Thoughts in words from a sinner who has been and is saved by the grace of God through Jesus Christ.

My name is Nathan Wells, I served as a missionary to Cambodia in South East Asia from ’03-’06 and I am currently going to school in the LA area at the Master’s Seminary.  I was married to my beautiful wife Christiana on 8-8-08, she is truly a treasure worth more than rubies! Lord willing we will return to Cambodia long-term in January 2010 and work with the local churches there to train up men in the Word as well as work towards translating Biblical resources for pastors and church leaders to use in order to grow in the walk with the Lord Jesus Christ.

I thank the Lord for His abundant mercy and grace; sending His Son to live a perfect life and then die on the cross for sinners like me, and then to give me new life, a new heart, resulting in repentance from my sin and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, for the salvation of my soul. I desire to live my life in a way that depends on the fact that Jesus Christ was raised from the dead; to live in such a way that will cause me to look like a fool to those who do not believe in Christ, but, because of Christ, I will gain so much more than this world has to offer. I desire to spend my life in serving Christ, growing in my love for Him, being completely satisfied in His beauty, “For momentary, light affliction is producing for us an eternal weight of glory far beyond all comparison, while we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen; for the things which are seen are temporal, but the things which are not seen are eternal.” (2 Corinthians 4:17-18)



  1. G’day Nathan,
    Seems like you are getting into study! I only had a very brief look at your blog but was impressed at what I saw. We’re busier than ever at the moment, mostly going well though.
    I just wanted to thank you for the help you gave getting unicode running for me. Most of the staff at the Bible school now use it, just a case of getting them to try and they are hooked. It does seem however that it is not very common yet in the wider community. Apparently many internet shops don’t have it installed. I’m guessing this is because it dies take a little bit of fiddling to install, although the 1.3 version is much be for installing. Have you kept up with any of the developments?
    Must go and do some work. Just wanted to touch base.


  2. Greetings Nathan. I just ran across your site, and am blessed in doing so. How does one become a member of your site?
    I have a question about the Granville Sharp’s rule, about which you posted. Can I ask you or do you have a site which is set up to answer questions from dummies who want desperately to learn?
    My question is: Would the G/S rule apply to any substantives, and not just restriced to names or persons? I am working on Acts 2:23. The words are ‘th opizmoeh boulh kai prognosie.’ My contention is that the G/S rule applies here, linking and makingeauivalent ‘foreknowledge’ and ‘predetermined counsel’. I am told that the RUle only applies to people and names, but I dont see that as being valid. Any thoughts? Or, any sources?

    Thanks in adnvace.
    Ad Coram deo,
    Ron Z


  3. Hi Ron,

    The easiest way to be updated when there is a new post is to subscribe to the rss feed. You can do so by going to http://reader.google.com and then add my feed by searching for the name of my blog (grasping the cross).

    As far as Acts 2:23 – I don’t believe that is a Sharp’s construction – there is no article on either βουλῇ καὶ προγνώσει
    To be a Sharp’s construction the first of the said nouns or participles must have the article while on the second noun or participle it is absent. So the construction in Acts 2:23 is not even Sharp like in my opinion.

    Also in Sharp’s rule the nouns or participles must be of personal description, respecting office, dignity, affinity, or connexion, and attributes, properties, or qualities, good or ill (p. 217 of Wallace). It must be a personal noun, that is singular, and is not a proper name.
    It always deals with a person (some examples: Mark 6:3; John 20:17; Eph. 6:21; Heb. 3:1; 1 Pet. 1:3; Rev. 1:9).

    Not sure if that helps – I’m still learning too!!


  4. Nathan,

    I caught a comment you posted on another site about Piper and Mohler taking Anyabwile to task behind the scenes at T4G. Are you at liberty to expand on this? If so, please respond to djorge@fbc.org.ky.

    Many thanks,



  5. Dearest Nathan,

    I ran across your website while researching James A. Montgomery, under your topic: “Exegesis of Daniel 7:13-14 – Old Testament Prophecy Exegetical Research”.

    I hope you will forgive what might be perceived as an intrusive thought, but Daniel 2:45 deliberately separates the “clay” from the “iron”, thus discounting a 4a/4b premise. As such one should discover a 4, 3, 5, 2, 1, = FIVE world empire sequence, for which the last is “divided”, presumably between the three superpowers.

    Given the above, the chapter 7 beasts MUST represent those superpowers. The “dreadful” would be the one-world-government which is thrown into the Lake of Fire, while the three superpowers regain their sovereignty and continue during the Millennial Reign for a “season and a time”.

    For validation, one could simply consider 12:4 & 9, in context with ~1948, and those four respective entities.

    With Best Regards,


    1. Hi Colin,

      Thank you for your interest.
      I’m not sure if I follow you. If you are trying to say that the vision in chapter 2 is connected with the vision in chapter 7, I am not sure why the observation about the separation between clay and iron is important (and why did you count 4, 3, 5, 2, 1?)
      Many have thought there was a connection between the two visions, but there is nothing explicit in the text that demands such an interpretation from what I remember. If you want to imply it, that is fine, but it is best not to go beyond the text in my opinion.
      Also, as far as connecting Daniel 7 with the events around 1948, I am not sure what you mean.
      I purposely did not go into trying to figure out who was who unless the text told me directly, because I don’t think that is why Daniel wrote down what he did. If five different people try to match what was said to present events, you will get five different interpretations. The main point is that the world’s systems fail, and God’s kingdom is forever. Therefore we have great hope, even in the midst of trials, for our God is the true sovereign of all.

      Because He lives,


  6. Dearest Nathan,

    Please allow the following:

    1. “…separation between clay and iron is important (and why did you count 4, 3, 5, 2, 1? …”

    Please note that 2:45 provides: iron, bronze, clay, silver, gold — 4, 3, 5, 2, 1 = FIVE. Of these, the “clay” is described as “divided”.

    2. Per your lesson: “Chapter seven marks the literary turning point of the book from historical to visions. Yet at the same time, the chapter is bound to those preceding historical accounts … by its own affinity with chapter two”

    I would agree with your initial observation, as indeed these three beasts are ~distant future~ “clay”/”divided” superpowers, and the fourth as the one-world-government. — Please note that chapter 2 empires were sequential however 7:11-12 dictates concurrent.

    3. “…[why] Daniel 7 with the events around 1948…”

    Daniel 12:4 & 9 dictate the prophecies for “the time of the end”. As such I would anticipate NOT ~483BC, or ~230BC, but probably approximate to 1948.

    Nathan, I do hope the church is edified in both the diction and the fulfillment.

    With Best Regards,
    Colin Sadler


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s