. Despite upholding marriage as only being between a man and a woman, the report was also presented as "a stepping stone toward greater inclusiveness".¹

Evangelicals voted against it because it indicated a departure from Scripture. The LGBT members voted against it because it did not give them the full equality that they wanted; and other clergy voted against it because they have concerns for the people in their pastoral care.

The Church of England always wants to be a ’broad’ church that includes everyone – but the Bishops’ Report satisfied no-one. It was presented with lots of apologies which showed that the Bishops knew that it would not please anyone: it was just a fudge. But that is the very nature of a church that tries to be all things to all people!

The Church of England wants to be a ’broad’ church that includes everyone – but the Bishops’ Report satisfied no-one.

Reflecting Society?

The Rev Bertrand Olivier, who is a gay man, told the BBC that the Church needed to “reflect modern society”.² But that is the very thing that the Church must not do! Its mission is to declare the unchangeable word of the Living God and apply it to the changing times in which we live; however unpopular that may be. The Church must be different from secular society.

Archbishop Justin Welby called for “a radical new Christian inclusion”³ for homosexual Christians, which sounds very much as though he is advocating a Church that reflects modern society just as Bertrand Oliver wants.

But the Church is answerable to God for its teaching, not to human beings. The Church of England will continue to be divided so long as it tries to please everyone. Surely the only thing that should matter is the presentation of the unvarnished truth in a world where truth has disappeared, or has become ‘alternative facts’ or ‘fake news’.

The Prophet Isaiah provides a pinpoint description of our nation today. He says:

Justice is driven back, and righteousness stands at a distance; truth has stumbled in the streets, honestly cannot enter. Truth is nowhere to be found, and whoever shuns evil becomes a prey. (Isa 59:14-15)

Surely, what is most needed in the nation today is for a Church that does not follow popular trends in society, but sets an example to the nation by lovingly and fearlessly declaring the truth of the word of the Lord!

References

1 Church of England votes against gay marriage report. BBC News, 15 February 2017.

2 Ibid.

3 Ibid.

If we study the Bible to find the origin of the concept of ‘kingdom’, it seems to have begun as an idea of man more than of God. At the time of the Prophet Samuel, all other nations except Israel had formed kingdoms ruled by kings. Power was centralised. Men and women seemed to like to put all major responsibility for the nation into the hands of one person. In this way it saved them the trouble of taking responsibility for themselves, an attitude which has typified every generation of mankind.

Up until this point, however, Israel had not been like other nations, but come under the direct rule of God. When Israel rebelled and requested a human king like all the other nations, it caused both Samuel and God great sorrow.

A Different Kind of Rule

By contrast, when Adam and Eve were in the Garden of Eden their life was built on relationship with God. Creator God was the supreme authority - but not in the same way as the centralised control of worldly political systems, which still exists today as it has through all of history.

Thus, when we pray “Thy Kingdom come”, we must be careful to understand the intent of the prayer that Jesus had in mind, or our use of the word ‘kingdom’ may end up being a concession to the world’s way of thinking. But in heavenly terms, the word ‘kingdom’ does not have the same definition. Jesus will return and establish what is called a ‘Kingdom’, but he will not come and replace one worldly system with another of like kind. Only the antichrist will seek to do that.

The Kingdom to Come

We must wait and see, but I imagine that Jesus will establish a rule that is a perfect manifestation of Torah, such as we can hardly imagine at this time. This will also be a restoration of what was lost in Eden and be based on wonderful relationship. It will fulfil perfectly the teaching of Jesus that the Kingdom of Heaven is within us. He will be our supreme Head, and we will live in partnership with Him as a wife with a husband.

When we cast off these imperfect bodies and live with Him forever, not subject to the world and its temptations or to our tendency to slip into sin and lawlessness, all this will be perfectly established. It is called a ‘Kingdom’ and we will have a ‘King’ - but not in terms of the world’s understanding.

Praying for Jesus’ Return

Therefore, it is good for us to consider prayerfully what we are saying, when we pray “Thy Kingdom come”. In the short term, we are confined to live in the present world so our prayer is for the rule of the Holy Spirit in and through us.

In the long term, and this is more at the heart of our prayer in these current days than ever before, we are praying for the return of Jesus. We should read Psalm 2 as we reflect on this. We are approaching the time when all other kingdoms will be exposed for their errors and the time when they will all fall. We should also consider the shaking that will come upon the earth at that time, as Jesus prophesied when he taught the disciples on the Mount of Olives, shortly before His suffering on the Cross. This teaching is expanded in the Book of Revelation.

In praying “Thy Kingdom come”, we are praying for Jesus’ return and the shakings in the heavens and on the earth that will precede this.

Think on these things before you pray!

Author: Dr Clifford Denton

David Bivin considers Jesus’s background in the first of a two-part study.

It is rather surprising to discover how many Christians are not aware that Jesus is Jewish. In Israel, for example, there are entire communities of people – Christian, non-Jewish people - who do not believe that Jesus is Jewish.

A friend of mine was attending an Ulpan (a Hebrew language school) in Jerusalem. At one point in a conversation with a young Christian woman from Bethlehem who was also learning Hebrew, my friend said: “Well, you know Jesus was Jewish after all,” to which the woman replied, “He wasn't Jewish.” So my friend countered, “Well, go and ask your priest and see what he says.” She did not ask her priest, but went home and asked her parents. Her father said “Yes, she's right. He was Jewish.” But her mother said “No, he wasn't Jewish,” so it turned out to be a tie!

We might be very surprised to learn how many Christians have never really grasped the fact that Jesus was Jewish, not only in Israel but in Europe, Britain and in the United States. Christians still have difficulty in believing that Jesus was Jewish. So perhaps we have to say a few words about Jesus's Jewishness, even if it means stating the obvious.

It is rather surprising to discover how many Christians are not aware that Jesus is Jewish.  

Jesus’s Family

It is not hard to find evidence in the New Testament for Jesus's Jewishness. For example, his genealogy is clearly Jewish. In the gospels of Matthew and Luke, his lineage is traced back to the patriarchs in typical Jewish fashion.

Jesus's family was also completely Jewish. Joseph, the name of his earthly, supposed father, was the second most common name of the period for Jewish men, and his mother's name, Mary, was the most popular name for Jewish women.

Inscriptions dating from the 1^st Century indicate that the name Yeshua, Jesus, was itself the fifth most common Jewish man's name after Simeon, Joseph, Judah and John.

All of his known relatives were Jewish, namely Elizabeth (a relative of Mary's), her husband Zechariah the priest, and their son John the Baptist, as well, of course, as Jesus' own brothers, James, Joseph, Simeon and Judah (Matt 13:55).

Torah-Observant Parents

The gospels document the fact that Jesus and his family were observant Jews. Jesus was circumcised on the eighth day and, as is still the Jewish custom for male children, at his circumcision ceremony he was formally given his name (Luke 2:21).

His parents also performed two other Jewish ceremonies in Jerusalem during that time. The first of them was the pidyon ha-ben (the redemption of the first born), specified in Numbers 18:15-16 - which Joseph symbolically performed on Jesus' thirty-first day, by giving five silver coins to a priest.

The name Yeshua, Jesus, was the fifth most common Jewish man's name of its day.

The second took place on the forty-first day after Jesus's birth, when Mary performed the ceremony for her purification by bringing two offerings to the temple (Lev 12:8). The offering by Mary of two birds rather than a lamb would indicate that they were not a wealthy family (Luke 2:24).

Jesus’s parents, we are told, went up to Jerusalem every year to observe the Feast of Passover (Luke 2:41). This devotion is exemplary and unusual, because most people living outside Jerusalem (as they did) made a pilgrimage to the Temple only a few times in their lives, and some only once. Making such a pilgrimage was a major expense for people who had to pay for the cost of the journey, for the stay in Jerusalem, and for the sacrifices offered in the Temple during the festival.

Although the biblical commandment of Deuteronomy 16:16 states, “Three times a year all your men must appear before the Lord your God at the place he will choose; at the Feast of Unleavened Bread, the Feast of Weeks and the Feast of Tabernacles”, it was not interpreted literally by the rabbis of Jesus's time. Pilgrimage was encouraged by them but not made mandatory.

The fact that Jesus's parents went all the way to Jerusalem every year shows how obedient they were to the Torah of Moses. The evidence in the gospels indicates that Jesus was no less observant than his parents and that he went up regularly to Jerusalem for the Feasts (John 7:10, 12:12). It was while he was in Jerusalem for Passover that he was arrested.

Jesus's parents went all the way to Jerusalem every year, showing their obedience to the Torah of Moses.

Jesus the Rabbi

How did Jesus appear to the people of his time? How differently did they see him from the many other teachers (rabbis) who went around Judea and Galilee with their bands of disciples?
By the time Jesus began his public ministry he had received not only the thorough religious training typical of the average Jewish man of his day, but had probably spent years studying with one of the outstanding rabbis in the Galilee.

We cannot at this point detail that preparation, of which we know a great deal from rabbinic sources, but we know that Jesus, who did not begin his ministry until a rather mature age, appeared on the scene as a respected teacher or rabbi.

To understand the significance of the title 'rabbi', as applied to Jesus, one must first grasp the significance of a rabbi of the 1^st Century and how he functioned in that society.

The term ‘rabbi’ is derived from the Hebrew word rav which in biblical Hebrew means 'great.' Originally it was not used as a title or as a form of address. By Jesus's time, however, it was used to refer to the master of a slave or the master of a disciple, thus 'rabbi' literally meant 'my master' and was a term of respect.

It was not a formal title, but was used to address a teacher and Jesus was recognised as such by his contemporaries, as many passages in the New Testament illustrate: “Jesus answered him, ‘Simon, I have something to tell you.’ ‘Tell me, rabbi,’ he said” (Luke 7:40). And, “A lawyer asked him a question to test him: ‘Rabbi, which Is the greatest commandment in the Torah?’” (Matt 22:35-36). Also, “A rich man asked him, ‘Rabbi, what good thing must I do to inherit eternal life?’" (Luke 16:16).

We should note the diversity of those who addressed Jesus as 'rabbi': a Torah expert, a rich man, and a Pharisee. Other scriptures illustrate that the Sadducees and ordinary people were part of a broad cross-section of people in Jesus's day who saw him as a rabbi.

Many scriptures illustrate that a broad cross-section of people in Jesus's day saw him as a rabbi.

Teaching Style

From the gospel accounts, Jesus clearly appears as a typical 1^st Century rabbi. He travelled around from place to place in an itinerant ministry, depending for food and shelter upon the hospitality of the people.

He did much of his teaching outdoors, but he also taught in homes and in village synagogues. He even taught in the Temple in Jerusalem, and was accompanied by a band of disciples who followed him around as he travelled.

Perhaps the most convincing proof that Jesus was a practising rabbi was his style of teaching. He used the same methods of instruction that characterised the rabbis of his day, such as the use of parables to convey teaching. The sort of parables that Jesus used were extremely common among the rabbis of 1^st Century Israel and over 4,000 of them have survived in rabbinic literature.

It is significant, perhaps, that among the thousands of parables to be found in rabbinic literature, not one is written in Aramaic; all are in Hebrew. Even when, a few hundred years later (500 to 600 AD), the main texts are written in Aramaic, the parable is always given in Hebrew.

Jesus’s Observation of the Law

There can be no doubt that Jesus observed the written law of Moses in its entirety. The New Testament clearly states that, having been born under the law, he committed no sin (Heb 4:15). Jesus was never charged with breaking any part of the written law, although his disciples were occasionally accused of disobeying aspects of the oral law.

Only one such accusation was brought against Jesus, and this was, of course, that he broke the Sabbath by healing the sick. In fact, Sabbath healings were permitted under official rabbinic ruling, so the only way we can understand this protest is to see it as the response of a narrow-minded ruler of a local synagogue.

There can be no doubt that Jesus observed the written law of Moses in its entirety.

Perhaps at this point we need to understand that in Jesus' day the Pharisees (with whom Jesus had more in common in belief and teaching than the Sadducees) believed in two 'versions' of the law.

First, they believed in the written law (the Torah, the five books of Moses), but they also believed in a second law (called the oral law), which they said had also been given to Moses by God on Mount Sinai and handed down through the generations by word of mouth. So perhaps a more pertinent question to ask is to what extent Jesus observed the practices of the oral law.

On Baptism

There may seem, at first glance, to be a shortage of hard evidence in the New Testament concerning Jesus' religious observance. But one must remember that the New Testament was written by Jews, for Jews. The normal Jewish religious practices were so well-known to the writers and to the readers that it would have been considered superfluous, perhaps ridiculous, to explain in detail how particular commandments were carried out.

That is why, for example, we have such a dearth of information in the scriptures about the practice of Jewish baptism. This was not conducted as we Christians do it today, but as the Jews still do it.

The earliest representation of Christian baptism in the catacombs in Rome shows John the Baptist standing fully clothed on the bank extending an arm to Jesus, who is undressed, coming up out of the water. John is helping him up the bank. So the one who was baptised or 'immersed' was not dipped under the water by some officiating minister, but rather walked down into the water alone, gave his testimony and dipped himself, just as it is still done today in every Jewish mikveh (ritual immersion bath).

The person officiating was there only to give his or her stamp of kashrut (official approval), to make certain that the hair of ladies, for instance, was completely immersed.

On Using God’s Name

Another example of Jesus's obedience to Scripture is his adherence to the rabbinic prohibition against using the unutterable name of God. The original understanding of the third commandment, “You shall not misuse the name of the Lord your God” (Ex 20:7), was probably that one should be careful not to break one's vows when one has sworn in God's name. However, the rabbis eventually came to interpret this commandment to include using the Lord's name frivolously or lightly. To avoid the risk of employing the divine name irreverently, the rabbis ruled that one should not utter it at all.

Jesus seemingly adhered to the rabbinic prohibition against using the unutterable name of God.

The divine name, written as the yod hay vav hay (YHVH) and called the ‘tetragrammaton’, could be pronounced only in the Temple, in the daily priestly blessing, and in the confession of the high priest on the Day of Atonement. When reading or reciting Scripture, one was not to pronounce the unutterable name but rather had to substitute with Adonai (Lord). In time, this substitute name of Adonai itself came to have such a sacred aura that it was used only in Scripture reading and prayer.

When it was necessary to refer to God in everyday speech, one sought other substitutes or euphemisms such as ha-Makom (the Place); ha-Kadosh (the Holy); ha-Gavohah (the High); ha-Lashon (the Tongue); ha-Gevurah (the Power); Shamayim (Heaven); ha-Shem (the Name). Even the less distinctive Elohim (God), which could refer to the God of Israel or to false gods, was avoided in conversation.

So serious was the prohibition against pronouncing the tetragrammaton that the rabbis included among those that have no share in the world to come, “He who pronounces the divine name as it is spelled.” The avoidance of the tetragrammaton began quite early, although there was no hesitation in pronouncing the sacred name in the Old Testament period. In the time of David, everyone went around saying YHVH (however they pronounced it), but already by the 3^rd Century BC, Adonai was being substituted for the yod hay vav hay (YHVH).

Jesus frequently used euphemisms for God, and his audiences would have been shocked if he had not. The most common word for God used by Jesus was 'Heaven'. This occurs, for example, in the phrase 'Kingdom of Heaven', the term Jesus used to describe his community of disciples, or his movement.

Jesus frequently used euphemisms for God, and his audiences would have been shocked if he had not.

To those in the Temple who questioned his authority, Jesus asked: “John's baptism - was it from heaven, or from men?” (Luke 20:4). In other words, was John's baptism of God or of men? In the parable of the prodigal son, Jesus had the prodigal say to his father, “I have sinned against heaven” (Luke 15:21). As for making oaths, Jesus commanded his disciples not to swear at all, not even using substitutes for God's name such as Shamayim (Heaven).

One other euphemism for God's name used by Jesus was ha-Gevurah (the Power). When interrogated by the High Priest, Jesus was asked for an admission that he was the Messiah. His answer was a classic example of rabbinic sophistication: “From now on, the Son of Man will be seated at the right hand of the mighty God.” (Luke 22:69). This proclamation hints at two different Messianic passages, Daniel 7:13 and Psalm 110:1: “Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet.”

To be continued in Part II, next week.

Paul Luckraft reviews ‘One Flesh’ by Peter Sammons (2012).

This very readable and accessible book sets out the biblical perspective on marriage and male-female relationships generally. Taking its title from Genesis 2:24 (which Jesus endorses in Matthew 19:5), the main theme is the uniting of the two genders according to God’s purposes.

The author’s aim is for his readers to get “a clearer idea of how God wants them to live out their lives as regards the opposite sex”, adding that “we will see some pitfalls to avoid and discover some principles which, if adopted, will help us to make good and healthy choices for the way we live our lives and with whom we share them” (p12).

This is no starry-eyed approach to what can be a difficult topic, both in theory and in practice. Living ‘happily ever after’ may be the hope and dream but reality is often very different, and the author is well aware of the hurts and disappointments that can occur in the pursuit of one of life’s main blessings. He tackles very sensitively the risks and rewards of entering into marriage and explains well the enormous responsibilities that such a lifelong commitment carries with it.

This is no starry-eyed approach to what can be a difficult topic.

Soul Mates?

One interesting point is where he discusses the modern idea of a soul mate. Sammons asserts that “the Bible in no place so much as hints at such an idea” (p48). He adds that this concept owes much to the New Age movement and actually has pagan roots. He states that Scripture “gives us no indication at all that there is only one person in all eternity that we might marry”, which he describes as “extremely liberating” (p48). In principle, happiness can be found with any one of many people, if both partners are prepared to work at building a life together. It should be added, however, that the author is clear that once a marriage takes place, there is then only one partner while each is alive.

One good section of the book is the account of the ‘true love story’ of Isaac and Rebecca, from which the author draws several godly principles.

Further scriptural passages given lengthy treatments include the romance between Ruth and Boaz and, inevitably perhaps, the Song of Songs. In these cases the author brings out the clear distinction between the Hebraic mindset on such matters and that portrayed by Greek thinkers, such as Plato and Augustine, which has so influenced Western culture.

The Definition and Purpose of Marriage

It is not until we get halfway through the book that the author attempts a biblical definition of marriage (too lengthy to quote here), the main point being to contrast it with a legal dictionary definition (even lengthier!) where it is called a contract rather than the more biblically accurate description of marriage as a covenant.

Interestingly, Sammons asserts that the first task of marriage is to banish loneliness, and only of secondary significance is that it enables a man and woman to join with God in the process of creation of new life.

Legally marriage is a contract, but the more biblically accurate description of marriage is a covenant.

Also at this halfway point, we are given a fuller understanding of the meaning of ‘one flesh’ which is too often assumed to refer primarily, or even exclusively, to sexual union. Sammons suggests the phrase in Genesis means much more, namely “to become a single functioning unit that draws its strength from itself. Being one flesh entails the complete identification of one personality with the other in a community of interests and pursuits, a union that is consummated in the act of physical unity” (p93). Much to ponder there!

Tricky Issues

As well as explaining the ‘leaving and cleaving’ aspect of becoming ‘one flesh’, the author also touches on the related topics of singleness and polygamy. Furthermore, he does not shirk the tricky issues of male headship, cohabitation and divorce, all of which he approaches with sensitivity yet firm convictions. It is also pleasing to note that he has stern words for those who promote sexual experimentation under the guise of sex education.

Boy meets girl – it happens all the time. But then what? Writers and musicians down the centuries have depicted many scenarios that could follow, often with less-than-happy consequences. The Bible never claims that marriage is easy, or that it will be a bed of thornless roses. But, Sammons believes, “the genius of marriage is that it provides a wonderful medium for love to grow…love is not so much the basis for marriage, but rather marriage is the basis for love” (p162).

Sexual sin may or may not be the worst form of sin, but its consequences can be more far-reaching than most. In this area of life, as in all others, Christians will want to live by godly standards but, as Sammons points out, “we are up against a powerful alliance of enemies: our own natural inclinations, the propaganda of the world, and the propaganda of the devil” (p101-102). We will have a better chance to stand against ‘the world, the flesh and the devil’ after reading this book.

One Flesh (171 pages, Glory to Glory Publications) is available from the publisher for £9.99 inc. P&P, or for free as a downloadable e-book. Also available on Amazon.