For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God:
for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.
- 1 Corinthians 14:2 (KJV)

From several places in this Bible verse we see that there do exist unknown tongues as the gift of tongues. Although, the word “unknown” in the above passage is italicized which means it is not in the original text, we can yet tell quite well that these tongues are unknown. Like other italicized words, this word is placed there to make English sence and logic of the passage.

There are those who are uncomfortable with “unknown tongues”, but cannot Biblically prove that spiritual gifts ended with the early church. So, a new doctrine gets embraced. They now say that they believe in the gift of tongues but say it is only a KNOWN tongue, further saying that the italicized word “unknown” in 1 Corinthians 14:2 is wrong. They will say that Acts chapter 2 is the only clear Biblical example of tongues which are only known tongues.

Insistence that the gift of tongues is only a known tongue is foolish for it is not a doctrine that holds up in the light of the Holy Scriptures. Let us compare the passage on tongues in Acts chapter 2 with 1 Corinthians chapter 14 verse 2…

Those who spoke in tongues in Acts 2 spoke unto men. 1 Corinthians 14:2 says that speaking in a tongue does not speak unto men but unto God.

There were those who heard the tongues on Pentecost who did understand the tongues. The Corinthians passage says that no man understands him who speaks in a tongue.

In Acts 2:11, it was no mystery to the hearers of tongues who confessed, “We do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.” They said it was in their own languages. 1st Corinthians says that he who speaks in tongues speaks mysteries.

Yes, the gift of tongues can come as a known tongue as seen in the second chapter of Acts. However, it is evidently clear that the tongues spoken of in Corinthians is not referring to the same kind of tongues as in Acts 2. 1st Corinthians shows tongues as being unknown. Other Bible passages show that unknown tongues may only be understood by the spiritual gift of interpretation which is not the same as human translation. The italicized word “unknown” in the Corinthians passage was well placed and accurate to the meaning of the text. The Bible’s true revelation of the “tongues of men and of angels” as said in 1 Corinthians 13:1, by far, does not solely rest on the word “unknown” in a passage that already makes quite clear that the tongues are unknown.

This “known tongue only” doctrine is a watering down of the Word of God and was a concocted and half-baked method in order dispute charismatic Christians about what they themselves do not understand. Such people who formulate doctrines in order to refute what they do not wish to believe from the Scriptures are not rightly dividing the word of God. Unknown tongues is not the only Bible teaching that gets criticized by these people. Commonly, they will criticize the affectivity and reality of other gifts as well. We should not be deceived by those who have a form of godliness but deny its power. In the Holy Bible we are exhorted to desire spiritual gifts.

For more on the topic of signs and wonders, please see our page titled, “Confirming the word with signs following“.

The New International Version says this about the about the passage …

[The most reliable early manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-20]

The earliest manuscripts available and other witnesses may not have this ending of Mark. However, Irenaeus (120-202 A.D.) mentioned in his writing “Irenaeus Against Heresies”, chapter X…

Also, towards the conclusion of his Gospel, Mark says: “So then after the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, He was received up into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of God;” confirming what had been spoken by the prophet: “The LORD said to my Lord, Sit Thou on My right hand, until I make Thy foes Thy footstool.”

It needs to be considered that the early manuscripts may not really be the most reliable. We find that the most relied on and used manuscript evidence was what was used in the King James Version translation. Hence the reason why these later manuscripts were so much more widely accepted and abundantly copied. Undoubtedly, discussion will go on about this topic.

Introduction

This brief paper can only touch the surface of the evidence for the authenticity and reliability of the Gospels. For the interested party desiring more, I would suggest starting with some of the sources in the References section. In particular, Josh McDowell’s The New Evidence that Demands a Verdict is comprehensive and possesses a large bibliography to other works. For easy reading, his More Than a Carpenter is an excellent overview of the evidence for the truth of Biblical Christianity. For a readable, scholarly look at the reliability of the New Testament documents, see The New Testament Documents, by F. F. Bruce. More than anything, I refer the reader to the documents themselves.

There is historical evidence for the authenticity of all of the New Testament. This paper will be limited in its scope to the Gospel accounts, as these accounts form the core of the narrative regarding the Person of Jesus Christ and the events that transpired surrounding him in the first three decades of the first century. It is my conviction that the outside historical evidence can lead a person to consider the claims of the truth about Christ, but that it is the documents themselves that are the most compelling evidence. It is the actual reading of these documents that compels one to become convinced of their truth and genuineness. For the serious seeker, it is insufficient to peruse occasional passages throughout the Gospels and make a judgment. Too many argue for the a priori impossibility of the Gospel accounts being true, having never read their contents. When one does so, one begins to see the non-contrived historical nature of the accounts, as well as a nature of teaching and organization suggestive of an origin greater than of ourselves. As the Scripture says, “So then faith [comes] by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.” ₁

Philosophical Assumptions

When we speak of authenticity, we are looking at such matters as the dating and authorship of the Gospels being what they claim to be. Reliability refers to the trustworthiness of the witnesses and their accounts of the events they claim to have seen. Evidence of divine origin is related to this, for if the writers’ witness to the resurrection of Jesus Christ is reliable, then the claims made by him are true. Included in those claims is that the Holy Spirit, whom we call the third person of the Trinity, would remind the disciples of all that Jesus had said and would teach them all the things they needed to know. ₂ The Gospel accounts, then, would be the product of God working through men. The nature of the accounts themselves is also evidence of reliability, if in their content and teachings they bear the stamp of divine origin.

In approaching the historical evidence for authenticity, it is necessary to look at the historical record impartially. One must consider the Gospel accounts as one would look at any ancient document. ₃ It is not proper, nor will it lead to truth, to assume that the accounts are biased because they are “religious” in nature. First, this assumption is based on a false distinction prevalent today between the secular and religious; whether an event is true is to be tested in reality. Second, the fact that the Gospel authors were close to the events that they describe and therefore came to believe in them does not disqualify them; rather it gives them extra credence in their witness to these events. ₄ One cannot arrive at truth by affirming the documents to be “religious” and assuming that they are therefore unreliable; they must be tested on their merits alone. In general, to get at the truth, one cannot approach this subject from an epistemologically or historically skeptical position. Absolute knowledge is not possible, but real knowledge is. The evidence must be weighed. One must come to a conclusion from the whole weight of the evidence.

Finally, one cannot assume an anti-supernatural bias. If one starts with the assumption that there is not a God who can do miracles, one cannot look objectively at the historical evidence and testimony. It is better to reserve judgment and consider the testimony of history.

The Testimony of the Hebrew Scriptures

We will start in our examination of the Gospels with the Old Testament documents’ testimony to the New Testament writings. It is well accepted that the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament, was in existence in the first or second century before Christ. This document translates the Hebrew Scriptures, therefore validating their existence well before the time of Christ. Included in these Scriptures that go back to the second millennium B.C. are multiple prophecies about the very events the Gospel writers claim to have witnessed. These prophecies are very specific. A son would be born to us in Bethlehem (Micah 5) who would be human but also God Himself in the flesh (Isaiah 9). This man would be crucified (Psalm 22), would die for our sins, be buried, and raised from the dead (Isaiah 53). This man, on the cross, would be offered vinegar to drink, his garments would be divided by lot, and not one of his bones would be broken. Further, this man would be a Messiah, an Anointed Prince, and would appear before the destruction of the second Temple (in 70 A.D.) Since the Gospel writers claim that all this and more was specifically fulfilled, we are dealing in their accounts with either truthful testimony, a deliberate deception, or a mythology that developed later about the Person of Christ. One must examine the evidence and decide which it is.

The Testimony of History

Sources from church writers as well as outside historians support the historicity of the Gospel events as well as the early dating and genuine authorship of the documents.

Dating of the Gospels

Some historians have placed the Gospel documents as written in the second century, although by the twentieth century most had placed them in the first century. ₅ If very late dates are true, this is not supportive of reliable historical accounts, being too far removed from the events that transpired and indicative of authorship by pseudonymous writers claiming to be actual eyewitnesses. Conversely, if earlier dates are true, it is excellent evidence that the Gospel accounts are neither a fraud nor a mythology. People living at the time would not have believed accounts that were patently untrue according to common knowledge; the Gospel would not have flourished. The scholar F. F. Bruce points to the writers’ repeated claims to be “witnesses of these things” and writes, “Had there been any tendency to depart from the facts in any material respect, the possible presence of hostile witnesses in the audience would have served as a further corrective.” ₆ It is the same situation as if a  rumor were circulating today that President Kennedy had risen from the dead. I was about 11 years old when the news of his death was announced, and I remember those events well. It is now 41 years later, and I would in no way believe it. Many did believe in the resurrection of Christ, and those who did not could not refute the reality of the empty tomb and no body to be found.

What is the evidence for the authorship of the Gospels earlier than the second century? First there is content. The level of detail of geography and culture and political conditions given by the Gospel writers is suggestive of an earlier authorship, and such details would not have been available to later writers. Charles E. Raven dates the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) before the year 70 based on content: “The general habit of placing the Synoptic Gospels in the period A.D. 70 –100 is inexplicable; for the evidence is weaker than the objections. They reflect a time before the scattering of the Palestinian Church and the dispersion of the local and conservative community, a time utterly unlike the age of experiment and syncretism which followed Nero’s persecution and the sack of Jerusalem.” ₇

Second, there is the evidence that these Gospels were quoted and used at an early date. Clement of Rome flourished around the years 90 – 100 ₈; he was a disciple of the apostles, according to early church writers Origen, Tertullian, and Irenaeus. He quoted from Matthew, Mark, and Luke, supporting both that these documents were circulating in his time and that the authors were indeed as claimed. Ignatius (c. 70 – c. 98/117) was bishop of Antioch and knew the apostles well. He wrote seven epistles quoting from Matthew and John, as well as other New Testament writings. ₉ Polycarp (c. 70 – c.155/160), a disciple of John, quotes the Gospel of John before the year 117 A.D. ₁₀ Time must also be allowed for the writing,
manual copying, and dissemination of the documents. ₁₁ From this and much more evidence, conservative scholars assign first-century dates.

Some of this conservative dating is as follows. Everett Harrison places Matthew from 70 –80, Mark from 50- 60, Luke in the early 60’s, and John from 80 –100. ₁₂ F. F. Bruce dates Matthew shortly after 70, Mark c. 64 – 65, Luke shortly before 70, and John, c. 90 – 100. ₁₃ Professor Richard Riss associates the dates with particular events in history: Mark during the reign of Claudius from 41 –54 when Mark and Paul were in Rome; Luke during Paul’s imprisonment in Caesarea from 58 – 60; Matthew in the Greek translation from 60 – 70; and John while he was in Ephesus from 85 – 90. ₁₄ John A.T. Robinson concludes that all the Gospels were written before the year 70 A.D. ₁₅

Authorship of the Gospels

If the writers of the four Gospels were eyewitnesses of the events surrounding Jesus, or close associates of eyewitnesses, this would be strong evidence for the reliability of the documents they wrote. The names given to the Gospels by church tradition reflect their authorship, and there is strong evidence of the accuracy of the tradition. The Gospel of Matthew was written by Matthew, a Jewish tax collector in Palestine who became a disciple of Jesus. The Gospel of John was written by John, a fisherman who also became a disciple. The Gospel of Mark was written by Mark, an associate of the disciple Peter. The Gospel of Luke was written by Luke, a physician and historian and associate of the Apostle Paul. (Paul’s claim to eyewitness status was that he saw, by direct revelation, the resurrected Messiah Jesus after his ascension into heaven.)

Historical sources support Matthew, Mark, Luke and John as being the authors of their Gospels. One source is Eusebius, the church historian who wrote his Ecclesiastical History around 325 A.D. ₁₆ He quotes Irenaeus, who was bishop of Lyons in Gaul and flourished around 175 – 195. ₁₇ Irenaeus speaks of being a student of Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna, who was in turn a disciple of John. In his work Against Heresies, Irenaeus says the following: “Matthew published his Gospel among the Hebrews (i.e. Jews) in their own tongue, when Peter and Paul were preaching the gospel in Rome and founding the church there. After their departure (i.e., their death, which strong tradition places at the time of the Neronian persecution in 64), Mark the disciple and interpreter of Peter, himself handed down to us in writing the substance of Peter’s preaching. Luke, the follower of Paul, set down in a book the gospel preached by his teacher. Then John, the disciple of the Lord, who also leaned on His breast (this is a reference to John 13:25 and 21:20), himself produced his Gospel, while he was living at Ephesus in Asia.” ₁₈ Here we have a disciple of a disciple of John confirming the authorship of the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. (It is as if I were relating how my father told me that my grandfather told him that such and such a thing had happened; there would be a high degree of confidence in the accuracy of my material, with only two degrees of separation). Some additional evidence for each book follows.

Mark

Additional information regarding the authorship of Mark is given by Eusebius when he quotes Papias, c. 60 – 130, who was bishop of Hierapolis and a disciple of the Apostle John. Papias was said to be a “hearer of John” by Irenaeus ₁₉. In Eusebius, Papius quotes the Elder, possibly another disciple of John, but probably John himself, as saying “Mark, having been the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately all that he [Peter] mentioned, whether sayings or doings of Christ; not, however, in order. For he was neither a hearer nor companion of the Lord; but afterwards, as I said, he accompanied Peter, who adapted his teachings as necessity required, not as though he were making a compilation of the sayings of the Lord. So then Mark made no mistake, writing down in this way some things as he [Peter] mentioned them; for he paid attention to this one thing, not to omit anything that he had heard, nor to include any false statement among them.” ₂₀

Matthew

Additional evidence for the authorship of Matthew is also provided by Eusebius quoting Papias quoting the elder John (probably John), “Matthew compiled the Logia in the “Hebrew” speech [i.e. Aramaic], and every one translated them as best he could.” sub>21 The word Logia literally means oracles ₂₂, and may refer to the Gospel of Matthew itself in an earlier Aramaic version (the extant one is Greek), ₂₃ or to an early compilation of the Lord Jesus’ sayings used as source material for the Gospels. ₂₄ The word “translated” can also be rendered as “interpreted”. ₂₅

Luke

In addition to the quote from Irenaeus above, evidence for the Gospel of Luke being written by Luke draws from his companion work, the Acts of the Apostles.  Both are formatted as an orderly account of the events they address. The styles are closely related. Acts makes references to a former account of all that Jesus did and taught. The two are clearly the work of one author. As to the identity of the author, the book of Acts contains many “we” passages in the midst of “they” passages that place the author with the Apostle Paul on various occasions. By a process of elimination of candidates who traveled with Paul, the remaining candidate who could have written Acts, and thus also the Gospel of Luke, was Luke. ₂₆

John

In addition to the initial quote by Irenaeus, several fragments support John as the author of his Gospel. One is a prologue that was added to the beginning of the book at the end of the second century to defend against the heretic Marcion, and is thus called the anti-Marcionite prologue. It says, “The Gospel of John was published and given to the churches by John when he was still in the body, as a man of Hierapolis, Papias by name, John’s dear disciple, has related in his five Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, as quoted in The New Testament Documents, p.32 The New Testament Documents, p. 35 In addition, the Rylands Fragment is a fragment of a copy of the Gospel of John dating to about 135 A.D. It was found in an isolated area in Egypt, and thus it must have taken several decades before that time for the Gospel to be copied and circulated as far as this place. This argues not only for the early dating of John, but also the authenticity of its authorship. ₂₈

Outside Historical Evidence of the Gospel Events

Historians outside of the church provide data that supports the authenticity of the events recorded by the Gospels, and so, indirectly, supports the authenticity of the documents. They are of interest, but should be considered as of secondary value compared to the documents themselves ₂₉ and the primary church sources supporting them.

Some of these include ₃₀:

1) The Roman historian Tacitus says “Christus…suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilate”
2) The Jewish historian Josephus speaks of Jesus and his crucifixion under Pilate. The exact wording of the passage is disputed, but probably some form of it is genuine.
3) Josephus also speaks of Jesus as the brother of James and speaks of James’ martyrdom
4) Josephus speaks of John the Baptist, a major figure in the Gospel records.
5) Pliny the Younger, a roman administrator, writes to the Emperor Trajan about the Christians in the year 112 and indirectly confirms their worship of Jesus as God.
6) The Jewish commentary, the Talmud, in the passage Sanhedrin 43a, says “On the eve of Passover Yeshu was hanged”. Although the Talmud
wrongly accuses Jesus of sorcery, it acknowledges the fact of his miracles.
7) Lucian of Samosata, a second-century critic of Christianity, acknowledges Christian worship of the man Jesus.
8} Heretical groups such as the Gnostics of the second century acknowledge Jesus and use the Gospels as a starting point.

The Testimony of The Gospels Themselves

It is valid to consider internal evidence from the Gospel records themselves. Do they appear contrived or authentic? Are they consistent? Do they appear to be real testimony of eyewitnesses, or the writings of authors distant from the events described? These are the kinds of questions we must ask to arrive at a reasonable conclusion concerning their reliability. These kinds of things are not subject to deductive analysis or scientific verification, and yet they are knowable.

When I read these documents, I find that the narrative flows very naturally. In each case, I get the sense of a person describing events that they have seen, or events that have been closely related to them. John, for example, describes his reaction to Jesus over the years he walked with him: “And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we beheld his glory, the glory of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.” ₃₁ In concluding the writing, he says “This is the disciple who testifies of these things; and we know that his testimony is true.” Mark, who wrote down the reminiscences of Peter (also called Simon), speaks as one who has heard the events from a participant. For example, in a down-to-earth touching passage where Simon’s influence shows through, Mark says, “But Simon’s wife’s mother lay sick with a fever, and they told Him about her at once. So he came and took her by the hand and lifted her up, and immediately the fever left her. And she served them”. ₃₂ The Gospels record many such very real details that would not be included in documents contrived for some sheer doctrinal purpose.

They do not appear contrived at all. The authors admit their own foibles, rather than trying to cover them up. Mark is very possibly the young man who fled at the arrest of Jesus. Peter, the man behind Mark, gives to Mark the very real account of his denial of Jesus and how he wept when the cock crowed and he realized what he had done. Far from trying to cover up the weaknesses of their group, the writers expose their failures in faith, the infighting that cropped up, and the disciples’ fleeing after the crucifixion of their Lord. They admit their initial unbelief at the resurrection of Jesus. And they honestly relate the testimony of the women as the first witnesses, contrary to what a contriver would have done in a culture where female testimony was considered immaterial. They in fact touchingly describe how the women who followed Jesus were the faithful ones who remained at the foot of the cross.

The accounts are consistent, and yet show the variations in point of view that would be expected of true testimony. When witnesses sit down and conspire together to give testimony in court, the testimony invariably comes out stilted and repetitive from one witness to another. Here there is no need to contrive, for each person saw, or had related to him, the events and sayings of Jesus.

Many have claimed contradictions among the Gospels, but upon further study these prove to be only apparent. In the play “Waiting for Godot”, Samuel Beckett makes much of the fact that Matthew says both of the two robbers crucified with Jesus reviled him, ₃₃ while Luke records one of the robbers as trusting in Jesus. ₃₄ Beckett did not leave room for repentance and the grace of God, for even while on the cross, one of the robbers at first reviled the Lord, then changed his mind about his own sin and put his trust in Christ. The Pharisees rejected Jesus as Messiah in some part because they knew the Messiah would not come out of Nazareth; had they looked more deeply, had they wanted to, they would have discovered that Jesus was born in Bethlehem, the city of the coming King. By looking more deeply, we can answer apparent contradictions, and can have a confidence that the documents are inherently consistent among themselves.

Details are given that are very consistent with authors familiar with Jerusalem and Palestine in the first century. The awareness of the governmental and high priestly structure, the descriptions of the Temple and its courts and the Pool of Siloam, knowledge of the Sanhedrin and the Jewish culture of the day, the physical layout of Galilee and Jerusalem and its streets, puts one in the times of Jesus as one walks through these Gospels. And in fact, it is essential to understand that the redemption of mankind was accomplished in a particular time in history, in a particular place, by a particular Person. No other faith in the world is so intimately tied to a person and the events surrounding him. Thankfully, God has provided four witnesses to testify to us of these things so that we can know the truth of them.

Conclusion

So what do we have? Four documents that were written soon after the events they describe, by people who were either eyewitnesses or close to eyewitnesses, and that speak clearly in an uncontrived manner about what they describe. “To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.” (Isaiah 8:30). I encourage those who would investigate these things to go to the testimony of the Gospels and consider their message.

¹ Romans 10:17

² John 14:26

³ The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict, p. 68

⁴ Ibid, p. 54, quoting Norman L. Geisler in Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics, p. 381

⁵ “Date and Authenticity of the New Testament”, p. 59

⁶ The New Testament Documents, p. 43

⁷ C.E. Raven, Jesus and the Gospel of Love, p. 128, as quoted by Professor Richard Riss in the web piece
“Date and Authenticity of the New Testament”, p. 59

⁸ The Dictionary of the Christian Church, p. 235

⁹ The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict, p. 44

¹⁰ “Date and Authenticity of the New Testament”, p. 64

¹¹ A Survey of the New Testament, p. 256

¹² The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict, p. 52

¹³ The New Testament Documents, p. 7

¹⁴ New Testament timeline

¹⁵ Redating the New Testament, p. 352, 353

¹⁶ Dictionary of the Christian Church, p. 356

¹⁷ Ibid, p. 516

¹⁸ Irenaeus, Against Heresies, as quoted in The New Evidence that Demands a Verdict, p. 54

¹⁹ Dictionary of the Christian Church, p. 746

²⁰ Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, as quoted in The New Testament Documents, p.32

²¹ The New Testament Documents, p. 35

²² Ibid

²³ A Survey of the New Testament, p. 160

²⁴ The New Testament Documents, p. 35

²⁵ A Survey of the New Testament, p. 160

²⁶ A Survey of the New Testament, p. 208

²⁷ The New Testament Documents, p. 50

²⁸ A Survey of the New Testament, p. 256

²⁹ Norman L. Geisler in Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics, p. 381, as quoted by The New
Evidence That Demands a Verdict, p. 55

³⁰ The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict, pp. 54 – 59

³¹ John 1:14

³² Mark 1:30,31

³³ Matthew 27:44

³⁴ Luke 23:41,42

References

Holy Bible, The New King James Version, c. 1982, Thomas Nelson, Inc.,
Nashville, TN.

Bruce, F.F., The New Testament Documents, c. 1981, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids,
MI. and Intervarsity Press, Downers Grove, IL.

Douglas, J.D., and Cairns, Earle E., Editors, The New International Dictionary of
the Christian Church, c. 1978, Zondervan, Grand Rapids, MI.

Gundry, Robert H., A Survey of the New Testament, c. 2003, Zondervan, Grand
Rapids, MI.

McDowell, Josh, The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict, c. 1999, Thomas
Nelson Publishers, Nashville, TN.

Riss, Richard, “Date and Authenticity of the New Testament”,

Riss, Richard, New Testament timeline, New Testament Survey course, 2004,
Somerset Christian College, Zarephath, New Jersey

Robinson, John A.T., Redating the New Testament, c. 1976, Wipf and Stock
Publishers, Eugene, OR.

The Barbarian Way: Unleash the Untamed Faith Within
by Erwin Raphael McManus

Two thousand years later the call to follow Christ has been repackaged to be smooth and trouble-free, filled with opportunity and promise but lacking risk, passion, and sacrifice. Is this really what Jesus died for? If He chose the way of the cross, where would He hesitate leading us? Is it possible that to follow Jesus is to choose the barbarian way?

Jesus never made a pristine call to a proper or safe religion. Jesus beckons His followers to a path that is far from the easy road. It is a path filled with adventure, uncertainty, and unlimited possibilities―the only path that can fulfill the deepest longings and desires of your heart.

This is the barbarian way: to give your heart to the only One who can make you fully alive. To love Him with simplicity and intensity. To unleash the untamed faith within. To be consumed by the presence of a passionate and compassionate God. To go where He sends you, no matter the cost.

Comments by Maverick Christians…

We find this book of good encouragement to follow the Lord in passionate desire for Him as true disciples. In the Scriptures, Jesus is quite clear about the cost of living life as a true disciple of Christ. Still, we find that this understanding has often been lost in the modern church of Jesus Christ. We are, therefore, glad for this book.

Please note, however, that the book’s author is a leader within the Emergent Church movement. The Emergent movement has the tendency to water down the gospel by contextualizing which we find is not being rooted and ground in the faith that was once for all delivered to the believers in Jesus.

As Maverick Christians, it is not our pursuit to cling to error or to favor one error over another. We should not adhere to undue conservative attitudes. Yet still, we should not seek for mere modern contextualizing of the gospel in relativism. We believe that proper emphasis of the fundamental doctrines of Christianity, which are taught in the Holy Bible, comes about as a result from true and bold passion for Christ. This passion is not found in or resulting in an exploration of mysticism nor of post-modern thought.

If we have true passion for the true God, we will be faithful to Christ’s teachings not wishy-washy about them in either our faith or our conduct. Christian faith is founded in the truth of Christ. Neither liberalism nor conservatism can rightly replace Bible fundamentalism and should never be used as substitutes for God’s Holy Word. Jesus is the Rock of our salvation. Yes! Unleash untamed faith in Jesus Christ! Be sure to do so in Spirit and in Truth.

For an exposé on the Emergent Movement, please see this video…The Real Roots of the Emergent Church.

Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
- 2 Timothy 2:15 (NKJV)

When telling others the gospel of Jesus Christ undoubtely you will face, at one time or another and perhaps very often, those who will dispute your faith and engage in conversation with you.  It is not necessary for the conversation to be heated.  Speak the truth in the love as the Bible says.  Arguing is frequently the way unbelievers will search out to find if faith in Jesus Christ is for real.  Therefore, be prepared.

If you intend to share your faith in Jesus, it is important for you to know what true faith in Jesus is. Therefore, be firm in your understanding of basis Christian doctrines, such as the Trinity of God, the virgin birth and Incarnate Deity of Jesus Christ, the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, blood atonement through Jesus Christ, salvation by grace solely through faith in God’s Son Jesus.

Being familiar with basic proofs of Christianity and how to explain them becomes important, too. Such as the existance of God, the inerrancy of the Holy Scriptures, and the historicity of Jesus Christ.

But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts, and always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear;
- 1 Peter 3:15 (NKJV)

Your Christian testimony is powerful, because even if your beliefs and evidence is not viewed credible, your perception of how you view the events in your life is generally beyond criticism. It can hardly be doubted that this is the way you personally experienced Jesus Christ. Know your own testimony and be prepared to tell it.

All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.
- 2 Timothy 3:16-17 (NKJV)

Know the Holy Bible. Know the Bible verses that address particular topics.  If you do not have a good answer regarding what you are replied with, you can respond saying, “That is good question, I would like to look into this.” Give a fair consideration regarding arguments made with understanding so when you research the Bible for what the Bible says, you can then answer intelligently. Listen to the Holy Spirit for what answers He gives you to say since the Holy Spirit has the role in the believer’s life to do this.

casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ,
- 2 Corinthians 10:5 (NKJV)

Be sure to speak what God gives you as a response. Do not leave questions unanswered that you or others may have about God, Jesus, and the Bible.  There are a number of good questions and the Bible has good answers.

But avoid foolish and ignorant disputes, knowing that they generate strife. And a servant of the Lord must not quarrel but be gentle to all, able to teach, patient, in humility correcting those who are in opposition, if God perhaps will grant them repentance, so that they may know the truth, and that they may come to their senses and escape the snare of the devil, having been taken captive by him to do his will.
- 2 Timothy 2:23-26 (NKJV)

Some questions are best avoided since those who ask foolish questions will only get foolish answers by those who entertain such.  The goal of sharing your faith is not winning arguments but to lead people to salvation which is received only through trusting faith in God’s Son Jesus Christ.

There is also such a thing as “foolish answers”.  If you do not know the answer to a question, search out the matter in the Bible and needful resources to find out the facts.  Simply searching the internet to find a snappy response will not help you learn proper apologetics but will only train you in “Bible Karate”.  This would be like, “If they say this, then I say that” going back-and-forth and so on.  This will not properly build your knowledge but will only train you in brainless responses such as the cults use.  Learn the truth of the Holy Bible for your own knowledge so you may instruct others well.

Take heed to yourself and to the doctrine. Continue in them, for in doing this you will save both yourself and those who hear you.
- 1 Timothy 4:16 (NKJV)

We should not be checking our brains out at the door once we believe in Jesus. We are able to keep an open mind yet also we are not to be deceived, muchless being deceived so easily. False religions will behave toward those who subscribe to them to what amounts as, “That’s right you found the truth with us now. You don’t need to look any further anywhere else.” Yet, through Jesus we do find the truth because He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. Therefore, we need to continually seek Him. As Jesus said, the Holy Spirit will guide us into all truth.

 
The Holy Bible, New King James Version Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc.

do sacraments

perform penance

be water baptized

partake of holy communion

go through church confirmation

or do any deeds at all to merit salvation

…then you believe in the false “works-salvation gospel” and you are NOT saved!

You cannot be saved by doing works to add to the work Jesus did on the cross to save you. Jesus did all the work to save you and any attempt to add to that is an insult to Him.

If you seek to do something to save yourself besides wholeheartedly believing in Jesus to save you, then you are seeking to become your own savior as another besides Jesus.

To be saved you must place your entire and undivided trusting faith in God solely through His Son Jesus Christ as your only Savior and source of salvation. If not, then He is not your Savior at all.

It is hopeless to divide your faith with self, church, other things or other people and expect that Jesus is truly the Savior in whom you trust. Therefore, abandon trust in all else and place your complete confident faith in God’s Son Jesus Christ to save you and to change your life.

I would like to say first of all that I am not a Cecessionist. I do not believe the Gifts of the Holy Spirit ceased with the New Testament Apostles. They are available to the Church of God today.

For those who do not believe the above, you are still my brother or sister in the Lord if you believe that we are saved by grace alone through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ alone. What I am about to tell you is not ‘politically correct’ and I will be labeled as ‘intolerant’ or maybe even a ‘basher’ by some people. I love Catholics, as I do anyone else, but it is the doctrine taught from Rome which is the problem.

President of the FGBMF-Peoria, Illinois

It started when I was voted in as President of a local chapter of the Full Gospel Businessmen’s Fellowship International. We had a dinner meeting once a month and a breakfast meeting once a month. At the dinner meeting we would usually invite a Christian businessman to give his testimony. We began to hold a Bible study and prayer meeting in my home.

The word got out, and some Catholics began to come to my home prayer and Bible study meeting, including a priest. The first thing this priest did was kneel in front of me, as if I could impart something to him. Later I knew that he wanted me to pray that he would receive tongues. I became a friend with this Priest and we began to attend other meetings together. More Catholics started coming to all of our meetings and I invited a Catholic professor from Ball State University to come and speak to our fellowship.

It wasn’t long until many of these Catholics were seeking and receiving tongues. At the time I just took it for granted that they were already saved and were receiving the Baptism of the Holy Spirit. Priests, nuns and others were beginning to receive tongues. I was guilty of believing that tongues was an indication that we shared the same Holy Spirit experience, and the same Jesus. This was due to my ignorance of the ‘Gospel according to Rome,’ for which I have no excuse.

I was invited to teach a course one night a week for six weeks in a Roman Catholic Parish, St. Monica In East Peoria, Illinois. Priests, nuns and others were present. I taught on the gift of Salvation. At the time I was not prepared for what I was confronting and because all present at the meetings deemed themselves already saved because of the Roman Catholic religion I don’t believe I addressed the subject in the right way. There was because of a spirit of bondage given to them by Rome, and their dependence on their infant baptism and other doctrines of Rome which nullify the Gospel.

I was invited to attend Catholic Charismatic prayer meetings at Bradley University as the only non-Catholic present.

One of the Catholic prayer groups were speaking in tongues and receiving unbiblical interpretations of a sinful nature, supposedly coming direct from Mary, ‘the mother of Jesus’. Which was further proof that the unsaved were receiving ‘tongues’ from a spirit other than God. Charismatic Catholics often become more devoted to Mary after receiving a tongue.

Mary becomes the focus

Many Catholic Charismatics have migrated to Mary, whom they see as the Holy Spirit’s ‘more interesting spouse.’ The Catholic Charismatic fellowship at Dayton University reported to the news media that since their ‘experience’ they have been giving more devotion to Mary.

Universalism

A Catholic Priest who was a sought after speaker in the Catholic Charismatic movement and spoke at many FGBMFI chapters, was speaking one night to a large group during one of our FGBMFI conventions. After his talk he gave an altar call to come and be ‘born again.’ I had an uneasy feeling, and after the service was over, I approached to ask him some questions. I asked him if Jesus was the only way to be saved, and he said very plainly, ‘NO.’ I asked, ‘Do you have to be born again and believe in Jesus Christ to be saved and he said ‘NO.’ What did he mean by ‘born again’?

It was obvious he meant that if you received tongues or any kind of subjective feeling, that was a proof of being born again, having nothing to do with being born from above by the Spirit of God or believing in Christ alone for salvation.

At that point I rebuked him for what he said and he got very angry and began to shake. I reported him to FGBMFI but nothing came of it. There are two kinds of Roman Catholics. The liberal that believes God is the Father of all and no-one is lost and the conservative Catholic that believes that only through the Roman Catholic church can you be saved.

“The Roman Catholic religion in its quest for ecumenism is now playing both sides as is seen in Vatican II.”….

An article published by the Dallas Morning News on Saturday March 20th, 1999 of an ecumenical meeting held in Dallas, Thanksgiving World Assembly, shows the other side.

What is important about this meeting is that it was attended by a Nigerian Cardinal of the Roman Catholic religion named Francis Arinze.

Many people think that Arinze, the Pope’s Deputy for Outreach, is heir apparent to John Paul II. But even if he is not, his comments are chilling and revealing.

An illustration of Roman Catholic ecumenism, which ices out the Gospel and makes mockery of the ministry of Jesus Christ, is found in Arinze’s answer to the question, “Can you still get to heaven without accepting Jesus?” His answer, not surprising, but chilling and ominous, is: “Expressly, yes!”

He says,”…..Gods grant of salvation includes not only Christians but Jews, Muslims, Hindus and people of good will.”

In spite of the mistakes, the FGBMFI has been and is being used of God, and many have been saved through it’s efforts, but I and others, have been guilty of an ecumenical spirit and unity at any cost. We have given a false hope of security to those who needed the truth of salvation.

Catholics no longer a mission field?

Some Evangelicals are now saying that Roman Catholics are no longer considered to be a mission field since they are ‘Christians’. What a sad commentary to our brothers and sisters in Latin countries, and others who have laid down their lives for the Gospel, and have seen millions of Roman Catholics believe the Gospel. The future of evangelism hangs in the balance.

In my eight years of working with Charismatic Catholics, I have come to the following conclusions.

I had been naive and had neglected to really look into the doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church to see what they really believed about the doctrine of Salvation by Grace through faith in Christ alone. I took it for granted that they believed the Gospel of the Bible. Historically, and conversely, the Roman Catholic Church teaches as dogma, that justification is conferred through her sacraments, and that it consists of inner righteousness whereby a man, it is stated, becomes ‘just within himself.’ The Church of Rome condemns the Biblical doctrine of justification by faith alone.

Any non-Catholic Church that held the doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church would be considered a ‘Cult’ by many of the same people who are seeking unity with the Catholics.

I have discovered that most Protestants do not know what the Gospel is ‘according to Rome’! And are easy prey for Roman Catholic apologists because they do not know how to defend sola scriptura or because of their extreme armenism. Do we once again need a reformation in the ‘Protestant’ Churches?

It was the standard practice of the FGBMFI to tell Roman Catholics to stay in the Catholic Church so that they could witness to others. I believe this was a very dangerous attitude in that I found those who stayed eventually were lost to the Roman Church once again because they had not been truly born again. I believe most of the ones who had trusted in Christ alone for salvation came out of the Roman Catholic Church.

You cannot stay in a Church, without consequences, that denies we are saved by what Christ did outside of us, and not what we can do to become worthy inside.

“Solo Christo”

“Solo Christo” was one of the cries of the Protestant Reformation. Translated from the Latin, it means “Christ Alone.”

In these times, the growing tendency to emphasize feelings and experiences at the expense of sound doctrine is presenting the world with a ‘feel-good’ religious community, the boundaries of which grow more ephemeral with every new ecumenical pronouncement. This is especially true among Roman Catholics and some Evangelical and Charismatic Christians. I want to emphasize that not all Evangelicals and Pentecostals are being deceived but some are.

And the lines become more blurred, so that now in some ecumenical meetings, New Agers, Universalists, Roman Catholic as well as true born again Christians such as Evangelicals and Pentecostals are coming together to celebrate their oneness in a quote, ‘Common Experience.’ This is the great deception.

Although speaking in tongues can be valid experience from God it is not always of the Holy Spirit. It can be counterfeited. Satan has counterfeits of the Gifts of God. You can receive an experience without being saved, and when this happens it leads to many problems. The major problem is a false sense of security that you are saved, and leads you further away from the true Gospel and many times into the occult.

I believe most of the Catholics were seeking a sign of tongues, and they received a false tongue. If we accept everybody as brothers and sisters because they speak in tongues, then we are heading down a slippery slope, Catholic or other wise. Spiritual experience ALONE can never be the basis for unity. Unity must be based on sound DOCTRINE.

“If anyone comes with another doctrine, do not receive him….for he ho greets him shares in his evil deeds.” Holy Bible 2 John 10-11 KJV.

Even though the above scripture taken in context applies to other heresies, such as the denial that Christ came in the Flesh, I believe it can just as well be applied to the Gospel of salvation, since they are related and cannot be separated.

“Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.” Galatians 5:1. KJV

Bill Scudder
Dayton Ohio USA

The balance between Word and Spirit ministries is found through the proactive emphasis of both. This is the model for spiritually healthy and vibrant Christian ministry.

When the Word of God is misunderstood and misused to minimize the gifts and work of the Holy Spirit, dry orthodoxies develop. The “rules” become more important than the spirit and intent of God’s Word. Relationship with Christ may yet seem personal but turns less interpersonal with God. As if God may hear your prayers but He will not speak back to you. This can result in a dead faith.

When the ministry of the Spirit is done with a minimizing of the Word of God false doctrines and religious excesses can result. Believers may turn to a wrong spirit and follow every wind of doctrine and popular fad spiritual movement. Faith may become strong but will tend to be a groundless faith and turn counterfeit.

We dare not leave off either the Word of God or the Spirit of God. We need to be emphatic and zealous for both lest we drift away. Nations need to have breathed in them the awakening given by God’s Spirit and to be built up by the Word of God. Lest mere human understanding be the rule of the land. Without a strong basis of God’s Word and Spirit a spiritual vacuum develops inside. This will only be left to be filled with demonic and unclean spirits and worldly philosophy which is not after Christ.

Take heed and embrase the fullness of God through Jesus Christ.

Thou wilt make know to me the path of life: in thy presence is fullness of joy; at thy right hand are pleasures for evermore.
- Psalm 16:11

2. There is a barrier between God and us: Sin.

Behold the LORD’s hand is not shortened, that it cannot save; neither is his ear heavy, that it cannot hear; but your inquities have made a separation between you and your GOD, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear.
- Isaiah 59:1-2

3. Our good deeds won’t remove the barrier.

And we are all as one that is unclean, and our righteousness (good deeds) as filthy rags.
- Isaiah 64:6

4. God has provided atonement as a way of removing the barrier. Atonement demands blood.

For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the alter to make atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that makes that makes an atonement for the soul.
- Leviticus 17:11

5. During temple times in Israel, animal sacrifices provided temporary atonement. Permanent atonement requires a unique sacrifice.

Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me.
- Psalm 40:6 (Septuagint)

6. The fifty-third chapter of Isaiah identifies this sacrifice as a man who was rejected by his people, yet whose death provided the ultimate atonement.

…he was despised, and we esteemed him not… But he was wounded because of our transgressions, bruised because of our iniquities; his sufferings were that we might have peace and by his injury we are healed…but he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.
- Isaiah 53:3b,5,12b

7. At least 48 specific prophecies further identify the Messianic figure, all of which have been fulfilled in Yeshua (Jesus) of Nazareth.

• He would be a descendent of King David (Jeremiah 23:5-6)
• The city of his birth would be Bethlehem (Micah 5:1-2)
• He would have a divine nature (Isaiah 9:5-6)
• He would come before the destruction of Herod’s temple in 70 C.E. (Daniel 9:26)
• He would be be executed by crucifixion (Psalm 22:14-17)
• He would rise from the dead (Isaiah 53:10)
• He would return with the evidence of having been mortally wounded (Zechariah 12:10)

8. God has provided perfect atonement (forgiveness of sins) through the sacrifice of the Messiah, Yeshua (Jesus). All who place their trust in Him have restored fellowship with God and assurance of eternal life.

Blessed are all they who take refuge in him. – Psalm 2:12

But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name… – John 1:12 (New Covenant)

I guess to most people it would not even occur that in regards to baptism there is a truth and that there is a lie. Most people go through life just skimming the surface of understanding, unless there is some apparent benefit to being informed. When people talk about current events, you usually can see that they haven’t given the subject matter much thought, very often they are just repeating something they read, saw or heard. More often than not this programing comes from a source that these people have come to trust. This source is engaged in the business of forming public opinion. This subject is enormously complex, but for my purpose it is sufficient to point out that the logic or the verifiability of what is said is not the main reason people are swayed, but rather by the prestige, clout and authority of the source.

Unfortunately, godly wisdom tells us that the bigger, the more prestigious the worldly source the more corrupt it is. This is because of our sinful nature. As individuals our spirit can be victorious over our flesh, but collectively as we become powerful mankind always ends up arrogant, prideful, high minded and eventually abusive, therefore I contend that from a Christian perspective we should be more suspicious of the high and mighty worldly sources than the voice crying in the wilderness. In this world people that think are a minority and unfortunately many of them may not have your best interests at heart.

So let’s cut to the chase. I will not be quoting scripture because you need to read the Bible in its entirety for yourself otherwise you cannot hope to understand much of anything. If you have not read it, I suggest reading a half hour of New Testament and a half hour of Old Testament every day. I do it in the morning when it is quiet and my brain is fresh to absorb God’s instruction manual. It will start like a chore, become a habit and end up a desire if you have a love for God. Once you have understanding in some area of the scriptures, the question arises, are you willing to obey? We are told in the Bible to repent, accept Jesus as our savior and to go be baptized for the remission of sins and for the gift of the Holy Spirit. One of the first questions is; does your salvation hinge on your baptism. Well to tell you the truth, I don’t know, but I don’t think so. I am confident, however that not being baptized as a comprehending Christian who has accepted Jesus as their Savior and who is repentant of his or her sinful nature will create a barrier between themselves and God. It will also limit the rewards that they will receive in the hereafter.

I want my fellow Christians to be as close as possible to the almighty, because that is what the Bible says that God wants. You see there can be no greater reward imaginable than to be as close to the Father as possible. Jesus said, “no one comes to the Father except by me”. Jesus Christ is the bull’s eye and the bull’s eye is now an opening because of the price paid with perfect currency (His precious blood) that only Jesus had and he was willing to pay the price. Now when an arrow hits the center and only the center of this target, which is Jesus, then the arrow goes through the target to reach everlasting life and we approach God to the degree that our judgment day will allow. One of the things that we will be judged about is our obedience to God’s commands.

In order to understand this dilemma about baptism, one has to wrap their mind around a Biblical truth that most Christians think they know, but they really don’t. That is that Satan has dominion in this world. We Christians are behind enemy lines. This evil entity has followers like Jesus . This evil is very successful in getting dumb sheep to believe a lot of things which are not true. For example that God loves everybody. Sounds nice, but it is a lie and is nowhere to found in the Bible. In the Old Testament Jehovah said Jacob I love, but Esau I hate. Well if you were alive at the time of Esau would you love him with a Christian love, even though God said I hate him. Well if my God hates someone then I hate them also, because my God knows best. Esau became Edom and the seed of Edom is still very much with us today. These conscious and unconscious followers of the dark side, to borrow a Star Wars term, are referred to in the Bible as snakes, vipers and creatures. They are masters of deception and use all the weaknesses of our sinful natures against us.

They win more often than they lose in destroying us and if that fails at least weakening our connection and therefore the power that you would have had from the Holy Spirit. It always amazed me how Christians who supposedly know full well about Satan and his world system, at the same time think they understand everything around themselves and that Satan has got nothing on them. This is pride and the good book says pride precedes a fall. Why does the Bible go on in so many places about humility? Because unless you come to God through Jesus with the mindset…

“I don’t know anything Father, I am a fool, help me to understand. I don’t deserve anything except death, without you I am nothing. Thank You for Jesus, I accept him with all my heart.”

Unless you feel this and understand this, you are unteachable. When you realize who you are in relation to God almighty you will fear him. You will fear disobeying your creator. You will realize that he controls every beat of your heart. You will also realize that he loves you and everything including Satan was created by him for the ultimate purpose of his children passing the test of righteousness with their own free will.

Baptism is a symbolic act which represents our dying to our old selves and going down like Jesus in his death for us and then coming up again out of the water a new creation in Jesus. Baptism is an act of obedience. Many Christians say you don’t have to be baptized, all you have to do is accept Jesus as your savior and you are good. Well, if you accept him, what are you accepting? Are you accepting the Lord of Lords, the King of Kings. Are you accepting Him, but not what he said. If you are playing these kinds of games, you are either a deceiver or a fool. In either case you will suffer because it is not just the deceiver that is punished, but the deceived also. You have a responsibility to not allow yourself to be deceived. How does one do that? Well, again, start reading the Bible, secondly start communicating with God. It is called prayer, I do it on my knees because you can never go wrong humbling yourself in the presence of the Lord. Pray to God in the name of Jesus to help you and keep you from being deceived. You can and should also pray for wisdom and understanding. If you talk too much, you can ask God to help control your tongue. You can pray for the Holy Spirit, but I believe God gives power to those that are ready and willing to do his work. Lastly, but should be first, thank him for all your blessings, as long as you are breathing there is always something to be thankful for.

As your relationship with Jesus and therefore with God grows, you will begin to understand his love for you and your love for him will grow. You will want to please him and you will feel shame if in your soul you know you are not in line with his righteousness ( which is a Biblical synonym for Godly love and order ). Now why in the world would you refuse to obey a direct command from your Lord and Savior? The answer is because you are being deceived. Sometimes it is an individual that is deceived sometimes it is a group, an institution or even a country. Can you explain why then there are some good intentioned people that actually believe that sprinkling water on an infant ( who has no idea what is going on) is accepted and considered a baptism? This Catholic or Orthodox ceremony is harmful to the extent that it deceived the parents and later the child into believing that he or she was baptized and therefore robbing that soul of the opportunity to obey their Lord and master and thereby receive the blessings that come with obedience. I see nothing wrong with a ceremony that dedicates a child, by the parent’s well wishes, to a Christian life, but this should NOT be called a baptism. Only a person can decide for themselves whether they are ready and willing to obey the Lord.

I don’t understand the psychology of all the characters that are involved in this deception. Some of them may be deceivers ,however I suspect most are deceived. From the stand point of the religious leaders in these institutions, you have the authority of the church. This is an awesome institution and there is a lot of pride in association to the institution. This is partly because of the size and beauty of the buildings and the wealth and power of the organization. This is peer group pressure on steroids. The parishioners are affected for many of the same reasons. Most people do not read the Bible and therefore it doesn’t even enter their minds to challenge the church’s authority. There used to be a fairy tale that quietly disappeared because Satan’s world does not want the dumb sheep to wake up. It was about an Emperor that was deceived by a snake tailor into taking the position that his suit was the most beautiful suit possible, but only intelligent people could see it.

The King did not want to admit that he could not see the suit, so he paraded around naked and all his subjects also kept silent. They must have been afraid of the King and they also did not want to admit that they were not intelligent enough to see the suit. This charade continued until a young boy jumped out of the crowd and screamed, “Look! The emperor has no clothes!” Maybe that is why it is said that the truth can come out of the mouth of babes. Well that is it, you can take the blue pill and go back to sleep or take the red pill and see how deep God’s Biblical truth is.

By George Shevchuk (June 6, 2012).