Jun 102019

Earlier today I was reading from Psalm 19 and came across these words in verse 14:

May these words of my mouth and this meditation of my heart be pleasing in your sight, Lord, my Rock and my Redeemer. (Psalm 19:14, NIV2011)

And I realised that something didn’t seem familiar. Looking into it I found that this was differently in the earlier version of the NIV:

May the words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart be pleasing in your sight,O Lord, my Rock and my Redeemer. (Psalm 19:14, NIV84)

These words are much more familiar and I have often heard them used as the “preacher’s prayer” as someone prepares to reflect on God’s word with God’s people.

Looking into it, I found that the change was introduced in the TNIV and persisted into the 2011 version and I can’t find any other translation that has “these words” / “this meditation” instead of “the words” / “the meditation”.

And so I started to think about “which was right” and didn’t get to a clear answer! Commentators seem to see both ideas as being valid with:

The closing petition of the psalm, similar to the closing petition in Ps. 104:34–35, is a request that God receive the entire psalm as an acceptable sacrifice

Rolf A. Jacobson and Beth Tanner, NICNT


The context suggests the “words” are not the words of the psalm or the psalmist’s words in general, but the words one might address to another deity or the words that might be the means of doing wrong to another person

John Goldingay, BCOT

So instead I started to reflect on what each rendering might say to us in the context of the Psalm as a whole, a Psalm which speaks some amazing and powerful things about God and how we are to live in relationship with him:

  • A reminder of how the universe God created demonstrates His glory, His power, His creativity (vs 1-6)
  • Statements about the laws, the words, the comments God has given us and how they are perfect, bring joy, provide positive guidance for life (vs 7-11)
  • Recognition of the challenges we have in seeing when we go wrong and calling out to God for help in avoiding falling into sin (vs 12-13)

The “these” translation is looking back on what has been said and prayed and asking God to accept it as a sacrifice of praise.

The “the” translation is looking ahead to what we will say and meditate on and praying that it will be pleasing to this God of creation, of good laws, of protection.

And both are helpful as we engage with the realities of daily living, as we spend time with God, as we spend time with others.

And the challenge I was left with is to take time during the day to reflect on what is behind and what is ahead:

  1. Can I take things I have done during the day up to this point and offer them to God with the hope that He will find them pleasing?
  2. Am I prepared to dedicate the rest of the day to living in a way that will continue to please Him?

So I don’t know which reading is more correct – but I do know that both of them ask questions of me, and I’ll seek to respond positively to both.

Sep 302018

I was intrigued by a report by the BBC about Kanye West changing his name to “Ye”.

The reason he gives in the article is:

“I believe ‘ye’ is the most commonly used word in the Bible, and in the Bible it means ‘you,'” West said earlier this year, discussing his album title with radio host Big Boy.

The problem is that this isn’t true!

Assuming the use of the Authorised Version (“ye” doesn’t appear in some recent translations) then the word “ye” occurs 3,985 times.

“The” is the most common at just over 64,000.

Other pronouns which occur more frequently are:

  • he (10,431)
  • I (8,853)
  • his (8,478)
  • they (7,377)
  • him (6,667)
  • thou (5,474)
  • thy (4,603)
  • my (4,367)
  • me (4,096)

My point isn’t to criticise Kayne West – I don’t know where he obtained his information or if anyone was advising him – but it is to raise the importance of being sure what the Bible says.

I think there are at least two areas where this is very important:

  1. For those of us who believe the Bible is inspired by God, helps us understand and appreciate who Jesus is, shows us how we can live in relationship with God and provides guidance and direction for living – it is vital that we understand what it says and don’t make assumptions
  2. To be able to respond to things people claim to be in the Bible and are not – as sometimes people “quote the Bible” incorrectly to make a point which it doesn’t support or to suggest problems with the Christian faith

Now – as much or even more than it has ever been – there is a need for those of us who believe the Bible reveals God to us to study it, to understand it, and to apply it properly.

As the apostle Paul said:


Dec 072016

I was recently asked to explain what was behind some of the language used in Isaiah 35:1-10 with references to:

  • Desert and parched land (Is 35:1)
  • Holy Highway (Is 35:10)

These words were written to give hope to God’s people – people who were going to experience exile  out of their land – hope that one day they would be able to return home. And they are written following on from Is 34 which speaks of a world that has become desert and desolate where no-one is safe to be or to travel. They speak about how God is going to restore what has been damaged and tarnished.

It is possible that the desert and the parched land refers to the Syrian desert across which the returning exiles would have to travel. But it is more likely that the terms are being used to refer to the entire world – physical, social, spiritual – which we have managed to mess up in so many ways. But that God is going to act, to work on this world, and it is going to be restored to wonder and glory once again. And all of creation will rejoice when it sees this happening.

And this picks up on the idea in Isaiah 32:15 which speaks about God’s spirit being poured out on the desert and turning it into a “fertile field”.


  • Is 35:1-2 are speaking about God acting in power to restore
  • Is 35:3-4 is to encourage people to prepare themselves and to dare to hope again
  • Is 35:5-7 are examples of the outworking of God’s power in salvation both for people and for situations. There is healing, there is restoration, there is provision

And then in Is 35:8-10 there is talk about a safe and secure “highway” that the redeemed will walk on as they return home. And the idea of a highway to return home keeps on cropping up in Isaiah (Is 11:16, 19:23 – which is about other nations entering into God’s blessing as well, Is 35:8, 40:3 – and here the idea is a highway for God to return, Is 49:11, 62:10).


It speaks physically about the journey that the exiles will take as they return to Zion (Jerusalem) the city of God and it speaks more widely of the journey that all people can take as they respond to God and come to him to receive his blessing. It is a safe road, a good road and a road that ends in joy and celebration.





Jan 192016

Last year, in our church, we had a preaching series on the book of Revelation – an opportunity to share together something of the greatness of God and His Lamb (Jesus), to hear the words of Jesus to His church, to gain insight into what is going on in the world and how God’s people are called to engage with it, and to look ahead to the wonderful future that is in store for us as God completes the work of re-creation and comes to dwell with His people (Rev 21:3).revelation cover

A number of people who weren’t able to get to some of the services asked for notes about what had been said so they could “keep up” and so I thought it might be helpful to make the entire set available.

There are, as is well known, many ways to look at the book of Revelation and I am sure some people will see it differently from how I present it in this book. But my hope and prayer is that it will encourage people to look again at what the book says, to wrestle with it, and to hear God’s voice speaking through it.

The book is available in a number of formats:

  • As a Kindle book (I had hoped to publish it for free but couldn’t find a way to do so in this format so it costs 99p)
  • As a “Personal Book” to be compiled as a Bible Commentary into Logos Software (the zip file contains the document, a cover file and a suggestion of how to install it)
  • As a downloadable PDF document


Mar 262014

The problem

Have you ever had a non-Christian friend (or “non-friend”) come up to you and say something along the the biblelines of “Your Bible says XXX which clearly can’t be true and so it can’t be trusted”? Or maybe you have read something in the Bible and have struggled to reconcile it with your experience of life and understanding of how things work.

Some common examples of this include:

  1. Science has disproved the Bible so we can’t rely on what it says about God or anything else
  2. The Bible makes statements about every-day life which are demonstrably untrue
  3. The Bible contradicts itself so we can’t trust it
  4. The Bible says things which may well have been true when it was written but just doesn’t relate to our society or culture today

There are many possible responses to these sorts of questions – such as:

  • If the Bible says something it must be true and so, even if we don’t understand it, our experience and our view of other things must be flawed – which might be ok for us but doesn’t really help in debate and discussion with those people who don’t “believe the Bible” to start with
  • The Bible is there to provide some general principles but we shouldn’t take it literally – which may help to get round some of the issues but can leave us, and others, unsure of what we actually can reliably depend on from the Bible
  • There are some passages which we can’t depend on but everything else is fine – which results in a cut-down version of the Bible which is probably different for each of us and undermines the overall authority of the word which God has given us

I was prompted to think about this last week when in conversation with a friend of mine who was looking into the question of how we understand and interpret the Bible. I was reminded of the importance of recognising the “genre” or “type of literature” of different passages and that it is only when we do this that we get a fuller appreciation of what the Bible is saying and how it should be understood. In effect, the importance of treating the Bible on its own terms as opposed to how we might want to read it.

We are used to dealing with these issues in everyday life – we know what to expect when we are reading novels, science reference books, biographies, emails, song lyrics, letters, newspaper articles, history books and blogs but we often fail to recognise that there are many different types of literature in the sixty-six books which make up our Bible (and often different types within particular books).

So, taking the examples above, how would this understanding of genre help respond to the critiques and comments which we, or others, have as we look at what the Bible says?

Science and the Bible

There are a range of these types of issues which come up – ranging from the fairly trivial to those which have caused much heated debate and disagreement.

At the fairly trivial end of the spectrum is the objections people make to the statement of Jesus when he talks about the sun rising (Matthew 5:45) resulting in comments such as

Science has shown that the earth goes round the sun and therefore the Bible can’t be trusted

This ignores the fact that the point of what Jesus is talking about isn’t planetary motion but more the way in which God treats people impartially. It also ignores the fact that, even today in general conversation, we are highly likely to talk about the time when the sun will rise. It is a standard expression, not intended to be a scientific statement.

Much more challenging, and more hotly debated, are discussions about how everything started and the bible and scienceidea that science has explained how the universe came into being and life (in all its forms) has developed, that this contradicts the biblical account of creation (particularly in Genesis 1-2) and so the Bible can’t be trusted.

People take differing positions on this – from believing that the Bible should be treated as a science text book and that all the conflicting discoveries are flawed in some way, through seeing the Bible’s creation account as a statement about the identity and purposes of God to saying that it shouldn’t be taken literally anyway. An example of some of the issues which need to be considered can be seen in a recent post (“Was Adam an historical figure?“) looking at questions around Adam and Eve. I’m not suggesting that I agree with everything in that article but rather that the questions raised are some of the things which need to be considered as opposed to just treating everything in the Bible as a statement of historical fact.

Statements which just don’t seem true

An example of this would be Psalm 12:7

   “You, Lord, will keep the needy safe and will protect us forever from the wicked,”

And we can look at many situations in the world, and sometimes in our own experience, where the needy aren’t kept safe nor protected from those who would seek to harm them – and so it is easy to claim that this promise isn’t true.

But if we look closer we see that this Psalm is a  prayer to God for help, not a statement from God as to how he will behave in each and every situation.

Contradictions in the Bible

Again, there are many instances which people point to.

There is the interesting example of Proverbs 26:4-5 where two seemingly contradictory statements contradictionsappear side-by-side:

   “Do not answer a fool according to his folly, or you yourself will be just like him.” (Proverbs 26:4)

“Answer a fool according to his folly, or he will be wise in his own eyes.” (Proverbs 26:5)

And it’s easy to look at these and see that they are taking extremely opposite positions – but this ignores the fact that the book of Proverbs is asking us to think about how we live and, in this case, recognising that it is appropriate to behave in different ways in different situations.

Much more challenging are questions which are asked about the four Gospel accounts of the life of Jesus and the seeming contradictions which appear there.

One example of this would be the witnesses to the resurrection of Jesus with:

  • Matthew having “Mary Magdalene and the other Mary” (Matthew 28:1)
  • Mark having “Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Salome” (Mark 16:1)
  • Luke has “the women” (Luke 24:1) who are later identified as “Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Mary the mother of James and the others with them” (Luke 24:10)
  • John just has Mary Magdalene (John 20:1)

All accounts have Mary Magdalene present but there are differences regarding who else was there.

But this shouldn’t cause us a problem if we think about these accounts being a form of biography with information gleaned from different witnesses (which even today is recognised as resulting in mixed messages) and material carefully selected and presented to tell a particular story. Rather it should encourage us to look more deeply at each account and try and understand what the different writers are trying to communicate.

Relevance, or otherwise, of the Bible

We can look at statements from the Old Testament about how God’s people were supposed to live including references to mixing seeds in fields, not making clothing from two types of material or “clipping the edges of your beard” (Leviticus 19:19-27) or statements in the New Testament regarding the role of slaves (Ephesians 6:5-8) and claim that these are of no relevance today and hence the entire Bible is irrelevant.

These are easy statements to make. It is much harder to look carefully at these passages and understand the context in which they were written, the reasons for what was written and the underlying principles which they teach which may apply to us today.

The challenge for Christians

I suggest that it is unreasonable of us to expect our non-Christians friends, the media or society in general to understand the different genres which we find in the Bible.

But, if we believe that the Bible is God’s word revealed to us, then surely it is reasonable to expect that we would be prepared to do the hard work to understand what it is saying on its own terms and, from that base, work through the questions which are raised either from our own study or by questions from others.