Tuesday, January 5, 2016

Chihuahuas and Churches: Which Church is the original one founded by Christ and His Apostles?

Guest Article by Jonathan Nathaniel Hayes
What Church can legitimately claim to be the first Church? Is a Chihuahua a wolf? What on earth do these two questions have in common? Give me a moment of your time and I will explain.

Many who claim their church is the “true church” do so by claiming to be the authentic church; the Church founded on the day of Pentecost in 33AD when Peter preached the gospel for the first time in the New Testament book of Acts chapter 2. The Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, Celtic, Armenian, Coptic, Syrian, Apostolic and many other churches claim they are the rightful claimants to the title of “heirs to the  first church.” A very good friend of mine recently posted this image on his facebook page…

 These Churches look at other, less ‘successful’ segments of Christendom and say “our Pope holds the seat of Peter” in the same way that the priest in the temple at Jerusalem claimed to sit in ‘the seat of Moses.’ This becomes the most important issue of debate for them, because if they can prove they are the rightful descendants of that first Church then all other doctrinal arguments become null and void in their minds. For those who naively drink the cool aid, the issue is settled. ‘My church is the original church so our way is the right way. All others are false.’
The problem, of course, is that each of them only accepts the authenticity of their own documentation and reject the validity of the others’ documentation, so it is something that cannot be resolved.
So who has the true claim to authenticity? And if one could substantiate such a claim beyond refutation, would it necessitate (as is assumed by those attesting such things) that their church is, as a result of being the sole heir, the true legitimate church?
Jesus often turned to nature as a teacher in His illustrations and the apostle Paul also said “Doth not nature itself teach you…” Although my first education was in Theology, my second education was in the wildlife sciences, so please indulge me as I do a very Christian thing and take an illustration from nature.
Is a Chihuahua, Shih Tsu  or a Lhasa Apso a wolf? Why that is silly! Of course not… or is it?
Geneticists tell us that all our dog breeds (including the Chihuahua) is 100% descended from the wolf. That is right, 100% of a Shih Tsu’s ancestry can be traced directly back to the wolf. Can you imagine, if dogs could talk, the debates they would have about who was the legitimate descendants of the wolf? Surely the malamute, German Shepherd and Siberian Husky would claim they have the most direct line because of their appearance. But genetic studies show that those breeds are some of the oldest lines of domesticated canids.
pastedGraphic_2.pdf
Will the real wolf please stand up?
I spent the better part of the last decade studying canids and working with them, both the domesticated (dogs) and the wild (wolf-coyote) types. Science has turned from its micro focused study, in recent years to taking a much more holistic macro view of nature (ecology). There was much discussion concerning the coyote wolf hybrids in my research. Should they be classified as wolves or coyotes? Should wolves be reintroduced or are they already here in a different form? The difference in the DNA was so minuscule that sound arguments could be made for either persuasion.
In order to answer the question, we needed to look beyond the DNA results from the lab and ask ourselves what role they are playing in the ecology of the forest. Are they behaving like wolves or coyotes?
See, all the while the dogs at the dog park are arguing who is the true descendant of the noble wolf, the wolf is still out there in the woods. And you don’t need to run a DNA test on one to know it is a wolf when you see it. To borrow the humorous example of inductive reasoning; if it looks like a wolf, hunts like a wolf, and howls like a wolf, then it is probably a wolf.
pastedGraphic_3.pdf
If you have followed my illustration, then the application is apparent. The Apostle Paul wrote,
“A person is not a Jew who is one only outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. No, a person is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a person’s praise is not from other people, but from God.”
This applies to us as well, for all scripture is good for edification and reproof. One cannot hide behind a pedigree. A miniature poodle can profess to be a wolf and use it’s DNA test results to prove it, but the truth becomes obvious when it meets a real wolf in the woods. Likewise, someone can cite their religious pedigree and reject all others but their own, but what matters is the life, the light, that they live out in this world. If it looks like first century Christianity, lives like first century Christianity, and sounds like first Century Christianity, then it is serving that role in the world and is assigned that name.
Asking for someone’s religious pedigree is akin to asking a wolf for its kennel club registration papers.
So a church wants to claim to be the true Church established on the day of Pentecost in 33AD? Great! I don’t want to see a list of Popes, I want to see the features of that first century Church in Acts 2.
Here is a list of key characteristics of the church on the day so many claim to be their Church’s birthday. Take inventory and ask yourself if yours lines up.
The church birthed on the day of Pentecost:
  1. Encouraged speaking in an unknown prayer language (Acts 2:4)
  2. Preached the Gospel as- repentance, water baptism by immersion with the invocation of the name of Jesus and again, the infilling of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38)
  3. Met for communion in one another’s homes (there were no Christian “churches” until Rome adopted Christianity and converted pagan temples into churches. Before the 300s, the Christians were themselves the church. Acts 2:46, Romans 16:5, I Corinthians 16:19
  4. Continued in the Apostles doctrine (not Justin Martyr’s or that of the Greek philosophers but of the Apostle’s teachings) Acts 2:42
  5. Fellowhip! (koinonia) Not just hanging out but a true communal sharing of wealth.  Acts 2:42-46
  6. Breaking Bread (the Lord’s Supper is a central element to first century Christianity) Acts 2:42, 2:46
  7. Prayers Acts 2:42
These were the defining characteristics of the church founded on the day of Pentecost. If a church has ought with these points, it may still find its origins on that day in another verse of Acts chapter 2; “And others mocking said these men are full of new wine.”
Just as there were Esseness and the followers of John the Baptist who did not buy into the claims of the religious establishment of the temple, so today there are Christians that have not bought into the claims of such institutions. I believe Christ’s words to those who rest their salvation on the pedigree of their religious institutions of today would be the same as it was to those who did the same 2,000 years ago when he warned,
“And do not think you can say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father.’ I tell you that out of these stones God can raise up children for Abraham.”  Jesus told us by what means men would know we were His disciples and it was not a religious pedigree, it was by the love that we would have for one another.

Walk like a disciple of Christ. Talk like a disciple of Christ. Love like a disciple of Christ. Be a disciple of Christ.
Chihuahuas and Churches: Which Church is the original one founded by Christ and His Apostles?
What Church can legitimately claim to be the first Church? Is a Chihuahua a wolf? What on earth do these two questions have in common? Give me a moment of your time and I will explain.
pastedGraphic.pdf
Many who claim their church is the “true church” do so by claiming to be the authentic church; the Church founded on the day of Pentecost in 33AD when Peter preached the gospel for the first time in the New Testament book of Acts chapter 2. The Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, Celtic, Armenian, Coptic, Syrian, Apostolic and many other churches claim they are the rightful claimants to the title of “heirs to the  first church.” A very good friend of mine recently posted this image on his facebook page…
pastedGraphic_1.pdf
These Churches look at other, less ‘successful’ segments of Christendom and say “our Pope holds the seat of Peter” in the same way that the priest in the temple at Jerusalem claimed to sit in ‘the seat of Moses.’ This becomes the most important issue of debate for them, because if they can prove they are the rightful descendants of that first Church then all other doctrinal arguments become null and void in their minds. For those who naively drink the cool aid, the issue is settled. ‘My church is the original church so our way is the right way. All others are false.’
The problem, of course, is that each of them only accepts the authenticity of their own documentation and reject the validity of the others’ documentation, so it is something that cannot be resolved.
So who has the true claim to authenticity? And if one could substantiate such a claim beyond refutation, would it necessitate (as is assumed by those attesting such things) that their church is, as a result of being the sole heir, the true legitimate church?
Jesus often turned to nature as a teacher in His illustrations and the apostle Paul also said “Doth not nature itself teach you…” Although my first education was in Theology, my second education was in the wildlife sciences, so please indulge me as I do a very Christian thing and take an illustration from nature.
Is a Chihuahua, Shih Tsu  or a Lhasa Apso a wolf? Why that is silly! Of course not… or is it?
Geneticists tell us that all our dog breeds (including the Chihuahua) is 100% descended from the wolf. That is right, 100% of a Shih Tsu’s ancestry can be traced directly back to the wolf. Can you imagine, if dogs could talk, the debates they would have about who was the legitimate descendants of the wolf? Surely the malamute, German Shepherd and Siberian Husky would claim they have the most direct line because of their appearance. But genetic studies show that those breeds are some of the oldest lines of domesticated canids.
pastedGraphic_2.pdf
Will the real wolf please stand up?
I spent the better part of the last decade studying canids and working with them, both the domesticated (dogs) and the wild (wolf-coyote) types. Science has turned from its micro focused study, in recent years to taking a much more holistic macro view of nature (ecology). There was much discussion concerning the coyote wolf hybrids in my research. Should they be classified as wolves or coyotes? Should wolves be reintroduced or are they already here in a different form? The difference in the DNA was so minuscule that sound arguments could be made for either persuasion.
In order to answer the question, we needed to look beyond the DNA results from the lab and ask ourselves what role they are playing in the ecology of the forest. Are they behaving like wolves or coyotes?
See, all the while the dogs at the dog park are arguing who is the true descendant of the noble wolf, the wolf is still out there in the woods. And you don’t need to run a DNA test on one to know it is a wolf when you see it. To borrow the humorous example of inductive reasoning; if it looks like a wolf, hunts like a wolf, and howls like a wolf, then it is probably a wolf.
pastedGraphic_3.pdf
If you have followed my illustration, then the application is apparent. The Apostle Paul wrote,
“A person is not a Jew who is one only outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. No, a person is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a person’s praise is not from other people, but from God.”
This applies to us as well, for all scripture is good for edification and reproof. One cannot hide behind a pedigree. A miniature poodle can profess to be a wolf and use it’s DNA test results to prove it, but the truth becomes obvious when it meets a real wolf in the woods. Likewise, someone can cite their religious pedigree and reject all others but their own, but what matters is the life, the light, that they live out in this world. If it looks like first century Christianity, lives like first century Christianity, and sounds like first Century Christianity, then it is serving that role in the world and is assigned that name.
Asking for someone’s religious pedigree is akin to asking a wolf for its kennel club registration papers.
So a church wants to claim to be the true Church established on the day of Pentecost in 33AD? Great! I don’t want to see a list of Popes, I want to see the features of that first century Church in Acts 2.
Here is a list of key characteristics of the church on the day so many claim to be their Church’s birthday. Take inventory and ask yourself if yours lines up.
The church birthed on the day of Pentecost:
  1. Encouraged speaking in an unknown prayer language (Acts 2:4)
  2. Preached the Gospel as- repentance, water baptism by immersion with the invocation of the name of Jesus and again, the infilling of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38)
  3. Met for communion in one another’s homes (there were no Christian “churches” until Rome adopted Christianity and converted pagan temples into churches. Before the 300s, the Christians were themselves the church. Acts 2:46, Romans 16:5, I Corinthians 16:19
  4. Continued in the Apostles doctrine (not Justin Martyr’s or that of the Greek philosophers but of the Apostle’s teachings) Acts 2:42
  5. Fellowhip! (koinonia) Not just hanging out but a true communal sharing of wealth.  Acts 2:42-46
  6. Breaking Bread (the Lord’s Supper is a central element to first century Christianity) Acts 2:42, 2:46
  7. Prayers Acts 2:42
These were the defining characteristics of the church founded on the day of Pentecost. If a church has ought with these points, it may still find its origins on that day in another verse of Acts chapter 2; “And others mocking said these men are full of new wine.”
Just as there were Esseness and the followers of John the Baptist who did not buy into the claims of the religious establishment of the temple, so today there are Christians that have not bought into the claims of such institutions. I believe Christ’s words to those who rest their salvation on the pedigree of their religious institutions of today would be the same as it was to those who did the same 2,000 years ago when he warned,
“And do not think you can say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father.’ I tell you that out of these stones God can raise up children for Abraham.”  Jesus told us by what means men would know we were His disciples and it was not a religious pedigree, it was by the love that we would have for one another.
Walk like a disciple of Christ. Talk like a disciple of Christ. Love like a disciple of Christ. Be a disciple of Christ.



If the ministry of the Bishop is a blessing to you, please consider leaving a monetary gift of any amount at the link provided here:

Saturday, January 2, 2016

The Gospel According to John, An Introduction


From the Tyndale Bible, First Page of the Gospel According to John
From the Tyndale Bible, First Page of the Gospel According to John

John, The Other Gospel

The earliest manuscripts have as their title “The Gospel According to John.” That this John is the brother of James and the beloved apostle of Christ is beyond serious question (13:23; 19:29; 20:2; 21:7, 20, 24). The Apostle John figured paramount in the early church and the synoptic Gospels, but is not mention by name in this gospel - which would be natural if he was the author and rather hard to explain if he was not. The evidence of the gospel gives testimony that the author was an eyewitness to the ministry of Jesus and one who was intimately versed in Jewish customs and the geography of the holy land. For example, he records that the house in Bethany was filled with the fragrance of the spikenard (12:3); he knew that the duty to circumcise on the eighth day (Leviticus 12:3) took precedence over the prohibition of working on the Sabbath (see 7:22); he alone, mentions Cana, a city of Galilee (2:1; 21:2), and that Jacobs well was deep (4:11). Moreover, both Irenaeus and Tertullian testify that the author of this Gospel was John the Apostle.

The Outline
The book can be divided into four parts:
  1. Prologue(1:1–18)
  2. The Book of Signs (1:19 – 12:50)
  3. The Book of Glory (13:1 – 20:31)
  4. Return to Galilee (21:1–25)
Notice how the passion narrative comes within the Book of Glory.

Date 
A long held view places the date of this gospel at a rather late period (A.D. 85 or later). But more recent scholarship suggests an earlier date of the 50s, but not later than A.D. 70.
The argument for a late date rests upon the statement of Clement of Alexandria that John wrote to supplement the accounts found in the synoptic Gospels (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 6 .14 .7); and, therefore, must have been written after them. Plus, the highly developed theology of the Fourth Gospel indicates to some that it originated late in the first century.
However, the arguments for the early date seem to carry the day. Consider the following: There is no indication that this gospel utilized any of the synoptics, as did Mathew of Mark and Luke of both Mark and Matthew. John wrote independent of the other three. Well over 90% of John’s Gospel is unique (i.e. not contained any other account). Whereas the Synoptics are straightforward accounts of Christ life and ministry, the Gospel According to John is highly literary and symbolic. The well-developed theology of this gospel is no reason to argue for a late date, in that the theology of Romans (written A.D. 57) is in every way just as developed. Besides all this, there is John’s reference to the pool of Bethesda (5:2); he says: “There is at Jerusalem, by the sheet market, a pool.” If this gospel was written any later then A.D. 70 the author would have said: “There was at Jerusalem, by the sheet market, a pool.” For both the pool and sheep market (gate) were destroyed in A.D. 70 by the Romans.
There is little doubt that John’s original has been enlarged: chapter 21, for example, which seems to be a second ending for the book; and, perhaps the prologue, which contains an independent hymn, subsequently, adapted to serve as a preface to the Gospel. So it is quite possible that the fourth Gospel, in its present form, could date as late as A.D. 85-90. The editing, however, was most likely done by John himself: because of the similarity between versus 1:1-5, 10-11, 14 and 1 John 1:1-4 which strongly suggest the same author.

Purpose and Literary Content
John states his purpose for writing in 20:31 “But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.” Some important very early manuscripts read “continue to believe,” suggesting that John’s audience consisted of Christians whose faith is to be deepened by the book: compare 19:35. Surely, both the evangelistic and pastoral nature of the Gospel is evident.
The Gospel of John begins with a masterful prologue which introduces many of the major themes and motifs of the Gospel; in much the same way as an overture does for a musical work. The prologue introduces Jesus as the incarnate Word of God manifesting to the world Father God in fleshly form. John reaches with one hand to the western thought of logos and with the other hand he reaches for the eastern thought of phos (light) and draws them both into Jesus of Nazareth - the Christ of God. John introduces the superseding of the Old Covenant by the New, in verse 17 - which sets the tone for the theme of his Gospel.
The Johannine River: Water is central to this gospel. The Johannine river of the Water of Life begins with water being turned to wine at the marriage in Cana (2:1-12); and, continues to flow into the third chapter with the instruction to Nicodemus to be “Born of the water” (3:3-5); after which the Living Water is offered to the Samaritan woman at Jacob’s well (4:4-26); then, the Living Water is troubled for the healing at the pool of Bethesda (5:1-9); Jesus walks on the sea of Galilee (6:16-26); further, Jesus announces that He is the river of Living Water at the feast of Tabernacles (7:37-39); there is the healing of the blind man as he washed in the pool of Siloam (9:1-7); the washing of the disciples feet (13:4-17); water (with blood) came from the side of the crucified Christ (19:31-37); and finally, the post resurrection appearance of Jesus by the sea of Tiberius (chapter 21).
Signs: The word “sign” (Grk sēmainō, Strongs’ #G4591) is used in this gospel for miracle - the author lists seven of them. Each “sign” has been carefully chosen to guide the reader along the path of discovery to the person of Jesus of Nazareth, the Son of God. These particular “signs” serve a specific didactic purpose. The first “sign” is the transformation of water into wine (2:1-11); presaging the replacement of ceremonial washing of the Jews with the sanctifying properties of the blood and Spirit of the New Covenant. The second “sign” was the healing of the nobleman’s son (4:46-54) by the word of Jesus from a distance, which demonstrates Jesus as the Word of Life. The third “sign,” the healing of the paralytic at the Pool of Bethesda in chapter 5. draws the readers attention to the words of Jesus and compares them to the healing waters of the pool (5:1-9). The fourth “sign,” the feeding of the 5,000 with 5 loaves and two fish (6:1-14), recalls the feeding of Israel in the wilderness with the manna and looks forward to the Eucharistic ministry of the Lord’s church. The fifth “sign,” walking on the waters of the Sea of Galilee (6:18-20), recalls the crossing of the Red Sea by the children of Israel. These last two “signs” (feeding the 5,000 and walking on the water) symbolize a new Exodus (which is being led by Jesus - the prophet like unto Moses [De 18:15]) out of Judaism. The sixth “sign,” of the healing of the young man born blind (chapter 9), demonstrates the triumph of the Light of the World over darkness. The seventh “sign,” the raising of Lazarus (Chapter 11), demonstrates Jesus as the Resurrection and the Life.
Before we pass on from this section, a word must be said concerning a few of the events that are only recorded by John. First, it is interesting to this writer that only John mentions the ministry of Jesus spanning four passover seasons (see 2:13; 5:1; 6:4; and 11:55). This gives Jesus a public ministry that lasts three and one half years and manifests Him as the Lamb of God; which title is given Him in the very first chapter, v29. Second, only the writer of the Fourth Gospel records the first cleansing of the temple, which took place at the beginning of Christ’s ministry (2:13-22). This first cleansing was to cleans the temple for His ministry and the second cleansing (Mt 21:12ff; Mk 11:15-18; Lk 19:45-47) for His sacrifice. Both cleansings occurred during a passover season. Third, only John records the washing of feet after the Last Supper (see 13:4-17). By recording this event John is giving us a portrait of Jesus as the servant King. Christians forever afterward have learned the lesson of servant leadership. The unique material of this Gospel makes up 92% of its content; therefore, to speak to it all would require a full commentary of the Gospel. I only wanted to mention these three events because they give the Gospel hues of color that do not grace the synoptics.
John and Women: As does Luke, John is concerned with the position of women in the New Israel. This Gospel presents the Woman at the Well in Samaria (chapter 4) as a prototype of a missionary (4:4-42): she goes into the city and tells the story of Jesus and brings many people to Him. It is here, in Samaria, that Jesus is first said to be the Savior of the World. Further, the first to proclaim the message of the Resurrection is a woman, when Mary Magdalene took the good news to the apostles (20:11-18).
Symbolic Use of the Number Seven: Moreover, John employs the sacred number 7 in his Gospel (as he also did in the Apocalypse):
The Seven Discourses of the Fourth Gospel
  1. The New Birth (3:1-36);
  2. The Water of Life (4:1-42);
  3. The Son of Man (5:19-47);
  4. The Bread of Life (6:22-66);
  5. The Rivers of Living Water (7:1-57);
  6. The Light of the World (8:12-59);
  7. The Good Shepherd (10:1-42).
The Seven Miracles (Signs) of the Fourth Gospel
  1. Transforming the water into wine (2:1-11);
  2. Healing the nobleman’s son by His word (4:43-54);
  3. Healing the lame man at the pool of Bethesda (5:1-16);
  4. Feeding of the 5,000 men plus women and children (6:1-14);
  5. Walking on the Sea of Galilee (6:16-21);
  6. Healing of the blind man (9:1-12);
  7. Raising of Lazarus from the dead (11:1-46).
The Seven “I Am” Statements
  1. I am the Bread of Life (6:35-51);
  2. I am the Light of the World (8:12-9:5);
  3. I am the Door of the Sheep (10:7-9);
  4. I am the Good Shepherd (10:11-14);
  5. I am the Resurrection and the Life (11:35);
  6. I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life (14:6);
  7. I am the True Vine (15:1-5).
The symmetry of this Gospel will escape most who read it, but let us bow before its unique unity and stand at awe of its profound message as being from the realm the eternal.

Deity of Jesus
Lastly, it is evident throughout the fourth gospel that Jesus is to be accepted as being fully divine. The Apostle Paul lets us know that Jesus’ deity was veiled while He was here in the flesh (Philippians 2:5-8). Jesus, Himself, admits to His disciples that He had spoken of (His oneness with) the Father in cryptic terms but would later make all things concerning the Father and Himself clear (John 16:25). This promise was fulfilled when John quoted Jesus saying: “I am the Alpha and the Omega, theBeginning and the End,” says the Lord, “who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty” (Rev 1:8). Thus, the full deity of Christ Jesus is revealed. John writes of the divinity of Christ in, at least, seven places in his Gospel. These seven declarations of Jesus’ deity are listed here for the reader’s consideration.
1:1-3, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.”
1:14 “And the Word (which is God, see v1) was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.” ∼ First parenthesis mine.
8:24 “I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.” ∼ The word “he” is not part of the Grk text, and is, therefore, an interpolation. Jesus actually said: “Unless you all believe I am the I AM you will die in your sins.”
8:58 “Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.” ∼ Here, again, if words mean anything at all, Jesus is saying He is the I AM that spoke to Moses from the bush (Ge 3:14).
10:30 “I and my Father are one.” ∼ The Jews understood Him to be saying that He was homoousios (same as) the Father ontologically. They were so scandalized by this statement that they pick up stones to stone Him “because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God,” they said.
14:8-9 “Philip said to Him, “Lord, show us the Father, and it is sufficient for us.” Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; so how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? (NKJV)
20:28 “And Thomas answered and said to Him, “My Lord and my God!””
There is much more that can (and no doubt should) be said concerning the Fourth Gospel; but, we must leave it here, for the moment. We are prayerful that your interest in this unique Gospel has been excited, and that you will study it for all it is worth.

Apostolically Speaking
☩ Mar David Ignatius

If the ministry of the Bishop is a blessing to you, please consider leaving a monetary gift of any amount at the link provided here:

Own this book today! Click on the link for more information.



Letters to my Children on Apostolic Kingdom Theology: An Apostolic Answer to Dispensationalism Concerning the Mission of the Lord's Church and End-Time Events
Letters to my Children on Apostolic Kingdom Theology: An Apostolic Answer to Dispensationalism Concerning the Mission of the Lord's Church and End-Time Events
After spending over forty years in the dispensational doctrine, and having raise my children in that theological framework, I became a convinced adherent to a "kingdom" theology that recognizes the Church as the Israel of God, and that the first century actually saw the fulfillment of most of Matthew chapter 24. "Letters to My Children on Apostolic Kingdom Theology" is a compilation of twenty four letters written to my children explaining my journey, and showing how we were led astray from the apostolic teaching of Scripture to embrace a view recently come into the Lord's church, of which the apostles knew nothing. These "Letters" provide a systematic approach to Apostolic Eschatological study of Scripture. It is sure of interest all students of Scriptures.