MISUNDERSTANDING THE HOLY SPIRIT

The Holy Spirit can be defined in a simplest way as the “Spirit of God.” I have recently defined the Holy Spirit as: “The Supreme Force which prevents us from evil.” The basis of this definition is that in order to save others, you should be saved first. The Holy Spirit is the Third Person of the Holy Trinity[1]. Christian Faith is incomplete without the acceptance of Holy Spirit; even the Muslims accept the presence of Holy Spirit. The Holy Bible mentions the presence and works of the Holy Spirit on numerous occasions. No one can ignore the essentiality of the Holy Spirit.

    However, one should keep in mind that the phenomenon of Holy Spirit does not start with the earthly arrival of Jesus Christ; this holds true from the very beginning; however, He was introduced and promised by Jesus Christ for all who believe in Him. The Holy Bible speaks of this promise in John 16:5-16 as: “But now I am going to Him who sent Me… But I tell you the truth, it is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper shall not come to you; but if I go, I will send Him to you…. But when He, the Spirit of Truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth…” This promise was fulfilled at the Day of Pentecost: “And when the Day of Pentecost had come, they were all together in one place. And suddenly there came from heaven a noise like a violent, rushing wind, and it filled the whole house where they were sitting. And there appeared to them tongues as of fire distributing themselves, and they rested on each one of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and Began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit was giving them utterance.” (Acts 2:1-4).

    Ever since the fulfillment of this promise, the Holy Spirit works among the people of God. However, on many occasions, He is misunderstood by the prayer leader as well as the public. The preachers and leaders of most of the churches claim to have the Blessing of Holy Spirit. They also preach that if some one wants to receive the Holy Spirit, he should first be Baptized with Water by them. They strongly say that the Baptism of Holy Spirit is impossible with out the Baptism of Water. They present the following passage in their support: “Truly, truly I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.” (John 3:5-6).

    Before going any further, let me explain the true meaning of this passage as it has been wrongly interpreted by many theologians. Jesus Christ says in verse 5: “Truly, truly I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” Now link this verse with verse 6: “That which is born of flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.” Now do you understand what I mean to say? The word “water” used in verse 5 symbolizes the sign of life—it refers to our parents from whom we are begotten. Verse 6 clarifies my view as “which is born of flesh is flesh, and that which is born of Spirit is spirit.” Kindly note that in both these verses, the word “Spirit” does not change which clearly refers to the Holy Spirit; however, the word “water” is changed as it is symbolized with physical birth—“born of flesh is flesh.” Also note that there are only two forms of births: the first one is Physical Birth, of which Jesus Christ says is from water or flesh; and the second one is the Spiritual Birth, of which Jesus Christ says is from the Holy Spirit. Therefore, never ever think the word “water” used in verse 5 as H₂O or D₂O, because it seems ridiculous after reading verse 6. Man can only born twice—first time from his parents, and second time from the Holy Spirit.

    The Holy Spirit needs no bounds of things like water. By preaching the baptism of water, they show that the Holy Spirit is conditional—they apply the condition of baptism of water. Moreover, they say that Christ was also baptized by John the Baptist, and at the same time Holy Spirit came to Him; therefore, every person should take the baptism of water. However, they don’t understand the true meaning of Christ’s baptism; they again mix it with H₂O. John 1:29-34 clarifies the purpose of Christ’s baptism as: “… And I did not recognize Him, but in order that He might be manifested to Israel, I came baptizing in water…. And I did not recognize Him, but He who sent me to baptize in water said to me, He upon whom you see the Spirit descending and remaining upon Him, this is the one who baptizes in the Holy Spirit…” This clears the fact that Jesus Christ took this baptism just to be “manifested to Israel.” Thus it was God’s plan to manifest Jesus Christ by this way. Now, do you think Jesus Christ needed any baptism to receive Holy Spirit?

    In addition to this, the Book of Acts clearly reveals how people received the Holy Spirit and then they were baptized by water. The claim for baptism of water holds true only for the people who, previously, don’t believe in Jesus Christ and are newly Christened—this baptism means assuring their entry into Christian Faith. Acts 10:44-48 clears my view: “While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who were listening to the message. And all the circumcised believers who had come with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out upon Gentiles also. For they were hearing them speaking with tongues and exalting God. Then Peter answered, Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we did, can he? And he ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ….” Now these people received the baptism of Holy Spirit even before the baptism of water—so where goes the condition of water first and Holy Spirit afterwards?

    This does not happen just once, there are many references in The Holy Bible, but I will not discuss them now; as I have made my point clear that the Holy Spirit is not confined to things like water—our first misunderstanding is clear.

    Now the second misunderstanding is a worst one. It is about the miracles that the Holy Spirit performs. I believe in the powers of the Holy Spirit and the miracles performed by Him; however, one should keep in mind that all the miracles performed worldwide are not backed by the Holy Spirit—Satan[2] works very craftily. The Holy Bible witnesses this many times: “But I am afraid, lest as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, your minds would be led astray from the simplicity and purity of devotion to Christ…. For such men are false apostles, deceitful workers, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. Therefore, it is not surprising if his servants also disguise themselves as servants of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their deeds.” (2 Corinthians 11:3-15). The Holy Bible further warns us in the following words: “Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world.” (1 John 4:1).

    Now you will say that we have seen miracles in front of our eyes; how can Satan perform such miracles? The Holy Bible answers you in Revelation 13:11-17 as: “…And he performs great signs so that he even makes fire come down out of the heaven to the earth in the presence of men. And he deceives those who dwell on the earth because of the signs which it was going to perform… And there was given to him to give breath to the image of the beast…” This clearly shows the powers of Satan. So, there remains no doubt that Satan disguises as Holy Spirit and beguiles people.

    Today, a trend has been set for crusades and healing ministries. Many of them heal the public, perform wonderful miracles, but either their theology is incorrect[3] or, from any other end, they are possessed by Satan. They perform miracles and after the meeting or crusade is over, the persons go back to their previous condition. Is this the work of Holy Spirit? Does the Holy Spirit comes and goes away? No, this was not done by the Holy Spirit. Whenever the Holy Spirit comes into a person, He completely changes his life—a change is what God desires; but these so-called Holy Spirit Bearers neither have a change in their own lives nor do they take any interest in this. Their motto is eat, drink and be happy. Then where is the Holy Spirit? He is no where near them.  For a moment, it seems as if there was a general hospital where every disease is cured. And can you answer me, of these cured people, how many received the Baptism of Actual Holy Spirit? I today ask these preachers, how many souls have they truly won for Jesus Christ?

    They have fruitless lives for God. Curing people is not all what God desires; He wants people to come towards Him with pure hearts. They speak in tongues, perform miracles, yet their souls are under the possession of evil spirits. They don’t respect God, Son and the Holy Spirit in a truer sense their women wear shorts[4] and claim: “Halleluiah, the Holy Spirit has arrived.” The Holy Bible rightly says: “For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God, or give thanks; but they became futile in their speculations, and their heart was darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools…” (Romans 1: 21-22). Some of them start joking in churches just to create public interest. So where is the respect that God expects? And where is that solemnity that God desires: “Guard your steps as you go to the house of God, and draw near to listen rather than to offer the sacrifice of fools; for they do not know they are doing evil. Do not be hasty in word or impulsive in thought to bring up a matter in the presence of God. For god is in heaven and you are on the earth; therefore let your words be few. For the dream comes through much effort, and the voice of a fool through many words.” (Ecclesiastes 5:1-3)

    In addition to this, Paul gives us an excellent criterion for judging these people in Galatians 5:16-25 as: “… But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law. Now those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. If we live by the Spirit, let us also walk by the Spirit.” I will not take this discussion any further as you can judge this by yourselves—however, any difficulty, offense or misunderstanding arising out of this discussion can be dealt separately. I am hopeful that this explanation will serve your purpose and will surely force you to think it otherwise. May God Bless you all. (Amen).

                  

Brother in Christ,

Jamshed Gill

---

[1] For further inquiry see The Inner Vision, Issue No. 02: Holy Trinity: The Most Controversial Issue.

[2] More detail is available from The Inner Vision, Issue No. 10: Who Is Satan?

[3] A detailed study of this topic is available from Kingdom or Rebeldom: Rejecting Christ.

[4] For more details, consult The Inner Vision, Issue No. 17: CAN WOMEN TEACH OR PREACH THE HOLY GOSPEL?

DESTINY: AN OPTIMISTIC VIEW

There has been a sharp controversy over the issue of Destiny. The word Destiny can be defined in simple words as, what will necessarily happen to any person or thing; one’s fate. The same meaning applies to the Biblical concept of Destiny, but it suggests a broader and deeper sense. Most often people say that it is no use to do good works; do whatever you like, what is written in your fate is bound to happen. Do you also agree with this concept? If yes, let yourself remain with me for a while so that we can discuss this in detail.

    On numerous occasions The Holy Bible announces that everything is written from the very first day. Paul, in 2 Timothy 1:9 proclaims: “who has saved us, and called us with a Holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was granted us in Christ Jesus from all eternity.” This clearly shows God’s Master Plan for mankind. In addition to this, the happenings of The Holy Bible were foretold many years before their accomplishments. So there remains no confusion about the fact that the prophesies were accomplished as The Holy Bible describes. Now there arises a question of individual importance. It is about the individual providence after death. Will he receive eternal life or not? To receive eternal life, it is compulsory that one’s name should be registered in the Book of Life. Is our name registered in the Book of Life? This is the main point of discussion. Now we will separate our discussion in two parts—the first part is, if our name is not registered, then how can it be registered in the Book of Life? The second part is if our name is registered, then is it enough for us?

    Coming towards our first point, if our name is not registered in the Book of Life, then it is an extremely serious issue. We have to register it; however, we cannot register it ourselves, it is God’s will. But for the registration purpose, we first require true faith in Jesus Christ, complete submission in His hands. This is the first step we have to take now the rest of the work will be done by Jesus Christ Himself. Now link this with our second point, which suggests that just registering our name in the Book of Life is not enough. Now you must be surprised, but I am thinking it in another way. The name registered in the Book of Life can also be moved—this removal is done in case we have just nominal faith and not true faith, our deeds are not according to what God desires. I will give you an example from The Holy The Holy Bible (Exodus 32:32-33) where Moses says: “But now, if Thou wilt, forgive their sin—and if not, blot me out from Thy book which thou hast written! And the Lord said to Moses, whoever has sinned against Me, I will blot him out of My book.” This clearly indicates that whoever will sin, his name will be blotted from the Book of Life. Here arises a sense of responsibility for us—we should walk by the paths explained in The Holy Gospel; in short, perfection is required.

    This was an overview of the issue; now let us capture it in a deeper sense. There are two types of principles existing with the universe—purpose or principle of creation, purpose or principle of restoration. According to the principle of creation, to attain perfection, man needs to fulfill his portion of responsibility. God is Almighty, He can save man any way; but it will be expressed only when man can fulfill his portion of responsibility. You can lift your one leg and still stand but you cannot lift your second leg also while standing. The same is the case with Destiny. God predestined to realize the purpose of creation, but, because of fall of man, the purpose of creation was not realized and the mankind came under satanic rule. Thus, the purpose of creation was lost to Satan and the Kingdom of God[1] must be restored—this is Salvation. The Salvation is for those who will have registered their names in the Book of Life till end.

    The phenomenon of Salvation was laid from the very beginning. Most of the theologians are confused in the regard that God created light, and this was the very first work done by Him in the very first day. You can agree with them, but I can’t. Read Genesis 1:1 which says: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.” Did you get the point? Yes, I think you are wise enough to capture it. God first created heavens and earth, and after that anything else was done. So the very first work done by God was the creation of heavens and earth. This was the commencement of the creation process. Now read verse 2: “And the earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters.” This clearly shows that something tragic happened between 1^st and 2^nd verse. Do you know what this was? It was the first rebellion of Satan after which he was thrown on earth from heavens. Isaiah 14:12-15 describes it as: “How you have fallen from heaven, O star of the morning, son of the dawn! You have been cut down to the earth…”

    Kindly, note this point that when God created other things, Satan was on this earth. Satan’s second rebellion was his conspiracy for Adam and Eve and this certainly worked for him. God knew that Satan will beguile Adam and Eve; therefore, He gave three of them free hand. They freely moved wherever they liked in the Garden of Eden. God could also have restricted them well before as He did this after throwing them out of the Garden of Eden with blazing sword. Thus, it was predestined. God gave man free will that’s why He planted the Forbidden Tree and the Tree of Life in the same Garden. He gave humans a choice of two ways—good and evil. It was predestined that man will choose evil.    

    The Holy Bible has mentioned on several occasions about the Book of Life. The most prominent of all these references is Revelation 20:11-15, where the description is given as: “And I saw a great white throne and Him who sat upon it,…and the books were opened; and another book was opened, which is book of life; and the dead were judged from the things which were written in the books, according to their deeds…and they were judged, everyone of them according to their deeds…And if any one’s name was not found in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire.” Here, two types of books are mentioned—first type is other books of deeds, the second type is the Book of Life. Of these types, the Book of Life is of most reverence. However, the importance of other books of deeds cannot be ignored as the judgment will be made according to these books.

    The Book of Life is a single book comprising lists of the saved people. On the other hand, other books of deeds comprise of works done by mankind. The Book of Life lists the blessed people and a double check is done with the help of other books so that there remains no confusion about anyone’s entry into the Kingdom of God. I am hopeful that this explanation will serve your purpose and will surely force you to think it otherwise. God Bless you all. (Amen).

                  

Brother in Christ,

Jamshed Gill

---

[1] More detail is available from Kingdom or Rebeldom.

HOW DID JOHN THE BAPTIST COME TO DOUBT JESUS CHRIST?

To understand this phenomenon abundantly, we should go to The Age of Christ. The Age of Christ was a mixture of different religious doctrines; even the Jews were practicing different religious views. About 144 B.C. Jews were divided in thee major tribes, namely: Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenees or Therapeutaees. However, they all were agreed on the fact that the Promised Messiah is yet to come and they were anxiously waiting for Him. They were so anxious about this that they inquired John the Baptist: “And this is the witness of John, when the Jews sent to him priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, who are you? And he confessed, I am not the Christ.” (John 1:19-20) If John the Baptist was not Christ then it is understandable that Jesus Christ was the actual Christ of whom John the Baptist also confesses. But the problem arises when John the Baptist in Luke 7:18-23 asked “are you the Expected One or do we look for someone else?”  And the situation complexes when Jesus Christ himself exclaims, “And blessed is he who keeps from stumbling over Me.” Do you understand why John had to ask this if Christ was the One to come since he had seen the Spirit as a dove descend upon the Lord (John 1:33-34); and for whom did Jesus Christ say this. If your answer is no, let me help you in this matter.

 Before going any further, let me tell you that the Bible is a Multifaceted Book. It is not like any other ordinary book, but it comprises deeper inner meanings. It contains symbolism on numerous occasions. Unfortunately, most of the theologians have misinterpreted these lines. They argue that John the Baptist doubted Jesus Christ as he was languishing in prison for about two years. However, I do not agree with these theologians. If John the Baptist had any doubt in his mind, this means that the prophesies, which he had personally made about Jesus Christ, were also doubtful and uncertain. How can a prophet misjudge as they are ruled by the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit cannot inspire error or doubt. Did John the Baptist stumble over Jesus Christ? The answer is no.

The fact is that, John the Baptist wanted to clarify the position of Jesus Christ in front of his disciples; so that his disciples can reconcile with the disciples of Jesus Christ and do not form any other tribe after his death as there were three doctrines already working. John the Baptist on each and every time accepts the Greatness of Jesus Christ. In John 1:29-36 John the Baptist declares Jesus Christ as the Son of God and the Promised Messiah. He allows two of his disciples to join Jesus Christ and they joined Him. This clearly shows that John the Baptist wanted his disciples to follow Jesus Christ. And for your interest, three out of twelve disciples that Jesus Christ had, were associated from John the Baptist, namely: Peter, Andrew and Philip. This clarifies the fact that John the Baptist wanted his disciples to shift towards Jesus Christ. He handed over his ministry to Jesus Christ and therefore, he had no doubt in his mind about Jesus Christ. He wanted Jesus Christ to flourish as his duty was just to prepare the way for Jesus Christ. Theologians may not agree but if he had any doubt about Jesus Christ then why did he exclaims otherwise when he was asked: “John answered and said: A man can receive nothing, unless it has been given him from heaven. You yourselves bear me witness, that I said, I am not the Christ, but, I have been sent before Him. He who has the bride is the bridegroom; but the friend of the bridegroom, who stands and hears him, rejoices greatly because of the bridegroom’s voice. And so this joy of mine has been made full. He must increase, but I must decrease.” (John 3:22-30)

So, where you place yourself now? I think you are agreed at last that John the Baptist was in no doubt about Jesus Christ. John the Baptist knew everything about the prophesies made for Jesus Christ. He also knew that he is going to be killed shortly; therefore, he did not want his disciples to live astray, he wanted to associate them with Jesus Christ, however he linked them in an out of the ordinary manner. And Jesus Christ also answered him in an eccentric way. He did not say, “Yes, I am the Promised Messiah,” instead he performed miracles in front of their eyes so that they can strengthen the witness of John the Baptist and shift towards Him. This process of shifting was not a physical one but a spiritual one, that’s why John the Baptist uses complex way and Jesus Christ replies in an excellent manner.   

Now one thing is sure that John the Baptist had no doubt about Jesus Christ in his mind; he just wanted to link the remaining part of Jews towards Him and sends his disciples to witness physically. But now another question may lurk up in your mind that if John the Baptist had no doubt in his mind than why did Jesus Christ exclaims: “And blessed is he who keeps from stumbling over Me.” Is He saying this about John the Baptist? The answer is no. Every theologian has give the same remarks after reading these verses that Jesus Christ is here speaking about John the Baptist. Here, I do not accept the claim made by the theologians that this is said about John the Baptist. If it is not said for John the Baptist then for whom it is said? This is the question that needs to be solved and preached throughout the world.

Now follow me carefully. This exclamation made by Jesus Christ holds deeper implication. It is not for John the Baptist but for the Jews of that time. Everyone will agree with me on the account that the Pharisees and other learned Jews opposed Jesus Christ and doubted his personality. In Matthew 13: 53-58 they regard him to be the son of a carpenter and took offense at Him. And He did not do many miracles there because of their unbelief. They also doubted Him in this regard that He performed miracles; according to them he was doing this with the help of Beelzebub. Though they were waiting for a Promised Messiah, they were not willing to accept Him as the Promised Messiah. In Matthew 12:38-45, the Pharisees and some of the scribes ask for a sign and Jesus Christ replies to them that no sign shall be given to that evil and adulterous generation except the sign of Jonah. On numerous occasions the Jews doubted about the Promised Messiah, Jesus Christ. Even while Crucifying they did not accept Him to be their Messiah; and not even after He was raised from the dead. You can also witness that on several occasions the Jews contradicted Jesus Christ and offended Him. But John the Baptist never ever offended or doubted Jesus Christ.

   

 Therefore, is this realistic that Jesus Christ would have left the doubtful Jews and charged the witnessing John the Baptist, who witnessed about His truth? Of course not. Let me introduce the thought provoking verses from the same so-called doubted paragraph in front of you: “And when the messengers of John had left, He began to speak to the multitudes about John, what did you go out into the wilderness to look at? …..… A prophet? Yes, I say to you, and one who is more than a prophet. …….. And when all the people and the tax-gatherers heard this, they acknowledged God’s justice having been baptized with the baptism of John the Baptist. But the Pharisees and the lawyers rejected God’s purpose for themselves…” Then Jesus Christ forcefully says: “To what then shall I compare the men of this generation, and what are they like?” (Luke 7:24-35).  Now who did disagree with Jesus Christ? Surely the Pharisees and other men of that time. They rejected God’s purpose for themselves and Christ knew in advance that they will do this; that’s why Jesus Christ indirectly warned them in the words: “And blessed is he who keeps from stumbling over Me.”

Jesus Christ knew that the Pharisees always stumble over Him; therefore, He notifies them in an indirect and quiet manner. Apparently it seems that He is saying this about John the Baptist but in reality He is saying this about the Pharisees and the stone-hearted Jews of His times who carried doubts about Him, His Father and the Holy Spirit. Undoubtedly, the said text needs a deeper understanding; otherwise, it seems misleading even to the greatest of the theologians. I am hopeful that this explanation will serve your purpose and will surely force you to think it otherwise. May God Bless you all. (Amen).

Brother in Christ,

Jamshed Gill

Cults in Christianity: Philadelphia Church

Before commenting anything, I want to clarify you about the fact that this Philadelphia Church is not the sixth of the seven churches listed in the Book of Revelation; as it was founded in the United States on December 20, 1989; however, they claim it to be the one mentioned in The Revelation Chapter 3 and 10—but it can be proved historically otherwise. This Church is also incorporated in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, South Africa and the United Kingdom; it also has its members in India and Pakistan—I have recently found its member in the figure of a net friend here in Pakistan, and this Issue is dedicated to her with a hope that it will guide her and strengthen her faith. The Philadelphia Church’s roots are traced from the Worldwide Church of God, founded by Herbert W. Armstrong. When the Worldwide Church of God began to move away from the deviant doctrines of their late founder, Herbert W. Armstrong, many splinter groups developed. The Philadelphia Church of God, under the leadership of an Armstrong clone, Gerald Flurry, quickly came to the forefront. Gerald Flurry founded his church soon after he was fired from the Worldwide Church of God, on December 7th, 1989.

Herbert W. Armstrong died on January 16, 1986. Mr. Armstrong sought to be of service to all nations. He has designated great claims to his personality, like: “... after three and a half  years of intensive study and training, Christ ordained me to preach this same Gospel of the Kingdom in all the world as a witness to all nations (Matthew 24:14). This ordination took place at, or very near, the Day of Pentecost, 1931.”(Autobiography of Herbert W. Armstrong: 1986 Edition, page. 428). After his death, Worldwide Church leaders began to remove Mr. Armstrong’s works from publication. By 1989, a serious doctrinal crisis had developed within the Worldwide Church of God. Gerald Flurry and John Amos (1929-1993), long-time ministers of the Church, disagreed with the removal of Mr. Armstrong’s literature and were subsequently barred from fellowship with the Worldwide Church. It is out of this controversy that the Philadelphia Church of God was born. Now you can judge by yourselves what better thing can be produced from a controversy, as two wrongs cannot make a right. The Philadelphia Church seeks to continue the work established by Herbert W. Armstrong. The Philadelphia Church of God accomplishes its goal through The Key of David TV broadcast, aired weekly; The Philadelphia Trumpet, published monthly; and through various booklets distributed free.

Mr. Flurry claims that his church is the only true church on the face of the earth today. He repeatedly makes statements like, “... truth is in only one church today, God’s church. Only God’s Philadelphia Church has retained God’s Law in this end time.” Not only does Mr. Flurry claim to be the only true church, he also claims to be the only one who understands Satan: ‘Only the Philadelphia Church of God understands Satan today. Only we can reveal Satan to the world’. He is counting on the loyalty of his followers to Herbert W. Armstrong. He has therefore, elevated Herbert W. Armstrong to heights of glory. The Trumpet of February 1995, page 5 had this statement, “Only the true disciples knew that John the Baptist filled the first century role of Elijah. And only God’s true disciples today know that Herbert W. Armstrong was the end-time Elijah!” Do you think it is true? If it is so, read the Holy Bible carefully and thoughtfully. Conceitedly claiming exclusive revelation from God, Flurry continues, “Only the Philadelphia Church of God is receiving new prophetic revelation from God today.”

Here are some more ridiculous examples, taken from their official publication, The Philadelphia Trumpet of April 1994:

         “Mr. Armstrong prepared the way for Christ's second coming. He preached the Gospel to the whole world for the first time in almost 2,000 years. He also restored the great foundational truth of God’s family to the earth.” Is this you can witness today? If you read the Holy Bible, you can witness the fakeness of this statement.

         “In terms of people exposed to the gospel and converted members, Mr. Armstrong probably did the greatest work of God in 2,000 years.” This does not take into account the services of Saint Paul, Peter, John and other True Christians .

         “...Mr. Armstrong is our primary connection to God in this end time...” If you read the Holy Bible, can you say that there is any other connection given to humanity for salvation  except Jesus Christ? Surely, there is no connection to God other than Jesus Christ. Read and believe: “And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no name under heaven that has been given among men, by which we must be saved.” (Acts 4:12). If the Holy Bible says this then from where the name of Mr. Armstrong came?

Repeatedly, in every issue of his magazine, Mr. Flurry exalts Herbert Armstrong and names himself and his church as replacements. These claims appeal greatly to those who place all their trust and faith blindly in Herbert W. Armstrong instead of Jesus Christ; and now have found a place to transfer their devotion. They cannot, or will not, look for correction to the word of God, but want an Armstrong clone. They want to be given ‘absolute truth’ by an ‘absolute leader’ that is Herbert W. Armstrong. What a dangerous mind set!

    

Further more, Mr. Flurry echoes the profane views of Mr. Armstrong. The Holy Trinity  is called ‘pagan’. The Worldwide Church of God is attacked for now accepting the Biblical view of God’s nature. Mr. Flurry mocks the shed blood of Christ in these words, “People want to believe we are simply saved by our faith in Christ's blood. As Mr. Armstrong said, that ‘is nothing but a dead faith—and a dead faith never will save one soul.’” This certainly is opposite to what the Holy Bible teaches. The Holy Bible clearly states, “…the blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin.” (1 John 1:7). Now the choice is yours, who is telling the truth—the Holy Bible or Mr. Armstrong? In addition to this, rejecting the Biblical teaching that Christ has completely atoned for our sins at Calvary, Mr. Flurry states, “After accepting Jesus Christ as our Savior, Paul was very clear about our need to live in accordance with God’s Law”. Philadelphia Church of God followers try very hard to keep the Old Testament Law by their works and festivals. If you are a Philadelphia Church of God member, you can disagree but first read this: “For the word of the cross is to those who are perishing foolishness, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.” (1 Corinthians 1:18) Mr. Flurry says, “A mere faith in Christ alone will not save one soul.” Disagreeing with Mr. Flurry, the Bible says in Ephesians 2:8, 9: “For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works…”

    

I know Philadelphia Church of God Members, love God, and try to serve Him; however, they are always kept in a state of uncertainty. They love Jesus Christ but this love is not a 100%, rather it has a hint of weakness—for instance, they believe in True Christian Biblical Doctrines about 90—95% but Jesus Christ demands 100% from all of us, just don’t get swayed by the so-called movement of the Holy Spirit, judge it according to the Holy Bible. Once you are truly converted, truly born again, you are filled with peace. It is exactly as 1 John 5:12, 13 says, “He who has the Son has the life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have the life. These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, in order that you may KNOW that you have eternal life.” However, unfortunately, the true teachings of the church have not been clearly disclosed to the public, they are afraid if these are disclosed, they will lose their members. Please note down that, you need to have the Son of God, Jesus Christ truly in your heart and your life. If you have the Son, you have eternal life. Notice also that you may KNOW you have eternal life. How can we break through false teaching, false prophets and false interpretations? Leave it all behind and turn to Jesus in prayer. May, God guide you in the True Path.

    

I beseech you dear ones in the Philadelphia Church of God, will you not turn your hearts to Jesus and trust Him alone? Do you realize how dangerous and mind-controlling the Philadelphia Church of God is? I know my words must have offended you but it is a bitter reality that everyone should accept. My aim is not to dishearten you but to draw out my Christian fellows from dangerous teachings. I know the teachings of Philadelphia Church of God have strongly rooted in your heart and soul, you also claim to have the Holy Spirit; but you are unaware of the actual teachings of this Church. That is why I call this an erroneous church. They claim that The Holy Spirit has guided them to join this church but this is not true. Before claiming anything to the Holy Spirit, one should carefully examine whether he has the Holy Spirit in reality or he is just guided by some satanic policy. I am hopeful that this explanation will serve your purpose and will surely force you to think it otherwise. God bless you all. (Amen).

 Brother in Christ,

Jamshed Gill

CAN WOMEN TEACH OR PREACH THE HOLY GOSPEL?

   Christianity is not as easy as we pronounce it. The Earlier Church was faced by terrible conditions as the saints were thrown into imprisonment and killed by the Romans. This was due to their hatred towards Christianity. The holy women of that time were also disgraced. Therefore, it was decided that majority of the women should live in their houses, take care of their children and family, and the men should go and face the music of the Romans; then the women can learn this from their husbands at home—this formed a chain of teaching and learning, and it was practiced in Rome as well as other brutal areas. The Holy Gospel has discussed on many occasions about this. Therefore, it was not possible for all the women to take part in preaching; instead their duty was to comfort and help the remaining. The time passed on and the situations changed steadily; now the women gradually started taking part in teaching and preaching The Holy Gospel, but remaining in the limits as described in The Holy Bible.

    Ever since the advent of Modernized Christianity, teaching and preaching of The Holy Gospel has taken a new form. There are controversial views on the subject that can women preach The Holy Gospel or not? The main source of this query is taken from 1 Corinthians 14:34-36, where Paul writes: “Let the women keep silent in the churches; for they are not permitted to speak, but let them subject themselves, just as the Law also says. And if they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is improper for a woman to speak in church….” (The Holy Bible: New American Standard, Broadman and Holman Publishers, Tennessee.)

    Certainly these lines show that women should not preach or teach The Holy Gospel. However, the surface meaning cannot fulfill our mission. You will be surprised here that I don’t agree with the translator in this regard. I have my own interpretation as I have consulted this with Arabic, Persian and Urdu translations. The translator here has unknowingly used the word “permitted” instead he should have used here the word “ordered” as the versions of Arabic, Persian and Urdu translate this with a word “hukum” which means “order.” Now the actual translation becomes: “Let the women keep silent in the churches; for they are not ordered to speak, but let them subject themselves, just as the Law also says…”

    Kindly note that here Paul has not used the words “ordered not to;” instead he has used the words “not ordered to” The words “not ordered to” elucidate that women are not forced to speak in churches; which means that they can speak but there is no compulsion on them in this matter. On the other hand, the words “not permitted to” suggest that if women speak in churches, they commit sin and break the Law. Therefore, the whole meaning changes quite severely.

    Now let us consider the second part of this verse which says: “…but let them subject themselves, just as the Law also says. And if they desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is improper for a woman to speak in church….” The Law here refers to Genesis 3:16: “… yet your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you.” For further clarification of the word “subject themselves” see 1 Peter 3:1 : “In the same way, you wives, be submissive to your own husbands …” This submission suggests the superiority of man over woman, as woman was derived from man, and for man. However, The Holy Bible also accepts the equal importance of both and says that no one can survive alone. 

    Now over viewing the above discussion, it becomes quite clear that The Holy Bible does not ban women to speak in churches; instead they are not permitted to speak before their husbands—this speaking is not normal conversation but it is quarreling or ill-tempered discussion, as The Holy Bible teaches us to love every one.

    Surely, the women are permitted to speak in churches but are not ordered to speak. There is no compulsion on them. And The Holy Bible proves this; Acts 2:17-18 clarifies this in the following words, this text can also be harmonized with Joel 2:28-32 : “And it shall be in the last days, God says, that I will pour forth of My Spirit upon all mankind; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream Dreams; even upon My bond slaves, both men and women, I will in those days pour forth of My Spirit, and they shall prophesy…” Now just think if women were not permitted to speak in the churches, then why The Holy Bible speaks about them?

    Now let me give you some more Biblical references concerning the said subject. Romans 16:1-15 gives a strong foundation to defend my case. It clearly explains the role of women in the Early Church: “I commend to you our sister Phoebe, who is a servant of the church which is at Cenchrea; that you receive her in the Lord in a manner worthy of the saints, and that you help her in whatever matter she may have need of you; for she herself has also been a helper of many, and of myself as well….” This includes a list of women working for Lord and Paul appreciates their efforts. Then how can Paul ban them from speaking in churches, certainly this is a misunderstood phenomenon. Another strong reference can be given from Matthew 28:5-7: “And the angel answered and said to the women, Do not be afraid; for I know that you are looking for Jesus who has been crucified. He is not here, for He has risen, just as He said. Come, see the place where He was lying. And go quickly and tell His disciples that He has risen from the dead….” Now the women were advised to spread this Good News; and for your interest, the very word Gospel means Good News; so how can anyone prevent women from spreading The Holy Gospel?

    Certainly, Paul’s interpretation has been wrongly judged by many theologians. Now take another verse from Acts 21:9: “Now this man had four virgin daughters who were prophetesses.” Therefore, The Holy Bible speaks of women prophesying, teaching and preaching The Holy Gospel. So where you place this objection that women can not teach or preach The Holy Gospel? Certainly, as I have said earlier, this is a misunderstanding about Paul’s Epistle due to less understanding of the Early Church’s state of affairs.  

    Thus, over viewing the above discussion, it becomes quite clear that The Holy Bible permits women to teach and preach The Holy Gospel. However, one should keep in mind that this permission holds some obligations as well. For instance, if you have an appointment with some high-ranked official, you will prepare and dress up like a gentleman. However, more preparation is required to go before God. Wearing shorts, while praying or preaching, does not make any sense to me. This does not create an environment of respect; rather, it looks as if we were to visit our worldly mates and not the Jehovah God. Paul has rightly pointed out this fact on more than one time, for reference see 1 Corinthians 11:3-16: “… But every woman who has her head uncovered while praying or prophesying disgraces her head…. Therefore the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels….Judge for yourselves: is it proper for a woman to pray to God with head uncovered? Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him, but if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her? For her hair is given to her for covering. But if one is inclined to be contentious, we have no other practice, nor have the churches of God.”

    This is what The Holy Bible calls a submission. For further inquiry, see 1 Peter 3:1-6: “…And let not your adornment be merely external—braiding the hair, and wearing gold jewelry, or putting on dresses; but let it be the hidden person of the heart, with imperishable quality of gentle and quiet spirit, which is precious in the sight of God. For in this way in former times the holy women also, who hoped in God, used to adorn themselves, being submissive to their own husbands. Thus Sarah obeyed Abraham calling him lord, and you have become her children if you do what is right without being frightened by any fear.”

    Can you tell me today how many women fulfill this? You will say that the world has changed and modernized. But will you also say that the Word of God has also changed and modernized? No, never, the Word of God is unchangeable. It is constant and holds true for all ages and civilizations. Covering the head and body properly suggests a sense of respect—the respect that we show towards God, our Lord. We should abide by the laws described in The Holy Bible and not what is taught by the modernized society. He wants us in pure form, pure from the heart.

    Moreover, there are many misleading ministries working today. They are working for Antichrist instead of Jesus Christ . And women play a vital role in these ministries. Although they perform miracles and preach amazingly, yet they preach not what they should preach. They teach and preach, perform miracles but of what use? They take The Holy Spirit  just as a toy in their hands and play with it; about these The Holy Gospel also warns us. All this is due to Modernized Christianity and lack of True Christian Faith understanding—modern women are the role models of this. 

    Therefore, one should keep it in mind that The Holy Bible allows women to prophesy and preach but it has to be done in a manner which The Holy Bible describes and not any other manner, which the Law prohibits. I am hopeful that this explanation will serve your purpose and will surely force you to think it otherwise. May God Bless you all. (Amen).

                 

Brother in Christ,

Jamshed Gill

Book Review: The Waste Land by T S Eliot

T. S. Eliot, the author of The Waste Land, was born on 26 September 1888 at St Louis, Missouri and died on 4 January 1965 in London. He married Vivienne Haigh-Wood, June 1915. After her emotional and physical health deteriorated in the early 1920s, Eliot separated from Vivienne, avoiding her all but once, until her death at Northumberland Mental Hospital in 1947. In 1957, Eliot married Esme Valerie Fletcher, his secretary at Faber & Faber and 38 years his junior. About this marriage Eliot wrote: “To her, the marriage brought no happiness. To me, it brought the state of mind out of which came The Waste Land.”

Eliot probably worked on the text that became The Waste Land for several years preceding its first publication in 1922. In a letter to New York lawyer and patron of modernism John Quinn dated 9 May 1921, Eliot wrote that he had a long poem in mind and partly on paper which I am wishful to finish. Richard Aldington, in his memoirs, relates that a year or so before Eliot read him the manuscript draft of The Waste Land in London, Eliot visited him in the country. While walking through a graveyard, they discussed Thomas Gray's Elegy Written in a Country Churchyard. Aldington writes: “I was surprised to find that Eliot admired something so popular, and then went on to say that if a contemporary poet, conscious of his limitations as Gray evidently was, would concentrate all his gifts on one such poem he might achieve a similar success.”

Eliot, having been diagnosed with some form of nervous disorder, had been recommended rest, and applied for three months’ leave from the bank where he was employed; the reason stated on his staff card was nervous breakdown. He and his first wife, Vivienne Haigh-Wood Eliot, travelled to the coastal resort of Margate for a period of convalescence. While there, Eliot worked on the poem, and possibly showed an early version to Ezra Pound.

The Waste Land, by T.S. Eliot, is widely regarded as one of the most important poems of the 20th century and a central text in Modernist poetry. Published in 1922, the 434-line poem first appeared in the United Kingdom in the October issue of The Criterion and in the United States in the November issue of The Dial. It was published in book form in December 1922. Among its famous phrases are "April is the cruelest month", "I will show you fear in a handful of dust", and the mantra in the Sanskrit language "Shantih shantih shantih".

Eliot's poem loosely follows the legend of the Holy Grail and the Fisher King combined with vignettes of contemporary British society. Eliot employs many literary and cultural allusions from the Western canon, Buddhism and the Hindu Upanishads. Because of this, critics and scholars regard the poem as obscure. The poem shifts between voices of satire and prophecy featuring abrupt and unannounced changes of speaker, location and time and conjuring of a vast and dissonant range of cultures and literatures.

It is a long, complex poem about the psychological and cultural crisis that came with the loss of moral and cultural identity after World War I. When it was first published, the poem was considered radically experimental. Eliot dispenses with traditional verse forms and instead juxtaposes sordid images of popular culture with erudite allusions to classical and ancient literature and myths. The title is indicative of Eliot’s attitude toward his contemporary society, as he uses the idea of a dry and sterile wasteland as a metaphor for a Europe devastated by war and desperate for spiritual replenishment but depleted of the cultural tools necessary for renewal.

The poem is deliberately obscure and fragmentary, incorporating variant voices, multiple points of view, and abrupt shifts in dramatic context. The motif of moral degeneration, however, is prevalent throughout the poem, the premise being that contemporary Europe, obsessed with novelty, trends, materialism, and instant gratification, lacks the faith and substance to reaffirm its cultural heritage, to reestablish the sense of order and stability that historical continuity once provided. In an attempt to counter the cultural deficit of the present with the rich cultural heritage of the past, Eliot combines images from pagan rituals and religious texts with ancient fertility rituals and allusions to legends of the Grail. These images of ceremony and tradition are set against bleak images of modern life, where spiritual death breeds cultural death, and the ashen landscape reflects a barren world void of transcendental value.

Describing a series of failed encounters between various men and women, Eliot creates composites of fertility archetypes that ironically are incapable of offering spiritual nourishment to a dying world. The characters drift in and out of meaningless relationships; the men and women are impotent, shallow, vain and excruciatingly ordinary. Culture is reduced to common clichés; the well of redemption becomes a “dull canal.” The world is filled with “a heap of broken images” where “the dead tree gives no shelter.” The only salvation appears to be in personal responsibility, self-control, and a faith in cultural continuity based on common Western European values.

The poem is an elitist document. Eliot provides copious footnotes, and the text is loaded with difficult literary, historical, and anthropological allusions; it is meant to be understood only by a few. As an account of the dilemma faced by the West of its being threatened by the loss of its privileged, white, patriarchal position of cultural dominance in the first half of the twentieth century, The Waste Land is indispensable.

The poem's structure is divided into five sections: The first section, The Burial of the Dead introduces the diverse themes of disillusionment and despair. The second, A Game of Chess employs vignettes of several characters—alternating narrations—that address those themes experientially. The Fire Sermon, the third section, offers a philosophical meditation in relation to the imagery of death and views of self-denial in juxtaposition influenced by Augustine of Hippo and eastern religions. After a fourth section, Death by Water, that includes a brief lyrical petition, the culminating fifth section, What the Thunder Said concludes with an image of judgment.

The poem begins with a section entitled ‘The Burial of the Dead.’ In it, the narrator—perhaps a representation of Eliot himself—describes the seasons. Spring brings "memory and desire," and so the narrator's memory drifts back to times in Munich, to childhood sled rides, and to a possible romance with a "hyacinth girl." The memories only go so far, however. The narrator is now surrounded by a desolate land full of "stony rubbish."

He remembers a fortune-teller named Madame Sosostris who said he was "the drowned Phoenician Sailor" and that he should "fear death by water." Next he finds himself on London Bridge, surrounded by a crowd of people. He spots a friend of his from wartime, and calls out to him.

The next section, ‘A Game of Chess,’ transports the reader abruptly from the streets of London to a gilded drawing room, in which sits a rich, jewel-bedecked lady who complains about her nerves and wonders what to do. The poem drifts again, this time to a pub at closing time in which two Cockney women gossip. Within a few stanzas, we have moved from the upper crust of society to London's low-life.

‘The Fire Sermon’ opens with an image of a river. The narrator sits on the banks and muses on the deplorable state of the world. As Tiresias, he sees a young "carbuncular" man hop into bed with a lonely female typist, only to aggressively make love to her and then leave without hesitation. The poem returns to the river, where maidens sing a song of lament, one of them crying over her loss of innocence to a similarly lustful man.

‘Death by Water,’ the fourth section of the poem is the shortest section which describes a dead Phoenician lying in the water—perhaps the same drowned sailor of whom Madame Sosostris spoke.

The last section, ‘What the Thunder Said’ shifts locales from the sea to rocks and mountains. The narrator cries for rain, and it finally comes. The thunder that accompanies it ushers in the three-pronged dictum sprung from the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad: "Datta, dayadhvam, damyata": to give, to sympathize, to control. With these commandments, benediction is possible, despite the collapse of civilization that is under way -- "London Bridge is falling down falling down falling down."

The Wasteland is a seminal poem. You'll find a reference to it everywhere and anywhere. Eliot brings the theme of futility, frustration, spiritual and physical barrenness into poetry with the use of varied symbols, myths, allusions, and imagery. It is not just the theme of death-in-life but its mode of representation that makes the poem a masterpiece. Often called as a 'heap of broken images' for its fragmented narration, the poem has allusions ranging from Christian to Greek to Hindu mythology, which are presented with the help of symbols. It is the abundant and obscure references that make the poem a difficult read. But once the references are clear, the poem becomes both entertaining and enlightening.

Eliot brings the chaos of the modern civilization into his narrative structure, but he also shows a ray of hope to come out of the decay. The protagonist of the poem, Tiersias is a soothsayer from Greek legend, who narrates to the readers the situation of the Wasteland. He is the grail bearer who can rescue the wastelanders from the moral, spiritual, sexual decay they are going through.

The title of the poem can also be taken as the wasteland of self, where man has become mechanical to his needs. There are constant references to incest, homosexuality, flesh trade, adultery, and sexual perversion. It is a wasteland where everything has lost its meaning. There are no values, no code of conducts, no hope, and no escape. The picture of nullity, nothingness, death in life, meaninglessness and aimlessness can be read in these lines:

'What shall I do now? What shall I do?

I shall rush out as I am, and walk the street

With my hair down, so what shall we do

Tomorrow?

What shall we ever do?

The hot water at ten and if it rains a closed car at four

And we shall play a game of chess,

Pressing lidless eyes and waiting for a knock upon

The door. (A Game of Chess, 131-140)

It is in this situation, the protagonist of the poem, Tiersias, asks the readers a rhetorical question:

What are the roots that clutch, what branches

Grow

Out of this stony rubbish? Son of man. (The Burial of the Dead, 18-20)

There is a type of critical anxiety which lurches from blurred close readings of individual texts to citations of authors from the literary canon who seem to be saying something similar. But Craig Raine's new study of TS Eliot aims to be more than a series of myopic readings. He states in his preface that his theme is that 'the Buried Life, the idea of a life not fully lived, is the central, animating idea' of Eliot's poetry. The idea is taken from Matthew Arnold's poem 'The Buried Life', which he quotes from 72 pages later:

'Alas! Is even love too weak

To unlock the heart and let it speak?

Are even lovers powerless to reveal

To one another what indeed they feel?'

The problem with these belated questions is that they ask the critic of Eliot to look closely at his life and, in particular, his failed marriage to his first wife, the fascist Vivienne Haigh-Wood, who joined the Blackshirts and worshipped Oswald Mosley. Looking at his close readings, one finds that they are not really close at all, but simple assertions about Eliot's lines bringing the world 'indelibly before us' and being 'drenched in desire, rapt with repetition'. In short, The Waste Land is a masterpiece and there is much in it for modern critics and research scholars.

Jamshed Gill

غزل: لہو دل کا نگاہوں سے۔ جمشید گل

   غزل: جمشید گل

لہو دل کا نگاہوں سے چھلکنا تھا،چھلکتا ہے
بنی آدم نے سولی پر لٹکنا تھا ، لٹکتا ہے
محبت کا ازل سے ایک ہی دستور ہے یارو
وفا کی آڑ میں دل نے بھٹکنا تھا ، بھٹکتا ہے
ہوا کیا فائدہ اس انبیا کے لشکرِ کُل سے
جہنم کے ذخیرے نے دہکنا تھا ، دہکتاہے
نکلنا خُلد سے آدم کا سب ہی جانتے ہوں گے
نتیجہ تھا بہکنے کا بہکنا تھا، بہکتا ہے
نہیں دینا تھاکفارہ کسی نے بھی گناہوں کا
ہر اک عاصی نے محشر میں سسکنا تھا ،سسکتا ہے
نہیں ہے روکنے والا کوئی اس کو زمانے میں
خدا کی راہ میں جس نے بہکنا تھا ،بہکتا ہے