Ken Blue Ministries

B y Ken Blue

Are Muhammad Parvez, and Waqas Parvez, just two more radical Muslims who have “hijacked” Islam’s peaceful religion by killing their youngest daughter for prides sake? I don’t believe they are, and neither does the Muslim world. Their silence is deafening.

If Islam does not teach “honour murder,” where are the Muslims that are outraged? Why are they not taking to the streets to protest this barbaric savagery? If there are any Muslims who are good, godly and decent, why are they not speaking up? We know the answer to our own question and so does every Muslim.

Muslims believe the whole world must eventually be ruled by Sharia law. Lauren Vriens, writing for the Council of Foreign Relations says, “Sharia, or Islamic law, influences the legal code in most Muslim countries. A movement to allow sharia to govern personal status law, a set of regulations that pertain to marriage, divorce, inheritance, and custody, is even expanding into the West. Sharia’s influence on both personal status law and criminal law is highly controversial, though. Some interpretations are used to justify cruel punishments such as amputation and stoning as well as unequal treatment of women in inheritance, dress, and independence. The debate is growing as to whether sharia can coexist with secularism, democracy, or even modernity.”

The author continues: “What is Sharia? Also meaning “path” in Arabic, sharia guides all aspects of Muslim life including daily routines, familial and religious obligations, and financial dealings. It is derived primarily from the Quran and the Sunna–the sayings, practices, and teachings of the Prophet Mohammed. Precedents and analogy applied by Muslim scholars are used to address new issues. The consensus of the Muslim community also plays a role in defining this theological manual.”

Now you understand the silence of Islam concerning “honor murder.” Their religion teaches it, and to speak out would be a crime in which the protester or a family member would experience an “honor murder.”

We do not hate Muslims. Rather, we feel sorry for them. How sad that a religion could be so oppressive, so cruel, so blind, and use fear to recruit and maintain its followers.

The father and brother of Aqsa Parvez have been sentenced to life in prison for what the judge called the “twisted and repugnant” murder of the 16-year-old. She was strangled to death in the family home in Mississauga, Ont., in December 2007.

Muhammad Parvez said he killed his youngest child because “this is my insult. My community will say, ‘You have not been able to control your daughter.’ This is my insult. She is making me naked.”

Mr. Parvez has made himself naked before the whole world. He has revealed his selfish pride, and that he loved the praises of his fellow man more than he loved his daughter. Call it what you will; there is no “honour” involved, there is only disgust and horror. Is this the real face of Islam?

By Ken Blue

“If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness; 4 He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, 5 Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself.” 1 Timothy 6:3-5.

Pride can be laid at the feet of these two horrible sins. They are like Pandora’s Box; when opened, they release all manner of plagues upon mankind. May God set us free from these self-diluting and destructive sins.

How prone we are to infer without sufficient or conclusive evidence. It means we have an idea or opinion about people without having all the facts. This is called “evil surmising,” and is rooted in personal ignorance and pride. It usually ends as gossip and the destruction of the other person’s reputation. Other words that fit this category are: Conjecture, guess, infer, presume, speculate, suspect, theorize, imagine, and presuppose. If you listen closely, you will hear others, and yourself committing this sin today.

The twin sin is that of “doting” by questioning everything and disputing about the use of words. Recently, I posted a blog titled Will You Enter The Kingdom. I receive an email dripping with sarcasm, which said, “I thought the Bible said ‘inherit’ instead of ‘enter’.” These people lie in wait to catch you in a verbal slip so they can glory in their pride. Jesus had to deal with this crowd constantly.

Many of you know grandparents who do nothing but dote upon their grandchildren. You can’t send your children to Grandma’s house for one night without having the children returned, spoiled and rotten. They are given everything they want. They return with a bag of new toys, a bag of new clothes, and a bellyache from all the cookies and candy. In other words, the grandparents were obsessed with the children. They gave every moment of every day to doting on them. Perhaps it was the grandparents who were sick!

It is interesting to note that the word “dote” implies to be sick or diseased. Vine’s Word Studies says it, “Signifies “to be ill, to be ailing,” whether in body or mind; hence, “to be taken with such a morbid interest in a thing as is tantamount to a disease, to dote,” 1 Tim. 6:4 (marg., “sick”). The primary meaning of “dote” is to be foolish (cp. Jer. 50:36, the evident meaning of noseō, in this respect, is “to be unsound.”

Many of God’s people have freed themselves from outward vices of the flesh. However, an equal number are guilty of the two most destructive sins in Scripture, and commit them on regular basis. So, don’t be guilty of “doting” or “surmising.”

By Ken Blue

The American Heritage Dictionary defines “Covenant” as:  “… n. 1. A binding agreement; a compact. 2. Law. A formal sealed  agreement or contract. 3. In the Bible, God’s promise to the human race.”

Dake, in his reference Bible list 15 major covenants. (See notes on Genesis, P.57).

“ It was not until the seventeenth century that a systematized theology based upon the idea of “covenant” developed. Samuel Rutherford (1600-1661) from Scotland, and Johannes Cocceius (1603-1669) of Holland, were both instrumental in the establishment of Covenant theology. It became firmly entrenched in Reformed Protestant theology after the Church of Scotland accepted the Westminster Confession in 1647.” -Northwestern Theological Seminary.

Covenant Theology sees three major covenants. The first is a Covenant of Works. This was, supposedly, given to Adam. He was told to do certain things and live. Of course, we know that he disobeyed God and became alienated from Him. Thus the Covenant of Grace began and continues out into eternity. A third covenant was made between the Father and the Son before the foundation of the world. This was the Covenant of Redemption.

One of the best ways to understand Covenant Theology is to see the contrast between it and Dispensational Theology. Covenant Theology does not see a sharp distinction between Israel and the Church. A chart at the end of the page will show the distinction. They assert that Israel constituted the people of the God in the OT, and the Church (which is made up of Jew and Gentile) constitutes the people of God in the New Testament. They say, “The Church doesn’t replace Israel; the Church is Israel and Israel is the Church (Galatians 6:16). All people who exercise the same faith as Abraham are part of the covenant people of God (Galatians 3:25-29).”

Since the Westminster Confession of Faith, 1647 best explains their theology; we will let them speak for themselves.

CHAPTER III  Of God’s Eternal Decree:

III. By the decree of God, for the manifestation of His glory, some men and angels are predestinated unto everlasting life, and others fore-ordained to everlasting death.

IV. These angels and men, thus predestinated and fore-ordained, are particularly and unchangeably designed, and their number is so certain and definite, that it cannot be either increased or diminished.

V. Those of mankind that are predestinated unto life, God, before the foundation of the world was laid, according to His eternal and immutable purpose, and the secret counsel and good pleasure of His will, hath. chosen, in Christ, unto everlasting glory, out of His mere free grace and love, without any foresight of faith or good works, or perseverance in either of them, or any other thing in the creature, as conditions, or causes moving Him thereunto: and all to the praise of His glorious grace.

VII. The rest of mankind God was pleased, according to the unsearchable counsel of His own will, whereby He extendeth or withholdeth mercy, as He pleaseth, for the glory of His sovereign power over His creatures, to pass by; and to ordain them to dishonour and wrath, for their sin, to the praise of His glorious justice.

Note: Covenant Theology teaches that some men and angels are predestined to salvation and others are predestined to hell. This is the extreme teaching of John Calvin, his TULIP. No one is predestined to heaven or hell. All men have salvation available to them. God has predetermined how one is to be saved, to what he is saved, the conformity of his salvation; but He has not predestined who will be saved and who will be lost.

CHAPTER VII  Of God’s Covenant with Man:

VI. Under the gospel, when Christ, the substance, was exhibited, the ordinances in which this covenant is dispensed are the preaching of the Word, and the administration of the sacraments of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper: which, though fewer in number, and administered with more simplicity, and less outward glory; yet, in them, it is held forth in more fulness, evidence, and spiritual efficacy, to all nations, both Jews and Gentiles; and is called the New Testament. There are not therefore two covenants of grace, differing in substance, but one and the same, under various dispensations.

Note: The reader should be aware that there is no such statement as a Covenant of Grace in Scripture. However, Covenant Theology teaches that the way one receives this grace is through the preaching of the Word and the “Sacraments of baptism and the Lord’s Supper.”

CHAPTER XXVIII  Of Baptism:

Baptism is a sacrament of the New Testament, ordained by Jesus Christ, not only for the solemn admission of the party baptized into the visible Church; but also, to be unto him a sign and seal of the covenant of grace, of his ingrafting into Christ, of regeneration, of remission of sins, and of his giving up unto God through Jesus Christ, to walk in newness of life. Which sacrament is, by Christ’s own appointment, to be continued in His Church until the end of the world.

III. Dipping of the person into the water is not necessary; but Baptism is rightly administered by pouring or sprinkling water upon the person.

IV. Not only those that do actually profess faith in and obedience unto Christ, but also the infants of one or both believing parents, are to be baptized.

VI. The efficacy of Baptism is not tied to that moment of time wherein it is administered; yet notwithstanding, by the right use of this ordinance, the grace promised is not only offered, but really exhibited and conferred by the Holy Ghost, to such (whether of age or infants) as that grace belongeth unto, according to the counsel of God’s own will in His appointed time.

Note: There are several errors in the above. The first is that one is “baptized into the visible Church.” No one is baptized into the church. The second error is the idea that baptism is a “sign or seal of the covenant of grace.” This is taken from the idea that baptism replaces circumcision and places the baptized person in a state of grace. This is left over from the Roman Catholic Church and explains why those who profess salvation are to baptize their infants by pouring or sprinkling. Notice article IV that baptism confers grace on all thus baptized.

The following chart helps to better understand Covenant Theology by contrasting it with dispensationalism.

Click to Enlarge