Dr Paul Allen

In Saul’s next attempt to destroy David, he unrealistically tried to involve those around him who loved David. Jonathan’s fondness for David is expressed by the same word as is used for the pleasure Saul had previously taken in David (18:22). It may be that Jonathan’s calm good sense in removing David from the scene and then facing his father with the realities of David’s support, through which the LORD won a great victory for all Israel, brought Saul back to one of his periods of reality. Jonathan must have had some awareness of Saul’s fear that David would replace him.  Still, his serene acceptance of the implications of David’s victories was maybe a further factor in Saul’s recovery of perspective. Jonathan’s attempts to prevent his father from further damaging himself by his obsession are admirable. Saul was persuaded, and David, at least for a while, was able to return to court. Saul’s confirmation of his word with an oath reflects the extremes of his mood swings. 19:8–10 / A ...

Two English homosexuals have been charged for allegedly brutally raping and killing a one-year-old baby they were on the verge of adopting. The BBC  reports  that 36-year-old high school teacher Jamie Varley and his “partner,” 31-year-old John McGowan-Fazakerley, were in the process of adopting 13-month-old Preston Davey, who in July 2023 was taken to Blackpool Victoria Hospital and soon died. Varley, who was suspended from his teaching job upon his arrest that year, is accused of  numerous counts  relating to murder, sexual assault of a male child, child cruelty, inflicting grievous bodily harm, taking and distributing indecent photos of a child, possessing indecent pseudo images of a child, and possession of an “extreme” pornographic image. McGowan-Fazakerley, meanwhile, stands accused of allowing the death of a child, child sexual assault, and child cruelty. READ:  ‘Married’ homosexuals sentenced to 100 years for sexually abusing adopted boys for child pornog...

I’ve recently had conversations with younger Christian friends who have been reeling from experiences and observations of confounding evil. As a man more than double the age of the friends I have in mind, I can vouch that comprehending what appears to be senseless evil doesn’t get easier the longer you live. Perhaps that sounds discouraging, especially since I remember, as a younger Christian, hoping I’d have greater wisdom in my golden years. After all, isn’t sagacity part of “the splendour of . . . grey hair” (Proverbs 20:29)? I hope this is true of me. But as I grow older, I’m discovering that the more significant part of wisdom isn’t accumulating a more excellent knowledge of good and evil so much as learning how to deal more faithfully with my deficit of such knowledge. So, if I have any wisdom worth imparting to Christians struggling with incomprehensible evil, it lies in cultivating the spiritual discipline of handing back the fruit. Problem of Evil Theologians and philosophers ...

Lyne Wallace In simple words, John gives us an important observation about the morning of the resurrection. “…It was still dark…” As always with John the words operate on two levels. Yes, it was before dawn so it was dark. John, however, was not referring to the limited number of lumens peering over the horizon. The time of day is only a servant to his greater point. The world was dark not because the sun had yet to peer over the horizon. John is not trying to describe the ordinary. The world was dark because the power of evil had if just for a moment, won the day or so it seemed. The Light of the World was extinguished, and, for all Mary Magdalene knew, that fact remained unchanged. She most likely suspected it to forever remain unchanged. Mary was beside herself in grief. Her eyes, swollen by hours of wailing, were unable to see clearly. Her wailing had drowned out both extraordinary and familiar voices. John 20 -  Mary and Jesus She watched in disbelieving horror as the soldiers...

At a rally in Moscow on Friday, Russian President Vladimir Putin paraphrased John 15:13 to justify the ongoing invasion of Ukraine, which has killed hundreds of civilians, including dozens of children. During his speech at the rally held in Moscow’s Luzhniki Stadium to “celebrate” the eighth anniversary of Crimea’s annexation, which is not recognized by most countries, Putin lauded the Russian military for “heroically” fighting in Ukraine. “You know, I remember the words from the Bible. There is no other love rather than if someone gives soul for their friends,” Putin said, according to the BBC broadcast of his speech. The remark was followed by huge applause from the crowd.  Putin’s remark was a reference to John 15:13, which states: “Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one’s life for one’s friends.” “We are seeing the heroic deeds of our guys in this operation,” Putin added, according to the CNN translation. “These words from the holy scripture of Christianity, it’s so...

More than seventy killings took place in London in the first quarter of 2018.1 A surgeon in a London hospital reports that the number of children and young people being brought in with knife injuries is at an all-time high.2 This great city, blessed in the past by some of the greatest gospel preachers in church history, is waking up almost daily to headlines telling of another life snatched away. Politicians debate increasing police funding. Newspapers argue about law enforcement. There is a place for that. But the root of the problem was described in a book aptly titled Death in the City, written nearly fifty years ago by the apologist Francis Schaeffer. In a culture that has deliberately turned away from God, what basis is there for morality? Schaeffer warned that Western societies in the 1960s were living off the borrowed capital of a Christian worldview. That capital was fast running out. There was now no certain foundation for morality, no firm basis for ethics. The social breakdo...

We understand, of course, the difference between the Old Covenant and the New, and how the work of Christ and the gift of the Spirit dramatically change how we relate to God. But he's one and the same God . Jesus gives us a clearer and deeper revelation of God, but not a different one. The God Jesus spoke with and spoke for, the God he unveiled, is the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. But we can't be closet Marcionites. Who was he? Marcion claimed the god of the Old Testament was a demiurge, a lackey deity, and sharply distinguished that being from the heavenly Father whom Jesus revealed and Paul preached. We don't believe that. The God of Moses is also the God of Paul. They're one and the same. But then there's Hosea 13:16 .  "The people of Samaria must bear their guilt, because they have rebelled against their God. They will fall by the sword; their little ones will be dashed to the ground, their pregnant women ripped open." That seems as differ...

The thief ’s purpose is to steal and kill and destroy. My purpose is to give them a rich and satisfying life.  ( John 10:10 ) There were four thieves closely involved in the events surrounding the crucifixion of the Lord Jesus Christ . The first of these was one of His own disciples. “[ Judas ] was a thief, and had the bag, and bare what was put therein” ( John 12:6 ). It was Judas, of course, who betrayed Christ , facilitating His arrest and conviction. The second was not only a thief but also a revolutionary and a murderer . “ Barabbas . . . who had committed murder in the insurrection . . . was a robber” ( Mark 15:7 ; John 18:40 ). This convicted criminal, appointed to death, was released and Jesus condemned in his stead. Thus, Barabbasbenefited temporarily from Christ, receiving an unexpected and undeserved liberty because Christ was willing to go to the cross. “Then were there two thieves crucified with him” ( Matthew 27:38 ). Their names are not given in the Bible , but ...

The strangeness of the passage is easily detectable, but only careful Bible study makes its importance apparent. Numbers 5:11–31 describes a water ritual to determine the guilt or innocence of a woman suspected of adultery . A husband is to bring the wife under suspicion to the priest, along with a required grain offering that will “bring iniquity to remembrance.” The priest in turn prepares a jar of water mixed with dust from the tabernacle (5:16–17). To this mixture is added the curses against her written “in a book” (5:23). Either the curses were written and erased, so that the erasures are swept into the water mixture, or the ink is washed off into the water mixture. The woman is compelled to drink the concoction after saying “Amen, Amen” in response to the priest’s invocation of blessing or cursing upon her, depending on her innocence or guilt. If she is guilty, the ingested mixture will cause pain and sterility; if there is no such reaction, she is deemed innocent (5:27–...

I was again overcome by the story of David’s sin against Uriah (murder) and Bathsheba (adultery) and God’s response in 2 Samuel 11–12. David acknowledges that the one who has done such a thing deserves to die (2 Samuel 12:5), but in the end Nathan says, “The Lord also has taken away your sin; you shall not die” ( 12:13 ). This is amazing grace. God passes over the sin and takes away the penalty of death. Although the sin is taken away and the death sentence removed, Nathan says, “Nevertheless, because by this deed you have utterly scorned the Lord, the child that is born to you shall die” ( 12:14 ). In spite of forgiveness, some “penalty” for the sin remains. Disciplinary Consequences I put  penalty  in quotes because I think we must distinguish consequences of forgiven sin (verse 13) from consequences of unforgiven sin . The latter are properly called penalties. The former we should probably call “disciplinary consequences.” That is, they are related to the ...

One of the standard ways that the New Atheists attack Christianity is by using some of the Old Testament war passages to argue that God is violent and petty. One of the favourite passages for this is the so-called Amalekite Genocide of 1 Samuel 15 . But difficulties with passages such as this are not restricted to atheists. In 2009, the popular website Ship of Fools ran a feature called Chapter and Worse. 1 Readers were invited to submit their least favourite Bible passages, and an evangelical acquaintance of mine submitted 1 Samuel 15:3 . And Samuel said to Saul, “The Lord sent me to anoint you king over his people Israel; now therefore listen to the words of the Lord. Thus says the Lord of hosts, ‘I have noted what Amalek did to Israel in opposing them on the way when they came up out of Egypt. Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.’” ( 1 Sam 15:1 ‑3...