The Reformed Olive Press

Harsh Commands, Harsh Times: Why God Ordered the Death of Children in Tribal Warfare One of the most disturbing topics in Scripture is God’s command for Israel to completely destroy entire populations—men, women, and even children—especially in cities like Jericho, Ai, and among the Amalekites (Deut. 20:16–18; 1 Sam. 15:3). To modern Western minds, this seems unthinkable. But to understand these commands, we must abandon our sanitized lenses and step into the ancient Near Eastern world—a world of tribal honor, vengeance, and generational warfare. These weren’t peaceful agrarian families just minding their business. These were honor-driven clans where children were raised with one goal: restore the family’s legacy, avenge their people, and never forget who killed their fathers. These weren’t “cute kids with coloring books.” These were future warriors—trained early to hate Yahweh and His people, much like we see in modern terrorist training camps where young boys in Afghanistan or Syria ...

 Inc@$t and Y@G: A  Modern Day Double Standard  Let me be clear from the start: I do not advocate for either Inc@$t or Y@G behavior. Both are biblically and morally wrong. However, the cultural logic and legal landscape surrounding them reveals an interesting contradiction. In today’s society, consensual Y@G relationships are celebrated—even codified into marriage law—while Inc@$t, even among consenting adults, remains illegal and taboo. Why the inconsistency? If we’re going to evaluate actions purely on secular grounds—like consent, harm, and evolutionary value—Inc@$t might actually seem more defensible than Y@G. Inc@$t, while still morally objectionable, at least involves the potential for procreation, which is essential to biological and societal continuity. It aligns with the evolutionary impulse to reproduce. Y@G, by its very nature, cannot produce life, and so serves no reproductive or evolutionary function. From a cold materialist standpoint, that should raise que...

 There Is No Such Thing as a Practicing Y@G Christian: Why Identities Matter in Faith In today’s world, the phrase “practicing Y@G Christian” is becoming increasingly common—but biblically, it's a contradiction in terms. Following Jesus means dying to all competing identities and living as a new creation in Him. You cannot serve both Yahweh and something He calls sin. Just as ancient Israel couldn’t claim loyalty to God while sacrificing to Molech, a Christian cannot cling to a “Y@G identity” while claiming to walk in holiness. The two are incompatible. Throughout Scripture, we see how God rejected divided allegiances. Israel was constantly tempted to trust in political alliances with pagan nations like Egypt or Assyria rather than rely on God’s covenant faithfulness (Isaiah 30:1–3; 31:1). These alliances were not just political—they were spiritual compromises. To lean on Egypt was to reject God as deliverer. Likewise, economic loyalties had to be forsaken—Jesus told the rich young...

N adab and Abihu: Not Struck Down in Ignorance – A Story of Responsibility In Leviticus 10, we meet two priestly sons of Aaron—Nadab and Abihu—who offered “unauthorized fire” before the Lord. What follows is one of the most sobering judgments in the Old Testament: fire came out from the Lord and consumed them. At first glance, this story feels harsh, even reactionary. But when we look deeper, especially through a relational and contextual lens, we see a story not of divine volatility, but of holy responsibility. These two men were not ignorant novices. Nadab and Abihu were among the very few Israelites who had already seen God’s glory (Exodus 24:1,9–11). They had stood on Sinai with Moses and Aaron. They had eaten a covenant meal in God’s presence. And most importantly, they were newly consecrated priests. Just one chapter before, in Leviticus 9, we see the entire priesthood inaugurated in a sacred, careful ceremony filled with repeated instructions from Yahweh. God’s expectations were...

One in Christ—But Not Without Holiness: Why Practicing Y@G$ Are Not Permitted to Serve the Church In the Old Covenant, access to God’s holy presence was not casual. Gentiles, no matter how well-meaning, were barred from full participation in Israel’s worship unless they underwent circumcision and committed to the Law of Moses. Exodus 12:48 made it clear: only those circumcised could partake in the Passover. Leviticus 17–18 extended moral expectations to foreigners, and Ezekiel 44:9 flatly prohibited uncircumcised individuals—whether in flesh or heart—from entering the sanctuary. The physical Temple structure mirrored these spiritual boundaries. Gentiles could only enter the outer courts. A literal wall warned them of death if they ventured further. Access to God’s presence demanded covenant faithfulness and purity. This context helps us understand the gravity of the New Covenant promise. Through Jesus, the wall separating Jew and Gentile is torn down (Ephesians 2:11–14). All are invite...

Philippians 3:20–21 Doesn’t Teach a Physical Body Resurrection Many Christians interpret Philippians 3:20–21 as a future promise of physical resurrection. But a closer look at Paul’s language—and especially how he uses the word sōma (Greek for “body”)—reveals something far more profound and spiritual than a mere upgrade of our physical flesh. This passage is about transformation of identity, not transformation of flesh. Paul writes: “But our citizenship is in heaven, and from it we await a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, who will transform our lowly body to be like his glorious body...” (Phil. 3:20–21, ESV) First, note the context: citizenship. Paul is speaking of status, belonging, and covenant identity—not physical anatomy. Our “lowly body” refers not to our muscles and bones, but to our condition under the old world, marked by humiliation, weakness, and bondage to sin. The Greek word for “transform” (metaschēmatizō) does not imply a literal, flesh-changing event. It’s used figurative...

New Jerusalem: Scattered Like the Levites, Not a City of Domination but of Presence When we think of New Jerusalem, many imagine a grand future city, descending from the clouds with walls of gold and gates of pearl. But what if that vision isn't about a centralized place of domination, but a distributed presence—a spiritual city already among us? The New Jerusalem, described in Revelation 21–22, isn’t about control, politics, or military power. It’s about God’s people becoming the dwelling place of God spread throughout the world, just like the Levites were in the Old Covenant. Under the Mosaic law, the tribe of Levi was not given a territory like the other tribes. Instead, they were scattered throughout the cities of Israel (Numbers 35:1–8; Deuteronomy 18:1–2). Why? Because their inheritance wasn’t land—it was the Lord Himself. Their presence among the other tribes served as a reminder of God's presence, instruction, and mediation. They were living tabernacles, embedded among ...

Debunking the "Canonical Bookends" Theory of Luke 11:49–51 and Matthew 23:34–36 In some modern arguments, skeptics of the Deuterocanon claim that Luke 11:49–51 and Matthew 23:34–36 form “canonical bookends,” supposedly marking Genesis as the beginning and 2 Chronicles as the final book of the Old Testament. This idea suggests that since Jesus names Abel (Genesis) and Zechariah (2 Chronicles) as victims of martyrdom, He is acknowledging the traditional Hebrew canon — which excludes the Deuterocanon. But this theory collapses under scrutiny both historically and theologically. The Historical Record  The Deuterocanonical books were widely accepted and used in the early church, quoted or alluded to by Jesus and the apostles. More critically, Martin Luther himself included the Deuterocanon in his 1534 German Bible, labeling them “Apocrypha” but still worthy of reading. The 1560 Geneva Bible, Coverdale Bible, Taverner’s Bible, Tyndale’s New Testament (which had cross-references to ...

Co mmon Misinterpreted Verses of the Deuterocannon  Protestants have often weaponized Catholic verses—especially those from the broader canon recognized by the early Church—to justify theological positions that break from historic Christianity. Rather than engaging these scriptures within their full literary and ecclesial context, they isolate phrases and reinterpret meanings to defend doctrines. This selective use of scripture turns verses meant to edify and unify the Church into tools of division. Below, are some common verses from the Deuterocannon that have been misrepresented. 1. 2 Maccabees 12:45 – Prayers for the dead Refutation: This passage is descriptive, not prescriptive. It reports Judas Maccabeus’s sincere act of faith, not a doctrinal command. Also, Scripture elsewhere implies a conscious afterlife (e.g., Luke 16:19–31), so intercession for the dead does not contradict biblical theology. 2. Tobit 12:9 – Almsgiving atones for sin Refutation: The verse teaches that alms...

  What Do You Do with Failed Prophecies?  Some biblical prophecies didn’t play out the way they were announced. That’s not heresy; that’s just honesty. One of the most striking examples comes from the book of Ezekiel. In chapter 26, God declares that Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, will destroy Tyre, scraping it bare like a rock and tossing its debris into the sea. But that never really happened—not in the way it was described. Nebuchadnezzar laid siege to Tyre for 13 years and eventually gave up. Centuries later, it was Alexander the Great—not Babylon—who fulfilled something closer to that prophecy. So what does Ezekiel say? God gives Nebuchadnezzar a “make-up reward”: “Since he got no wages from Tyre, I will give him Egypt” (Ezekiel 29:17–20). But history shows he didn’t fully conquer Egypt either. So what’s going on? From an Open Theism view, this actually makes sense. God isn't predicting a locked-in future—He's interacting with free agents. God genuinely intended for Neb...

How Modern Media Repeats Ancient Objectification In today’s world, sex scenes in movies and pornography are often dismissed as harmless entertainment or “artistic expression.” But if we step back and evaluate them through the lens of biblical anthropology, it becomes clear: modern media frequently treats human beings exactly the way ancient cultures did—as objects, not as image-bearers. While we might assume we've progressed morally, Scripture and culture both testify to a repeating pattern: when people are stripped of their dignity and used as tools for pleasure, power, or profit, we return to the same ethical decay seen in some of the Bible’s darkest stories. Ancient Objectification: The Bible Doesn’t Hide It The Bible, especially the Old Testament, shows us a raw picture of human societies where people—especially women and the vulnerable—were often treated as property, war spoils, and commodities: Exodus 20:17 lists a wife alongside a man’s house, servant, and ox—showing her leg...

Not One of His Bones Will Be Broken: Not a Prediction, But a Pattern Many Christians point to Psalm 34:20—"He protects all his bones, not one of them will be broken"—as a clear, predictive messianic prophecy fulfilled by Jesus during his crucifixion. But a closer, contextual reading shows that this verse is not a distant foretelling of Jesus’ fate, but rather part of a poetic reflection by David about how God protects the righteous in general. Psalm 34 is a psalm of thanksgiving, written by David after being delivered from danger. In verse 19, the psalm says, "Many are the afflictions of the righteous, but the Lord delivers him out of them all." The theme here is not selective or partial deliverance, but total rescue. Verse 20—"He keeps all his bones; not one of them is broken"—is a metaphor for complete protection. It doesn't mean the righteous will be hurt but spared broken bones; it means the righteous will be fully preserved. That makes applying th...

Why Jesus Would Approve of the Deuterocanon? When modern Christians debate whether the Deuterocanonical books belong in Scripture, the conversation often turns to canon lists, councils, and the Reformation. But a better starting point might be this question: What was Jesus' relationship to these books? Would He have approved of them? Jesus and the Septuagint: His Bible Included the Deuterocanon The most important fact often overlooked is this: Jesus and His earliest followers regularly quoted from the Septuagint (LXX)—the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures. This version included the Deuterocanonical books like Wisdom, Sirach (Ecclesiasticus), Tobit, Judith, and 1 & 2 Maccabees. For Greek-speaking Jews in the 1st century (and even many in Judea), the Septuagint was the primary version of Scripture. Since Jesus and the apostles quoted from it, even when it differed from the Hebrew, we can reasonably conclude that they respected its contents, including the Deuterocanon. Ec...

Why God Appears Selective in His Intervention Why does God seem to intervene in some situations and remain silent in others? This question has puzzled believers for generations, especially when injustice or suffering seems to go unchecked. From a human perspective, God’s actions can appear selective, even arbitrary. However, the biblical story reveals a deeper pattern: God intervenes according to His covenant purposes, timing, and long-term redemption plan—not our immediate expectations.  God Honors Human Freedom and Natural Law God created a world where human decisions matter and natural processes function consistently. If God constantly interrupted freedom or nature to prevent pain, the world would become unpredictable or robotic. Instead, God typically works within the rules He created, giving space for real freedom, real consequences, and real love. Love and relationship require freedom, not control. God Influences, But Does Not Coerce God is constantly acting—nudging, persuadi...

R einterpreting the Book of Enoch: Adam and Eve as the Nephilim-the Cast-Out Ones The Book of Enoch has captivated many with its dramatic story of fallen angels, cosmic rebellion, and hybrid giants. But what if we’ve been reading it too literally? What if its apocalyptic symbolism actually points to a covenantal story, not a cosmic myth? What if the Nephilim — often assumed to be demonic hybrids — are instead Adam and Eve cast out of the sacred space-the Garden? The Meaning of “Nephilim”: More Than Giants The Hebrew word “Nephilim” comes from the root נפל (n-f-l), meaning to fall. While often translated as "giants," the more accurate meaning is “fallen ones” — and not necessarily in terms of stature, but in rank. In Genesis 3, Adam and Eve are cast out of Eden — they “fall” from covenantal intimacy. In Genesis 4:6, God warns Cain, "Why has your countenance fallen?" In Numbers 13:33, the Nephilim are those who were cast out of Canaan — dispossessed and spiritually al...