THE CREED
ON VIDEO-
.Liberal arts
.Cathedral
.Charlemagne
.Holy Roman Empire
.Feudalism
.University
.Notre Dame
.Bill O’reilly got it wrong!
NEW STUFF- In this ‘new stuff’ section I’m trying to cover
short snippets of things I mention of the videos that I never wrote about before.
So- Liberal Arts?
In the Middle Ages the church took up the slack after the
fall of the Roman Empire in the West [5th century].
Over time the Cathedral churches became places where people
would be able to obtain an education.
The Cathedral churches /cities [Like Corpus Christi] were the
main hub for the outlying Parish churches.
Eventually they made education available to not only the
clergy- but to other interested students.
In the early days of the Roman Empire- this type of education
was only available to ‘Free Men’.
So- the term Liberal comes from the Latin ‘Liberales’- or
‘Free Men’.
There were 7 ‘arts’ or general fields of study-
1 Math
2 Geometry
3 Astronomy
4 Music
5 Logic
6 Rhetoric
7 Latin
In today’s world- when you study for a general education- we
call that ‘Liberal Arts’- as opposed to what a person majors in- a specific
field.
Got it?
PAST POSTS [verses below]-
HEBREWS- 2015- VIDEO LINKS INCLUDED
HEBREWS 1-3 The next few weeks I’ll be teaching from an old commentary
I wrote a few years back [2007-8]- The notes at the bottom of the chapters- and
post- are new [as well as the videos].
NEW NOTE- In the study of the bible- there are debates about who wrote
the letters of the New Testament.
In the field of higher criticism- it gets a bit silly at times.
I just finished an on line course from a respected scholar out of Yale
university.
He taught from the higher criticism perspective- I enjoyed the course-
though I did not agree with lots of his conclusions.
At one point he questioned whether Paul wrote the middle chapter of one
of the letters attributed to Paul.
Yet he did believe the first- and last chapters were by Paul.
For the most part- we believe that the letters in the bible- that say
in them ‘written by Paul’ are from Paul [or Peter, James, Etc.].
But- Hebrews leaves the authors name out- so some debate who wrote it.
Tertullian- an early church father [2/3rd century]
attributed it to Barnabus- Paul’s companion that we read about in the book of
Acts-
For about 1500 years- till the time of the Reformation- most Christian
scholars attributed it to Paul.
Hebrews is written in a high form of Greek [which is another way we
determine who wrote the letters- tough this is not always accurate.
Many say John the apostle did not write Revelation- because the form of
Greek used is much lower than the other writings of John- yet- there is
internal witness that John [the apostle] wrote it.
In John’s writings [gospel- 1st, 2nd and 3rd
John] he speaks about Jesus as the Word [Logos] and this theme is seen in
Revelation too].
So- while we don’t know for sure- I personally stick with the
authorship of Paul the apostle.
INTRODUCTION:
I have been wanting to overview this book for
a long time. I believe there are a lot of misconceptions from Hebrews. Often
time’s modern translations take older books of the Bible and want to make them
relevant for our day. This can be both good and bad.
I like the message Bible, but for in depth
study it doesn’t really work. There are certain things that must be interpreted
in context of the time and place when
the book was written. Hebrews is one of the most important New Testament books
to ‘read in context’. I wont go over every verse in this short commentary, I
will hit the high points of various chapters and try to show you what I mean by
‘reading it in context’.
I believe it is possible that this book was
Paul’s ‘open letter’ to the first century Jewish community, this is quite
possibly why it goes unsigned. The ‘Judaizers’ had so polluted the minds of
their fellow Jews against Paul ‘he speaks against Moses and our law’ type
thing, that if Paul signed this letter, there would be little chance that the
intended audience would read it!
If you read a
book on auto mechanics, and tried to make it relevant for the human body, it
wouldn’t work. For instance if you spoke on the engine of a car, and then tried
to ‘translate’ that and equate it with the human heart, you would have
problems. But if you left it in context and then applied the concept of
maintenance and the need for clean fuel lines, and then applied it to the human
need for clean arteries, well then that would be OK.
So I believe when we read Hebrews, and don’t
try to make it ‘fit’ Gentile believers, then it works. You still get great
principles from the ‘manual’, but you understand that it is not speaking
directly to the Gentile church. God bless you guys, I hope you get something
from it. John.
CHAPTER 1:
NEW NOTES AT END OF CHAPTER-
LOGOS.
SEATED.
‘God, who at sundry times and in diverse
manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the Prophets, hath in these last
days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by
whom also he made the worlds. Many years ago when I was going to a fundamental
Baptist Church, they would interpret this passage in a ‘cessationist’ way. They
would say because God says in the past he spoke by prophets, but now by his
Son. That this means he doesn’t speak thru Prophets any more. The Prophets here
are Old Testament voices. In Ephesians it says after Jesus ascended up on high
he gave gifts unto men, some Apostles, some Prophets, etc. The fact that Jesus
made Prophets after the ascension teaches us that there were to be a whole new
class of New Testament Prophets that were different from the old. I find it
strange to believe that Jesus would create a whole new class of gifts, and then
take them away as soon as the Bible is complete. Why would Paul give
instruction in the New Testament on how Prophets would operate [Corinthians]
and then to say ‘as soon as this letter is canonized with the others, all this
instruction will be useless’ it just doesn’t seem right.
The reason Paul is saying in the past God used
Prophets, but today his Son. Paul is showing that the Jewish Old testament was
a real communication from God to man. But in this dispensation of Grace, God is
speaking the realities that the Prophets were looking to. Paul is saying ‘thank
God for the Old Jewish books and law, they point to something, his name is
Jesus’! The Prophets [Old Testament] served a purpose; they brought us from the
shadows to the present time [1st century] now lets move on into the
reality. Now you must see and hear the Son in these last days. ‘Who being the
brightness of his glory and the express image of his person…when he by himself
purged our sins SAT DOWN on the right hand of the majesty on high’ here we are
at the beginning stages of themes that we will see later in the letter. The
significance of Jesus ‘sitting down’ will be contrasted with the Old testament
priests ‘standing up’. Paul [for the record I think Paul wrote this letter,
from here on I will probably just refer to the writer as Paul] will teach that
the ‘standing up’ of the Levitical Priests represented an ‘incomplete
priesthood’ the reason Jesus sat down was because there would be no more
sacrifice, and no more priesthood made up of many priests who would die year
after year. This doesn’t mean there would be no more New Testament priests as
believers, but that there would be no more Old Testament system. Paul will find
spiritual truths like this all thru out the Old Testament.
Some theologians feel that Paul is a little
too loose with these free comparisons that he seems to ‘pull out of the hat’,
for the believer who holds to the canon of scripture, it is the Word of God.
‘Being made so much better than the angels…but unto the Son he saith “thy
throne O God is forever and ever, a scepter of righteousness is the scepter of
thy Kingdom”. Here Paul introduces another theme that will be seen thru out
this letter. The superiority of Jesus over angels. Why is this important? Most
believers know that Jesus is greater than angels, don’t they? Here we see why
context is important to understand this letter. In Jewish tradition it is
believed that the law was given to Moses by God thru the mediation of angels.
Some say ‘well, we don’t use Jewish tradition, we use scripture’. First, Paul
used anything he could to win the argument. Second, if we believe Hebrews is an
inspired book, then when we read later on that the law given thru angels
received a recompense if broken, then right here you have scripture [Hebrews]
testifying that God did use angels to ‘transmit’ the law to some degree. Now,
why is it important for gentiles to see this? Well it really isn’t! But it is
vital for a first century Jew to see it. If Paul can show that Jesus is greater
than the angels, then he is beginning to make the argument that the New
Covenant is greater than the Old.
Here is the
context. Moses law is highly revered in the first century Jewish community, so
here Paul says ‘how much better is the law/word given to us from Gods Son’.
Since Jesus is much better than the angels, therefore pay closer attention to
the words spoken thru Gods Son, he is greater than the angels! ‘But to which of
the angels said he “sit at my right hand until I make thy enemies thy
footstool” we end chapter one with the theme of Jesus being better than the
angels, yet in chapter 2 something funny happens, Paul will make the argument
of Jesus being “a little lower than the angels” lets see what this means.
NEW NOTES-
4-2015
LOGOS.
We see God
having created all things thru Christ ‘the express image of his person- by whom
also he made the worlds’.
Jesus is called
the WORD of God in scripture- the Greek word- for ‘word’ is Logos.
We read in the
bible that God made all things- but also that Christ made all things-
Is this a
contradiction?
No-
For the first
3-4 centuries of Christianity- as you study the early church councils-
The early church
struggled over how to view the relationships between God and Jesus
These debates
raged- and at times each side viewed the other as Heretics.
I think it was a
mistake to be so quick to judge those as heretics- who were having difficulty in
expressing in finite words- the great mystery of God and Christ.
In Genesis we
read that God spoke all things into existence- so- here we see God’s Word-
Logos [Christ] as being the instrumental cause of creation.
In John chapter
one we read that Jesus was the Word- in the beginning- who was with God- and
was God.
I’ll try and
simplify it [not an easy task to say the least].
God- who is
Spirit- spoke- and this expression of God- his Word- is also referred to as
Christ-
Christ/Jesus is
the Word of God made flesh- and it is thru his humanity [incarnation] that we
do indeed see God in ‘the flesh’-
Yes- by Him- all
things were made.
SEATED.
We see a theme
in chapter 1- that will run thru the whole letter-
HE SAT DOWN- In
Hebrews we are seeing the superiority of the New Covenant over the old- and
there will be many comparisons to show how the Old Covenant- priests-
sacrifices- the law itself- was less than what we get in the New Covenant-
And the reality that Jesus sat down at the right hand of
God- shows us that he was the last- and
[parts]
. (1235) 2ND CORINTHIANS 12- Before I get
into a long history discussion with you guys, let’s hit a few verses. Paul says
‘when I was with you, did I gain a profit from you, take advantage of you?’ or
‘when I sent Titus, did he gain a profit from you?’ He then goes on and says
the fathers lay up money for the kids, not the other way around. He says he has
spent out of his own pocket for them, and he will continue to do so. He says he
does all this so people won’t have the excuse ‘he’s just in it for the money’.
Notice, Paul himself did not have the common mindset we see in ministry today.
Often times financial appeals are made from Paul’s writings in Corinthians,
these appeals often say ‘we are not asking for ourselves, but for you’ it is
put in a way that says it would be wrong to not take money from people. That in
some way not taking an offering would violate scripture. Paul flatly said he
did not take money from them for personal use, nor would he. When the modern
church uses Paul’s other sayings in this letter to appeal to giving, we need to
share ‘the whole counsel of God’ not just a few verses that fit in with what we
practice. Now, Paul speaks about being caught up into ‘heaven’ [Gods
realm-Paradise] and hearing truths from God that were not lawful for men to speak.
He states that God gave him truth that came from Divine revelation. If you skip
a few pages over in your bible, you will hit Galatians. In the first chapter he
says how after he was converted he did not confer with the other leaders at Jerusalem , but received
teaching straight from God. Let’s discuss what revelation is, how we come to
know things. The last few centuries of the first millennium of Christian
history you had the ‘Holy Roman Empire ’ which
was a political/religious union of church and state. Under the emperor
Charlemagne the territories of the empire were vast. Those who came after him
did not have the same control over the regions that were vast. Eventually you
had a form of rule arise that was called Feudalism; the sections of the empire
that were too far to benefit directly from Rome would simply come under the
authority of the local strongman [much like the present dilemma in Afghanistan,
I think it’s time to get our boys out of that mess]. People would come under
the authority of a ruler and he would lease out land to the citizens and they
would benefit from his protection. The citizens were called Vassals and the
land was called a Fief. At one point king John of England would do public
penance in a disagreement he had with the Pope and all of England would become a Fief under
the rule of the Pope. Now, this would eventually lead up to the development of
the strong nation states, an independent identifying with your state/region as
opposed to being under Rome
and the papacy. This type of independence would allow for the 16th
century reformation to happen under Luther. If it were not for Frederick
the Wise, the regional authority in Germany where Luther lived, he
would have never had the protection or freedom to launch his reformation.
Luther also had the influence of being a scholar at Wittenberg . Around the 12th-13th
centuries you had the first university pop up at the great cathedral of Notre
Dame in Paris .
The word university simply meant a co-operative effort from two or more people.
It applied to many things besides learning. It was also during this time that
the church began to develop a system of harmonizing Christian doctrine; she
began to do systematic theology. The writings of the Greek philosophers
[Aristotle] were rediscovered after centuries of them being hidden, and the
great intellectual Saint Thomas Aquinas would wed Aristotle’s ideas with
Christian truth. This became known as Scholasticism. Aquinas believed that men
could arrive at a true knowledge of God
from pure reason and logic. But man could not know all the truths about God and
his nature without ‘special revelation’ [the bible and church tradition]. All
Christians did not agree with Aquinas new approach to Christian truth, the very
influential bishop Bernard would initially condemn Aquinas over this. Bernard
said ‘the faith that believes unto righteousness, believes! It does not doubt’.
The Scholastic school taught that the way you arrive at knowledge was thru the
continuous questioning and doubting of things until you come to some basic
conclusions.
[Parts- this got put in because I search words from my past
posts that relate to the recent video- so- the word ‘university’ popped up. I
mention this because for those who read all this stuff- every so often a past
post might not relate to the video- but I’ll stick it on anyway- see?]
NEW NOTE- In the study of the bible- there are debates about who wrote
the letters of the New Testament.
In the field of higher criticism- it gets a bit silly at times.
I just finished an on line course from a respected scholar out of Yale
university.
He taught from the higher criticism perspective- I enjoyed the course-
though I did not agree with lots of his conclusions.
At one point he questioned whether Paul wrote the middle chapter of one
of the letters attributed to Paul.
Yet he did believe the first- and last chapters were by Paul.
For the most part- we believe that the letters in the bible- that say
in them ‘written by Paul’ are from Paul [or Peter, James, Etc.].
But- Hebrews leaves the authors name out- so some debate who wrote it.
Tertullian- an early church father [2/3rd century]
attributed it to Barnabus- Paul’s companion that we read about in the book of
Acts-
For about 1500 years- till the time of the Reformation- most Christian
scholars attributed it to Paul.
Hebrews is written in a high form of Greek [which is another way we
determine who wrote the letters- tough this is not always accurate.
Many say John the apostle did not write Revelation- because the form of
Greek used is much lower than the other writings of John- yet- there is
internal witness that John [the apostle] wrote it.
In John’s writings [gospel- 1st, 2nd and 3rd
John] he speaks about Jesus as the Word [Logos] and this theme is seen in
Revelation too].
So- while we don’t know for sure- I personally stick with the
authorship of Paul the apostle.
INTRODUCTION:
I have been wanting to overview this book for
a long time. I believe there are a lot of misconceptions from Hebrews. Often
time’s modern translations take older books of the Bible and want to make them
relevant for our day. This can be both good and bad.
I like the message Bible, but for in depth
study it doesn’t really work. There are certain things that must be interpreted
in context of the time and place when
the book was written. Hebrews is one of the most important New Testament books
to ‘read in context’. I wont go over every verse in this short commentary, I
will hit the high points of various chapters and try to show you what I mean by
‘reading it in context’.
I believe it is possible that this book was
Paul’s ‘open letter’ to the first century Jewish community, this is quite
possibly why it goes unsigned. The ‘Judaizers’ had so polluted the minds of
their fellow Jews against Paul ‘he speaks against Moses and our law’ type
thing, that if Paul signed this letter, there would be little chance that the
intended audience would read it!
If you read a
book on auto mechanics, and tried to make it relevant for the human body, it
wouldn’t work. For instance if you spoke on the engine of a car, and then tried
to ‘translate’ that and equate it with the human heart, you would have
problems. But if you left it in context and then applied the concept of
maintenance and the need for clean fuel lines, and then applied it to the human
need for clean arteries, well then that would be OK.
So I believe when we read Hebrews, and don’t
try to make it ‘fit’ Gentile believers, then it works. You still get great
principles from the ‘manual’, but you understand that it is not speaking
directly to the Gentile church. God bless you guys, I hope you get something
from it. John.
CHAPTER 1:
NEW NOTES AT END OF CHAPTER-
LOGOS.
SEATED.
[parts]
(862)ROMANS 11- let me make a
note on the previous entry. Over the last few years, as well as many years of
experience with ‘ministry/church’, I have seen how easy it is to fall into the
well meaning mindset of ‘I am going into the ministry, this is my career
choice. My responsibility is to do ‘Christian stuff’ and the people’s role is
to support me’[ I am not taking a shot at well meaning Pastors, I am basically
speaking of the many friends I have met over the years who seemed to think
ministry was a way to get financial support]. In the previous entry I mentioned
how Paul seemed to have a mode of operation that said ‘when I am residing with
a community of believers, I refuse to allow them to support me. I will work
with my own hands to give them an example, not only to the general saints, but
also to the elders. I am showing you that leadership is not a means to get
gain’. It does seem ‘strange’ for us to see this. Of course we know Paul also
taught the churches that it was proper and right to support those who ‘labor
among you’. I have taught all this in the past and I don’t want to ‘re-teach’
it all again. The point I want to make is we ‘in ministry’ really need to
rethink what we do. How many web-sites have I gone to that actually have icons
that say ‘pay me here’. The average person going to these sites must think ‘pay
you for what’? Paul did not teach the mindset of ‘pay me here, now’. Also in
this letter to the Romans we are reading Paul’s correspondence to the believers
at Rome. He often used this mode of ‘authority’ [writing letters] to exercise
his apostolic office. Of course he also traveled to these areas [Acts] and
spent time with them. And as I just showed you he supported himself on purpose
when he was with the saints. Basically Paul is carrying out the single most
effective apostolic ministry of all time [except for Jesus] and he is doing it
without all the modern techniques of getting paid. He actually is doing all
this writing and laboring at his own expense. He told the Corinthians ‘the
fathers [apostles] spend for the children, not the children for the fathers’.
So in todays talk on ‘apostles’ being restored. God ‘bringing back into
alignment apostolic government’ we need to tone down all the quoting of verses
[even the things Paul said!] that seem to say to the average saint ‘how do you
expect us to reach the world if you do not ‘bring all the tithes into the
storehouse’! When we put this guilt trip on the people of God we are violating
very fundamental principles of scripture. Now, let’s try and finish up chapter
11. Paul is basically telling Israel and the Gentiles that God’s dealings are
beyond our understanding [last few verses]. God is using the ‘unbelief’ of
Israel as an open door to the Gentiles. He is also using the mercy that he is
showing to the Gentiles as an ‘open door’ to Israel! He will ‘provoke them to
jealousy’. There are a few difficult verses that would be unfair for me to skip
over. ‘All Israel shall be saved’. Paul uses this to show that God’s dealings
with natural Israel as a nation are not finished. Who are ‘all Israel’? Some
say ‘the Israel of God’ [the church]. I don’t think this fits the text. Some
say ‘all Israel that will be alive at the second coming’ I think this is
closer. To be honest I think this can simply mean ‘all Israel’ all those who
are alive and also raised at the return of the Lord. Now, this would be a form
of universalism [all people eventually being saved]. I am not a Universalist,
but I don’t want any ‘preconceived’ mindset [even my own!] to taint the text. I
think God has the ability to reveal himself to the whole nation of Israel in
such a way that ‘they all will be saved’. If I were a Jewish person I wouldn’t
wait for this to happen! Just like the Calvinists argument of ‘why witness’?
Because God commands it. So even though you can make an argument here for a
type of universal redemption at Christ’s revealing of himself to Israel at the
second coming [which is in keeping with this chapter, as well as other areas in
scripture; ‘they will look upon him whom they have pierced’ ‘God will pour out
the spirit of mourning and supplication on Israel at his appearing’. Which by
the way would fit in with ‘whoever calls on the Lord will be saved’ which I
taught in chapter 10. This is a futurist text implying a time of future
judgment and wrath’]. So God’s dealings with Israel are not finished. Paul also
warns the Gentiles ‘don’t boast, if God cut out the true branches [Israel] to
graft you in. He can just as quickly cut you out too’! It would be dishonest
for me [a Calvinist] to simply not comment on this. You certainly can take this
verse in an Arminian way. Or you can see Paul speaking in a ‘nationalistic
sense’. Sort of like saying ‘if Germany walks away from the faith, they will be
‘cut out’. [France would have been a better example! Speaking of the so called
‘enlightenment’ and the French Revolution]. In essence ‘you Gentiles, don’t
think “wow, look at us. God left Israel and we are now special!”’ Paul is saying
‘you Gentiles [as a whole group] stand by faith. God could just as quickly ‘cut
you out’ and replace you with another group’. I also think the Arminians could
use this type of argument for the previous predestination chapter [9]. But to
be honest I needed to give you my view. One more thing, Paul quotes Elijah
‘lord, I am the only one left’. He uses this in context of God having a remnant
from Israel who remained faithful to the true God. God told Elijah ‘there are 7
thousand that have not bowed the knee to baal’. Paul uses this to show that
even in his day there were a remnant Of Jews [himself included] who received
the Messiah. An interesting side note. The prophetic ministry [Elijah] seems to
function at a ‘popular level’. Now, I don’t mean ‘fame’, but Elijah was giving
voice to a large undercurrent that was running thru the nation. If you read the
story of Elijah you would have never known that there were ‘7 thousand’ who
never bowed the knee! Often times God will use prophetic people to ‘give voice’
or popularize a general truth that is presently existing in the ‘underground
church’ at large. Sort of like if Elijah had a web site, the 7 thousand would
have been secretly reading it and saying ‘right on brother, that’s exactly what
we believe too’!
ROMANS 12
.ARE SOME GIFTS BETTER THAN
OTHERS?
.HOW SHOULD THEY FUNCTION IN THE
‘BODY’?
. HOW SHOUD WE GIVE OFFERINGS-
DID PAUL TEAHC TITHING?
.HOT COALS ON THEIR HEADS- HUH?
(864)ROMANS 12:1-8
‘I beseech you by the mercies of God to present your bodies as living
sacrifices, holy and acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service
[spiritual worship]’. Most times we see ‘by the mercies of God’ as a recap of
all that Paul has taught from chapters 1
[parts]
(1273) 2ND KINGS 17 in
some ways this is a transitional chapter; up until now foreign countries
attacked and suppressed Israel, but in this chapter we see the first real
captivity of the people as a whole. Hoshea the king over the northern tribes
[Israel] rebels against the king of Assyria who had them under tribute. So the
king of Assyria puts Hoshea in jail and besieges Israel for 3 years, they take
the city [Samaria] and they remove the majority of the people out of the land.
He also places foreigners in the land to repopulate it. These foreign nations
eventually mix in with the remnant that remained and these descendants are what
we read about in John’s gospel, they were considered ‘half breed’ Samaritans.
Now after the new inhabitants settle in the ‘Lord sent lions among them’. The
people see this as judgment from God and request the Assyrian king to send them
a priest so they could learn the ways of the God of the land and not die. This
priest arrives and to some degree teaches these pagans the true worship of God,
they of course kept their pagan beliefs as well, but it is interesting to see
how the Lord even used a judgment scenario to redeem people. Okay, last night I
was reading some of the history of the 18th-19th
centuries and how after the French Revolution and the era of Napoleon many
Europeans began to fear the idea of total and free Democracy, there was a sort
of romantic musing upon the good old days of the Monarch. Many Frenchmen longed
for the stability of the old Catholic church, these were called
‘Ultramontanists’ which meant ‘beyond the mountains- Alps’ and stood for their
desire to re attach with the old Roman church in a way that allowed the church
to reassert a global oversight over France as it used to have before the
Revolution and Reformation. Part of the fear had to do with the nation states
being their own sovereign, that whatever the nations wanted to now do they
could do without any outside oversight; in essence part of the role of the
Roman church was to provide a type of ‘united nations’ oversight over the
individual states. Ultimately Democracy would eventually prevail and the new
world of the Americas would be the first nation to adopt Democratic principles
right from the start. When reading the history of the world, often time’s
revisionists put their own spin on stuff. For instance we often read the
history of Darwin in the latter half of the 19th century and see him
as some enlightened figure who stood up against the bigotry of the church. But
a generation or 2 before Darwin you had many ‘enlightened’ Evangelicals who
fought for human rights and the dignity of man. William Wilberforce and the
‘Clapham community’ were men who used their political and social status as a
means of freeing the Black man from the horrendous slave trade in Britain.
Clapham was a small town around 3 miles outside of London; the town was sort of
an elite place for the higher ups of society. Sort of like the Hamptons. Yet it
was from this area in the late 18th century that many of the modern
programs of the Evangelical movement were launched. The wealth and influence of
these men launched the first bible societies, they started mission
organizations for the poor; and even tried to instill a schema of social justice
in their business dealings [the head of the East India trading company was part
of the group]. These men wrought good social change and fought for the rights
of the Black man, for him to be treated as a human and not some type of lower
class chattel property. Darwin’s ideas would put into print the racist ideas of
those who opposed the outlawing of slavery as a legitimate trade. Those who
resisted freeing the slaves [both in Britain and the colonies] believed that
the Black man was an inferior race to the White man. Darwin taught these
beliefs openly in his books; he believed the Black race was proof of
Evolutionary theory, that the Blacks proved to us that there were
intellectually inferior races of men that did not advance along the more
educated road of White men. The point being that a full 70 years before Darwin
you had very influential Christian men who fought for the rights and freedom of
Black men, and yet history normally portrays Darwin as the person who fought
the bigotry of the church in his noble journey for truth. Okay, God allowed his
people to be taken captive, they rebelled against him and they lost their
freedom as a people, yet they still had a history of great and noble deeds,
they accepted proselytes into their nation and treated the poor in their land
with respect. It would be wrong to view the entire history of Gods people [both
now and then] from the lens of the sins and wrongs that occurred, yes the
church has made her mistakes and it sounds noble to say ‘lets cast off all the
restraints of religion’ but in the end you might wind up looking past the Alps
for some help.
(1270) CONC. 2ND KINGS 15- Azariah the king had a
long reign and also was a leper. We read earlier how Naaman the leper was a
great military leader. A few weeks ago as I was channel surfing I caught a
biography on Father Damien, a Belgian Priest who went to Hawaiian in the 1800’s
to serve Gods people. Hawaii had a problem with Leprosy at the time and they
eventually quarantined the lepers to an island named Molokai [sp?]. Father
Damien used to visit the island and eventually requested permission to stay on
the island and serve the people. He eventually caught leprosy himself and wrote
how he so identified with the people that it was only fitting that he should die
from the common disease of the people he loved. The next week I read an article
or 2 on Father Damien, it just so happened that he was up for being canonized
as a Saint by the Pope. So a few stories covered some of the controversy that
surrounded him; some accused him of sleeping with some of the women on the
island and they said that’s how he got sick. Other critics said he wasn’t
really as dedicated as the stories portrayed; that he actually traveled to a
part of the island where normal people lived and then he would later go back to
the side where the lepers were. So the critics had their reasons, some of the
critics were sincere in their beliefs and did not intend for their critiques to
be made public. So to be honest reading these stories did
[parts]
VERSES-
. Isaiah 53:3 He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows,
and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was
despised, and we esteemed him not.
Isaiah 53:4 Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our
sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.
Isaiah 53:5 But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was
bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and
with his stripes we are healed.
Isaiah 53:6 All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned
every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.
Isaiah 53:7 He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened
not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before
her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth.
Isaiah 53:8 He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who
shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living:
for the transgression of my people was he stricken.
Isaiah 53:9 And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the
rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in
his mouth.
Isaiah 53:10 Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put
him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see
his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper
in his hand.
12 And when
he was accused of the chief priests and elders, he answered nothing.
13 Then said
Pilate unto him, Hearest thou not how many things they witness against thee?
14 And he
answered him to never a word; insomuch that the governor marvelled greatly.
Matt. 27
1Corinthians 15:1 Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the
gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye
stand;
1Corinthians 15:2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory
what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.
1Corinthians 15:3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which
I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
1Corinthians 15:4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again
the third day according to the scriptures:
And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names
are not written in the book of life of theLamb slain from the foundation of the world. Rev.
And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and
hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation; 2nd Cor. 5:18
20 And,
having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all
things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things
in heaven.
21 And you,
that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now
hath he reconciled
22 In the
body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and
unreproveable in his sight: Col. 1
And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eli,
Eli, lama sabachthani? that is to say, My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?
Matt. 27
John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only
begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have
everlasting life.
John 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the
world; but that the world through him might be saved.
John 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that
believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of
the only begotten Son of God.
facebook.com/john.chiarello.5
Note- Do me a favor, those who read/like the posts- re-post
them on other sites as well as the site you read them on. Thanks- John.*
No comments:
Post a Comment