https://ccoutreach87.files.wordpress.com/2015/11/11-7-15-the-cross-2.zip
ONVIDEO-
.Baby
.Did just the ceremonial law pass away?
.What was the purpose of the law?
.Doctor law and doctor grace
.Water baptism and faith
.They got paid the same!
.2nd mile
PAST POSTS [verses below]
(820) . ROMANS 3:19-31 ‘Now we know
that what things the law says, it says to those who are under the law… that
every mouth may be stopped and all the world becomes guilty before God’. One of
the questions that arise as a response to Paul’s gospel is ‘if the law cannot
make us righteous, then why even have it’? Paul will consistently teach the
concept that Gods intention for the law was simply to reveal mans sin to him.
Man would have this ‘form’ of the law written on stone tablets and as he tried
to live up to God’s standards he would come to the proper diagnosis that all
men are sinners. This diagnosis would then lead him to a place of faith in
Jesus. After he believes in Jesus he then fulfills the law naturally, out of
having a new nature ‘yea, we establish the law’ [3:31]. I have found it
interesting over the years to teach people this. To explain to sincere people,
church goers. To say ‘did you know the bible says that no man can be saved by
trying to obey Gods Ten Commandments’? I will always explain that this doesn't
mean that God wants us to break them! But when we come to the Cross we by
nature keep them. These verses lay down the foundation of ‘justification by
faith’. He that believes is righteous. To declare Jesus righteousness for the
remission of sins that are past. Having faith ‘in His Blood’. Both Jews and
Gentiles need to be made righteous thru faith/belief in Jesus. I want to
establish this fact in your mind. Paul without a doubt describes this
experience as being ‘justified by faith’. This is the same as saying ‘believing
with the heart unto righteousness’. Later on [chapter 10] this needs to be
understood when parsing the verses that say ‘with the heart a man believes unto
righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation’ many are
confused about this, to get it right you need to see that Paul spends much time
early on establishing the fact that ‘those who believe unto righteousness’ are
justified by faith already!
Below are just a few clips from Romans 1-3- I hope to hit on these in
the video.
Romans 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it
is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew
first, and also to the Greek.
Romans 1:17 For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from
faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.
Romans 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against
all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
Romans 1:19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in
them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
Romans 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of
the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even
his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
Romans 2:13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God,
but the doers of the law shall be justified.
Romans 2:14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by
nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law
unto themselves:
Romans 2:15 Which shew the work of the law written in their
hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean
while accusing or else excusing one another;)
Romans 3:19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it
saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all
the world may become guilty before God.
Romans 3:20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh
be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
Romans 3:21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is
manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;
Romans 3:22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of
Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no
difference:
Romans 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of
God;
Romans 3:24 Being justified freely by his grace through the
redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
Romans 3:25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through
faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that
are past, through the forbearance of God;
Romans 3:26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness:
that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.
Romans 3:27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law?
of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.
Romans 3:28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith
without the deeds of the law.
ROMANS 4-7
Video
https://ccoutreach87.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/700-galatians.wav?_=1 This is an old radio show I made years ago-
thought it fit well with what I’m teaching now- you’ll need to use Internet
Explorer browser to hear it.
The apostle Paul quotes a lot of Old Testament
scriptures in this letter- I hope to cover some of them on the video- but as
you read these chapters- it would be helpful to read Genesis 12- 13- 15-and 17-
these are the main chapters Paul uses in the life of Abraham to show Abrahams
faith- and how he was justified by faith- before he was circumcised [Gen 15].
He will describe the faith of Abraham by using
the story of Abraham and Sarah having a son in their old age [Gen. 17] - and
talk about how the heirs of the promise- that Abraham would be ‘heir of the
world’ was made to ALL THE SEED- meaning not just to his Jewish brothers who
would believe- but also to the Gentiles- who were never granted the ‘right of
the covenant’ [circumcision].
Paul explains that Abraham was justified BEFORE
he was circumcised- so- he is the father of all the kids- even the Gentile
believers who were never circumcised- but had the faith of Abraham.
Now- there’s’ a lot I am trying to cover in this
Romans study- for those who watch the videos- you will see that I’m also
covering the divisions within Christianity- primarily those that arose out of
the 16th century Protestant Reformation. I quote the book of James-
and show how James says ‘was not Abraham our father JUSTIFIED BY WORKS when he
offered up Isaac his son on the altar’. It’s important to see- that these words
JUSTIFIED BY WORKS- are indeed used in our New Testament- in the videos I’m
explaining this- but the point I’m making is James uses the account of Abraham-
in Genesis 22- and shows us that the progressive work of ‘Justification’ can-
and is- applied to the act of Abrahams obedience- and when God saw Abraham DO A
JUST THING [a work] James says ‘he was then justified’- the same word used in
the initial act of our Justification- seen in Genesis 15- ok- this might be a
bit much to take in now- but over time when we get a better grasp on this- I
believe it will help to foster unity in the Body of Christ.
James 2:21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he
had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
James 2:22 Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by
works was faith made perfect?
James 2:23 And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham
believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called
the Friend of God.
James 2:24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and
not by faith only.
NOTE- As I do this study- I’m copying/pasting an old commentary I
wrote years ago- I guess I should read the commentary first- after I penned the
above- I read it- I basically covered the same thing- at least I’m consistent!
ROMANS 4: 1-12
Now, Paul will use one of his most frequent arguments to prove that all
men, both Jews and Gentiles, need to be justified by faith and not ‘by works’.
The most famous singular figure that natural Israel looked to as the
‘identifier’ of them being a special people was ‘Father Abraham’. Paul does a
masterful job at showing how Abraham was indeed justified by faith and not by
works. The ‘work’ of circumcision came before the law. It would later become synonymous
with law keeping [Ten Commandments] and Paul can certainly use it here as
implying ‘the whole law’. But to be accurate this work of circumcision was a
national identifying factor that Israel looked to as saying ‘we are better than
you [Gentiles]’. Paul is showing Israel that God in fact ‘made Abraham
righteous’ before he circumcised him! [Gen. 15] And the sign of this
righteousness was circumcision. This meaning that Abrahams faith in Gods
promise [a purely ‘passive’ act! This is very important to see. Later on as we
deal with the famous ‘conversion texts’ we need to keep this in mind] justified
him without respect to the law. God simply took Abraham outside and said ‘look
at the stars, your children will be this abundant’ and Abraham simply believed this
promise to be true. Much like the passive belief of Cornelius house at their
conversion [Acts 10]. The simple belief in the promise of Jesus justifies the
sinner! Now this fact of Abraham believing and being made righteous, before
being circumcised, is proof [according to Paul] that Abraham is the father of
‘many nations’ not just natural Israel. All ethnic groups who HAVE THE SAME
FAITH AS ABRAHAM are qualified to be ‘sons of Abraham/ heirs of God’. The fact
that Abraham carried this justification along with him as he became
circumcised, shows that all Jewish people as well can partake of this
‘righteousness by faith’ if they have the same faith as Abraham had. Jesus did
say ‘Abraham rejoiced to see my day’[ John’s gospel]. In Gods promise to
Abraham of a future dynasty of children, this included the promised Messiah. So
indirectly Abraham’s belief in the promise of being the father of ‘many
nations’ included belief in the coming Messiah. So according to Paul, all
ethnic groups who have faith in Jesus are justified/made righteous. The very
example Israel used to justify ‘ethnic/national pride’ [Father Abraham] was
taught in a way that showed the truth of the gospel and how God is no respecter
of persons.
(820) ROMANS
4:13-14 ‘Now the promise that Abraham would become the inheritor of the world
was not going to be fulfilled thru the law [natural Israel] but thru faith [all
who believe, both Jew and Gentile]’. I have spoken on this before [see note at
bottom] and will hit on it a little now. The historic church can be defined for
the most part as ‘a-millennial’, that is they interpreted the parables on the
Kingdom of God and the promise of ‘inheriting the world [which includes the
Promised Land]’ as being fulfilled thru the church. That Jesus established Gods
kingdom and the church basically fulfills these promises by expanding Christ’s
‘rule’ thru the earth. Some historians saw the 4th century
‘marriage’ of Rome and Christianity as a fulfillment of this. During the 19th
and 20th century you had the rise of Dispensationalism, a
‘new/different’ way of interpreting these land promises. Many good men showed
the reality of Christ’s literal coming and pointed to a future time where Jesus
literally sits on a throne in Jerusalem and rules all nations. These brothers
are called ‘Pre-millennial’, they believe that Jesus comes back first [pre] and
then establishes his ‘millennial rule’ on earth. The Premillennialists would
see the Amillennialists as ‘replacement theologians’. They said that these
brothers were taking the actual promises that God made to Israel and
‘replacing’ Israel with the church. In essence they accused the Amillennialists
of spiritualizing the promises to Israel and saying the church would be the
recipients of the promises. Now, both sides have truth to them, I personally
believe the Amillennialists have a lot more truth! But I do see some of the
good points that the Premillenialists made. I want you to simply read these
verses [Romans 4:13-14, Galatians 3:18] and see for yourself how Paul does
teach the reality that the promises to Abraham are to be fulfilled thru the
church [spiritual Israel]. This does not mean that there is no future physical
return of Jesus. But the body of scripture leans heavily on the Amillinnialists
side. [see entry 703] NOTE- To be fair, some historic thinkers held to the
Premillennial position. The majority were Amillennial.
(821) ROMANS
4:15-25 ‘For the law worketh wrath, for where there is no law there is no
transgression’. I simply want to touch on the concept of ‘wrath’ being a very
real part of judgment. One of the ways the gospel ‘saves us’ is by promising a
future [and present!] deliverance from wrath. While death ‘reigned’ before the
law was given, it wasn’t until the law where you had a clear picture of
transgression and atonement. We will deal with this later in Romans. Now Paul
once again hits on the theme of Abraham being the ‘spiritual father’ of many
nations [all who believe] and how the promises of God to Abraham were to be
fulfilled thru this ‘new race of people’ [the church]. Paul is careful to not
demean Israel; he couches his terms in a way that says ‘God will fulfill these
things thru the circumcision who believes [Jews] and the un-circumcision who
believe’ [Gentiles]. I want to stress the very plain language Paul uses to show
us that we should not be seeing Gods ‘covenant promises’ thru a natural lens.
Christians need to be careful when they support [exalt!] natural Israel in a
way that the New Testament doesn’t do. ‘To the end that the promise might be
sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also
which is the faith of Abraham’. Now Paul tells us that when God made promises
to Abraham that Abraham believed against hope. When all things looked really
bad, he still believed. When he was 100 years old and Sarah around 90, he held
to the promise [read my commentaries on Genesis 15-18 and Hebrews 11] and
therefore God imputed righteousness to him. How closely are you paying
attention to Paul’s free use of Abraham and Genesis? If you carefully read this
chapter you see Paul ‘intermingle’ the story of Abraham being ‘made righteous
upon initial belief’ [Gen. 15] and the later story of Sarah having Isaac [Gen.
17]. I think Paul was simply using the description of Abrahams faith, as seen
in the Gen. 17 [and 22!] accounts of his life, to show the type of faith he
initially ‘exercised’ [I don’t like using this term to be honest. God actually
imputes faith to the believer at the initial act of regeneration]. The
important chapters from Genesis that we all need to have a ‘working knowledge’
of are Chapters 12 [the initial promise], 15 [the oft mentioned ‘imputed
righteousness’ verse], 17 [the receiving of the promised seed- Isaac], and 22
[the ultimate act of obedience that Abraham showed in offering up Isaac. This
will be described in James epistle as ‘righteousness being fulfilled’. James,
who is concerned about ‘works’, will say that when Abraham offered Isaac he was
fulfilling the ‘imputed righteousness’ that God gave him earlier. James
actually describes this as ‘being justified by works’{James 2:21} and James
says ‘the scripture was fulfilled that saith Abraham believed God and it was
imputed to him for righteousness’… ‘see how that by works a man is justified
and not by faith only’. The classic view taken by many confuses the ‘justified’
part with the initial act of justification that Paul centers on. James uses
‘see how he was justified by works’ in a future ‘judicial decree’ sense; that
is God having the ongoing ‘freedom’ to continually say ‘good job son, you did
well’. The word justification is used in a fluid sense much like salvation.
Christians need to be more ‘secure’ in their own assurance to be able to see
these truths. When we approach all these seemingly ‘difficult passages’ in a
defensive mode, then we never arrive at the actual meaning]. When we see the
overall work of God in Abraham’s life we see the purpose of God in ‘declaring
people just’ [initially ‘getting saved’]. The purpose is for them to eventually
‘act just’ [obey!] ‘Jesus was delivered for our offenses and raised again for
our justification’ thank God that this process is dependant on the work of the
Cross! [see # 758]
(1329) GALATIANS 2- Paul recounts his meeting with
the apostles at Jerusalem; some feel he is talking about his first visit [Acts
11- before AD 50] others think he is discussing his Acts 15 meeting [right at
around AD 50] I’m in the latter camp. Paul is basically telling the churches of
Galatia that he already went thru this whole discussion with the main apostles at
Jerusalem [Peter, James and John] and that they had already agreed that the
Gentile believers did not need to get circumcised and come under the law in
order to be saved. I do find it interesting that out of the 4 decrees that were
made [read Acts 15] that the only one Paul recounts here is ‘to remember the
poor’. The only decree worthy enough for Paul to recount is the one on
charitable giving; those of you who have followed this blog for a while know
how much I emphasize this point. If the early church was teaching tithing to
the Gentile churches, surely it would have come up at the Jerusalem meeting,
but it didn’t. This chapter has some important verses that all believers should
commit to memory ‘if righteousness come by the law, then Christ died in vain’
‘the life that I now live I live by the faith of the Son of God who loved me
and gave himself for me’ etc. I really want all my Catholic/Protestant readers
to pay attention to the verse’s that I just quoted; the bible clearly teaches
that if men could ‘be saved’ by keeping Gods law, then Christ died in vain.
Paul will go on to teach [chapter 3] that if there had been a law given that
could have given men eternal life, then ‘being saved’ would come that way; but
he then goes on to say that there never was a law given that men could keep in
order to be saved. Paul always gives the caveat ‘does this mean we go out and
break the 10 commandments’? And his answer is always a big NO! The point of
this chapter is we as believers are saved because Jesus died to pay the penalty
for our sin; the proof that the penalty was completely paid is in the fact that
Jesus rose again [Romans 5]. All who believe in this reality are now the
children of God, indeed ‘we are all the children of God by faith in Jesus
Christ’.
(1330) GALATIANS 3- The main point of this chapter
is God made a promise to Abraham that he would ‘bless’ all nations thru one of
his kids someday [Genesis 12). This promise was given to Abraham 430 years
before God gave the 10 commandments to Moses. Therefore the promise that men
would be justified/saved by faith cannot be ‘undone’ by a later act of giving
the law to Moses. The point being that Paul is arguing with the Galatians that
their new view that they need to keep the law in order to ‘be saved’ [the blessing
of Abraham IN CONTEXT!] is false because God already told Abraham it would be
by faith in the coming Messiah. Paul then asks ‘is the law then against Gods
promise’? No, it was given to man [Israel] until the time came for the promised
child to be born [1st century], but now that the promised child is
here we are no longer under the ‘schoolmaster’. The schoolmaster term can be
confusing; the word in Greek means the person who walked the kids to school
[truth] and then dropped them off AND LEFT. Paul is saying the law period
served its purpose; it revealed mans sinful nature to him and then ‘dropped him
off at the Cross’. Paul is saying the law fulfilled its purpose and we are now
under grace. As new creatures in Christ we walk in love and fulfill the righteousness
of the law by our new nature, it’s not a legalistic thing. There is some
confusion today on this chapter; some were taught that ‘the blessing of
Abraham’ was speaking of the promises in Deuteronomy on financial blessings.
And that the curse is speaking about the curse of ‘poverty’. Though it is true
that the bible does speak about this in the Old Testament, in context Paul is
not saying this here. Paul explains what he means about the ‘curse of the law’.
He says it’s the curse of never being able to do enough to appease God, the man
that is under the law puts himself under this mindset of perfectionism and
lives under this constant feeling of never being able to do enough. This was
Paul's previous experience as a Pharisee. When Paul teaches that we are
delivered from ‘the curse’ so the ‘blessing of Abraham might come on the
gentiles, that we might receive THE PROMISE OF THE SPIRIT BY FAITH’ he is not
saying Jesus died to make us financially rich, he is saying Jesus delivered us
from the old law mindset of legalism and we now have forgiveness and acceptance
as a free gift- ‘being now justified by faith we have peace with God thru our
Lord Jesus Christ’ [Romans 5].
This post deals with the faulty understanding
expounded by many Evangelical/Protestant ministers [end times scenarios, Tim
Lahaye type books] that exalt ethnic/racial elements into the gospel, and
contribute to the many present tensions between Muslims/Jews/Christians.
(1331) GALATIANS 4- Paul says there was a time
period before the promise would be fulfilled thru Christ; that time has come to
an end [the law] and we are now in ‘the fullness of times’. When we were under
the law we were no different than servants, but now in grace we are mature
sons, people able to inherit the promise. Paul says why do you desire to go
back under the ‘restraint’ phase, the time of discipline and legalism, we are
now in a fullness stage thru the New Covenant and we don’t need the old
mentality anymore. Once again Paul really ‘spiritualizes’ the Old Testament in
his teaching, he says that the law [Old Testament] taught this difference
between law and grace. He uses the story of Abraham having 2 sons [Ishmael,
Isaac] and he says ‘cant you hear what the law is saying’? One son was born by
promise [Isaac] the other thru the works of the flesh [law]. And just like it
was back then, the one born after the flesh persecuted the one born after the
Spirit, so today [1st century] those after the flesh/law are
persecuting those born after the Spirit. It’s important to see that Paul DOES
NOT use this analogy to describe Jewish/Muslim [Arab] relations; he actually
refers to natural Israel as ‘Ishmael’! He says the Judaisers [Jews zealous of
the law] were fulfilling the type/symbol by persecuting Gentile believers. We
need to keep these distinctions in our minds, because when we don’t rightfully
discern the truth we do damage to the non ethnic testimony of the gospel. Paul
says the law relates to natural Israel/Jerusalem who is under bondage with her
children, but the ‘New Jerusalem’ which is above is the mother of us all, and
this Jerusalem relates to the church. The New Jerusalem is not referring to a
physical city that will ‘hover over the earth during the millennium rule’
[EEK!] But it refers to the new community people of God, the church. I have
written on this before and these references in the New Testament [Revelation,
Hebrews- us being the new Zion, etc.] are speaking of the church, the people of
God. Paul once again speaks of ‘natural Jerusalem’ in a negative light, in the sense
that he teaches those who are under the law are not walking in the fullness of
the promises of God as come in the Messiah. The New Testament spends no time
engaging in the glorying of any ethnic group [whether it be Israel, Gentile,
etc.] It’s not that the apostles were being anti Semitic, it’s just the
emphasis is on the new kingdom of God and the new people of God [the church
made up of both Jew and Gentile]. Its striking to compare the writings of the
first Jewish believers to the current trends amongst many evangelical
preachers, the two don’t mesh well.
(835)ROMANS 7:1-4 Paul uses the
analogy of a married woman ‘don’t you know that the law has dominion over a
person as long as he is alive’? If a married woman leaves her husband and
marries another man she is guilty of breaking the law of adultery. Now, if her
husband dies, she is free to marry another man. The act that freed her from sin
and guilt was death! Every thing else in the scenario stayed the same. She
still married another, she still consummated the new marriage. But because her
first husband died, she has no guilt. I always loved this analogy. For years I
wondered why these themes in scripture are for the most part not ‘imbedded’ in
the collective psyche of the people of God. We have spent so much time ‘proof
texting’ the verses on success and wealth, that we have overlooked the really
good stuff! Now Paul teaches that we have been made free from the law by the
‘death of our husband’ [Jesus] so we can ‘re-marry’. Who do we marry? Christ!
He has not only died to free us from the law, he also rose from the dead to
become our ‘husband’ [we are called the bride of Christ]. Paul connects the
death and resurrection of Jesus in this analogy. Both are needed for the true
gospel to be preached [1st Corinthians 15]. Notice how in this
passage Paul emphasizes ‘the death of Christ’s body’. The New Testament doesn’t
always make this distinction, but hebut here it does. In the early centuries of
Christianity you had various debates over the nature and ‘substance’ of God and
Christ. The church hammered out various decrees and creeds that would become
the Orthodoxy of the day. Many of these are what you would call the ‘Ecumenical
councils’. These are the early councils [many centuries!] that both the eastern
[Orthodox church] and western [Catholic] churches would all accept. Some feel
that the early church fathers and Latin theologians [Tertullian, Augustine and
others] had too much prior influence from philosophy and the ‘forensic’
thinking of their time. They had a tendency to describe things in highly
technical ways. Ways that were prominent in the legal and philosophical
thinking of the West. Some of the eastern thinkers [Origen] had more of a Greek
‘flavor’ to their theologizing [Alexandria, named after Alexander the great,
was a city of philosophy many years prior to Christ. This city was at one time
the center of thinking in the East. That’s why Paul would face the thinkers at
Athens, they had a history in the east of Greek philosophy]. Well any way the
result was highly technical debates over the nature of God and Christ. The
historic church would finally decree that Christ had 2 natures, Human and
Divine. And that at the Cross the ‘humanity of Jesus’ died, but his ‘Deity’ did
not. I think Paul agreed by saying ‘we are free from the law by the death of
Christ’s Body’ here Paul distinguishes between the physical death of Jesus and
his Deity. Note- actually, Augustine would be in the same school as Origen.
Alexandrian.
(836)ROMANS 7: 5-13 ‘But now we
are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we
should serve in newness of the Spirit, not in the oldness of the letter’. This
is such a powerful statement! WE ARE DELIVERED FROM THE LAW, surely Paul must
mean ‘the fleshly law [carnal nature] in our members’? No, he means ‘the law’,
the actual moral code that was contained in the Ten Commandments. He writes to
the Colossians ‘Jesus took the handwriting of ordinances that were against us
[the real law, not the sinful nature!] and nailed it to his Cross’. He tells
the Ephesians ‘the middle wall of partition [law] has come down in Christ’. I
know it’s easy to develop ideas that justify this radical grace concept in our
minds, it’s just part of mans nature to want to be able to do something,
contribute some way to our salvation. ‘Surely the law helps me stay in line’?
No it doesn’t! You are 'dead to the law by the Body of Christ’. We now live and
are regulated by the ‘Spirit of life in Christ Jesus’. It is the fact that we
have been raised to life in Christ that frees us, not the law. Paul goes on and
explains that there was a time when ‘he was alive without the law’ but when the
commandment came ‘sin revived, and I died’. Paul was a strict Pharisee, the
further he advanced in law, the more he found himself to be ‘exceeding sinful’.
The more he learned, the worse he got! It’s sort of a catch 22, you see and
hear the ‘do not do this’ portions of law, and it stirs up the sinful nature to
‘do it’. Now Paul recaps an earlier theme of the law serving the function of
revealing sin to man. He defends the law by saying ‘was that which is good
[law] death unto me’? No, but the law simply ‘awakened’ the sin that was always
there, hiding under the covers. It brought to a head the ‘disease’. The law
revealed the underlying problem of sin, and made it ‘exceeding sinful’. The law
is good, we are bad! [apart from Christ and the Spirit of life].
(837)ROMANS 7:14-25 Paul now
shows us the reality of Gods law and its effect on man. ‘When I do something
that I DON’T WANT TO DO, then I consent unto the law that it is good’. Did you
ever think of this? The fact that you [or even the atheist!] have done things
that ‘you don’t want to do’ proves the existence of God and natural law [which
the 10 commandments were only a glimpse, they reveal a small part of Gods
character and nature]. So if you, or anybody else, have ever struggled with ‘I
am doing something that I hate’. Then why do it? Or better, why hate it? You
yourself are an actual living testimony of ‘the law of God’. Your own
conscience testifies that there are
‘good things’ and ‘bad things’. You also testify of the fact of sin ‘why
do you keep doing the bad things’? Alas, that thing called ‘sin’ does exist!
Paul shows us that the experience of every human member on the planet testifies
to both the righteousness of God and the sinfulness of man. Freud [the father
of modern Psychology] saw this war rage in the psyche of man, he came up with
an idea that we need to ‘free man’ from this inner moral struggle. He espoused
the idea that in mans ‘head’ he has this preconceived image of ‘God’ and right
or wrong. Being Freud was a child of the Enlightenment, as well as a student of
Existentialism [though the Father of Existentialism was a Christian, the Danish
theologian/ philosopher Soren Kierkegaard] he taught that if we could just
eliminate this ‘God idea’ and ‘church moral code’ from mans mind, then all
would be well! Geez, I could hardly think of a more destructive thing than to
tell man ‘if it feels right, do it’! Paul taught ‘if you can’t stop doing
something that ‘feels right’ then you are sinning!’[if that which ‘feels right’
is making you miserable!] And the very fact that you can’t escape the guilt,
proves that God exists and that his law is this unstoppable force that invades
all human consciences. Paul knew the struggle, he testifies thru out scripture
that he tried to become right with God over and over again, but the ‘law of
sin’ [the sinful nature. Here ‘law’ is speaking of the ‘principle of sin’ and
the fleshly nature] prevented him from keeping the ‘law of God’ [doing what’s
right], he then found the ‘righteousness of God that comes thru faith in
Christ’. Paul ends the chapter ‘O wretched man that I am, who shall deliver me
from the body of this death’? ‘I thank God thru Jesus Christ my Lord’. Paul
found the answer, his name was Jesus.
Romans 7:1 Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to
them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as
he liveth?
Romans
7:2 For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so
long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of
her husband.Romans 7:3 So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.
Romans 7:4 Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.
Romans 7:5 For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death.
Romans 7:6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.
Romans 7:7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.
Romans 7:8 But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead.
Romans 7:9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.
Romans 7:10 And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.
Romans 7:11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.
Romans 7:12 Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.
Romans 7:13 Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.
Romans 7:14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.
Romans 7:15 For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.
Romans 7:16 If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.
Romans 7:17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
Romans 7:18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.
Romans 7:19 For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.
Romans 7:20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
Romans 7:21 I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.
Romans 7:22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:
Romans 7:23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.
Romans 7:24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?
Romans 7:25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.
ROMANS 8-10
VIDEO- [I cover stuff on the
videos that are not in the post- here are a few]
.Council of Trent- what did the
Church say?
.Do we get the final say- at the
Judgment?
.What are the Catholic virtues-
did Paul teach them?
.Augustine, Calvin, Whitfield and
Wesley.
.Infusion or Imputation? How bout
both!
At the bottom I added some quotes
from the Catechism of the Catholic church- to show that the official teaching
of the church DOES NOT TEACH SALVATION BY THE LAW- BUT BY CHRIST.
. REMINDER- This is a commentary
I wrote years ago- the videos are new.
.CHAPTER 8- FEW POINTS;
1-
Did God choose us to believe- or did we choose
him?
2-
When Paul says ‘he makes our bodies alive’ is he
only speaking about resurrection?
3-
Does God use difficulty- or is it to be rebuked?
4-
Was Paul a ‘hyper- Calvinist’?
(839)ROMAN 8:1-4 ‘There is
therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not
after the flesh [sinful nature] but after the Spirit [new nature]’. Now, having
proved the reality of sin and guilt [chapter 7] Paul teaches that those who
‘are in Christ’ are free from condemnation. Why? Because they ‘walk according
to the Spirit’ the ‘righteousness of the law is being fulfilled in them’.
Having no condemnation isn’t simply a ‘legal function’ of declared
righteousness, and Paul didn’t teach it that way! Paul is saying ‘all those who
have believed in Jesus and have been legally justified [earlier arguments in
chapters 3-4] are now walking [actually acting out] this new nature. Therefore
[because you no longer walk according to the flesh] there is no condemnation’!
This argument helps bridge the gap between Catholic and Protestant theology,
part of the reason for the ongoing schism is over this understanding. After the
Reformation the Catholic Church had a Counter Reformation council, the council
of Trent. They dealt with a lot of the abuses of the Catholic Church, things
that many Catholic leaders were complaining about before the Reformation. They
did deal with some issues and reformed somewhat. To the dismay of the more
‘reform minded’ Catholics [with Protestant leanings] they still came down
strong on most pre reform doctrines. This made it next to impossible for the
schism to be healed. But one area of disagreement was over ‘legal’ versus
‘actual/experiential’ justification. The Catholic position was ‘God can’t
declare/say a person is justified until they actually are’ [experientially].
The Protestant side [Luther] said ‘God does justify [legal declaration] a
person by faith alone’. Like I taught before, both of these are true. The Catholic
view of ‘justification’ is looking ahead towards a future reality [The same way
James speaks of justification in a future sense- He uses the example from
Genesis 22, when Abraham does a righteous act] while the Protestant view is
focusing on the initial legal act of justification [Genesis 15]. Here Paul
agrees with both views, he says ‘those who walk after the Spirit [actually
living the changed life] have no condemnation’.
(840)ROMANS 8:5-13 Paul will teach
the impossibility of the ‘carnal minds’ ability to submit to Gods law. Those
who are ‘in the flesh’ [the unregenerate nature- not simply ‘in the body’. We
will get into these distinctions in a minute] can’t submit to God. Society
spends so much time and effort trying to get the ‘lost man’ to do what's right.
The prohibition movement [outlawing liquor], the increase in the severity of
punishment for crimes dealing with drugs. Making the child kidnappers crime
punishable by death. While all these laws are necessary and good [though some
debate the wisdom of the kidnapper one, they think the kidnapper might just go
ahead and kill the victim if the same punishment applies to both crimes] they
have little effect on getting ‘the carnal man to submit’. Paul also says ‘if
the Spirit of him who raised up Christ from the dead dwells in you, then he
that raised up Christ from the dead shall quicken [make alive] your mortal
bodies by his Spirit that dwells in you’. Let’s do a little teaching here. Most
commentators see this as speaking of the promise of the resurrection ‘your
mortal bodies’. I see this more in line with the context of chapter 7. The
discussion of ‘mortal bodies’ [your actual body, the flesh- which is different
than ‘the fleshly nature’ which refers to the sinful nature] speaks of your
actual life now ‘let not sin therefore reign in your mortal bodies’. Also in
verse 13 of this chapter the same theme is seen ‘if ye thru the Spirit mortify
the deeds of the body ye shall live’. I believe Paul is primarily saying ‘if
you are in the Spirit [born of God] the Spirit of life will make alive your
physical life in such a way that you will glorify God in your body and spirit,
which are Gods’ [Corinthians]. Chapter 12 says your bodies are living
sacrifices, holy and acceptable to God. Now later on in this chapter [8] we do
see the resurrection, which is called ‘the redemption of the body’ [verse 23]
so these two concepts work together. The fact that the believer is ‘training
his mortal body’ for God [thru obedience] is sort of a precursor to the
resurrection! Now, some believers confuse the resurrection of the body and the
work of regeneration in ‘making you alive’ [Ephesians 2]. The work of
regeneration brings your dead spirit back to life [born again] when you believe
[which is a Divine imputation of faith at the moment of conversion, a sovereign
act]. This ‘coming alive’ is purely spiritual. This qualifies you for the
future physical resurrection of the body [Ephesians calls this the ‘down
payment’, the ‘earnest of our inheritance, until the redemption of the purchased
possession’. The word ‘earnest’ here is used in the same way as ‘earnest money’
in a real estate transaction. The fact that we have been ‘sealed’ with the Holy
Spirit is our ‘guarantee of future bodily resurrection’]. Bishop N.T. Wright,
the bishop of Durham [the church of England- Durham is the 3rd most
influential post in the Church of England. Canterbury is at the top] has
recently written on the truths of the resurrection of the body. He is an
excellent scholar, way way above my league. He has been instrumental in ‘re
introducing’ the reality of Christ’s resurrection as well as our future
resurrection as a very real Christian belief [and historic truth as well]. I
have read some of Wrights stuff and am a little surprised at some of the ideas
on ‘soul sleep’ and the immortality of the soul. Bishop Wright seems to side
with some of the ideas that certain restorationist groups [7th day
Adventists] espouse, that the Catholic Church kind of corrupted the ideas of
heaven and the soul by being overly influenced by Greek thought. While it is
possible for Bishop Wright to have come to his understanding entirely thru
scripture and history, yet I felt it a little strange to see him make these
arguments. For the most part I like brother Wright and totally agree with his
stance on the future ‘new heavens and new earth’ as the final place of rest [as
opposed to dying and going to heaven now, which is a temporary place] but there
is the biblical reality of a present ‘heaven’ and this doesn’t only come from
Greek thought. I have often used the Christian doctrine of the new heavens and
new earth while speaking with the Jehovah’s witnesses, I always agree on the
reality of a future kingdom on earth. I simply steer the conversation back to
‘who qualifies for it’ and get straight to the gospel. Well anyway we have a
promise of a future resurrection, and also a ‘quickening of the body now’ [God
actually using our physical life to glorify him]. These are both great truths!
(841)ROMANS 8: 14-18 ‘For as many
as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the Sons of God’. Many of us are
familiar with this verse [I hope!]. We often see it as saying ‘Gods direction
in our lives is proof that we are Christians’ true enough. But in context
‘being led by Gods Spirit’ means living the new life thru Christ. The putting
to death of the old man and being ‘made alive’ thru Christ is what this is
saying. Paul agrees with John [1st John] ‘those that do what is
right [led by the Spirit] are of God’. Paul says ‘we have received the Spirit
and a natural result of this is crying “Abba, Father”. I don’t want to do too
much here, but Paul sees the ‘confession’ and heart cry of the believer as
proof, a result of being ‘a habitation of the Spirit’. A sign, if you will, of
being born of God is confessing/ praying to the Father. Paul quoted David in
chapter 4 ‘for this shall every one that is godly pray unto thee in a time when
thou mayest be found’ [Psalms 32- actually Paul quotes a different section from
the Psalm, but this theme is consistent with Paul’s view]. Paul knew the
reality of ‘the godly calling upon God’ they have an inner cry of ‘Abba,
father’. ‘We are heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ’. For many years this
has been a popular verse among many believers, often times it is used to say ‘God
owns the cattle on a thousand hills’ [which he does] therefore if we are heirs
‘give me some cattle’! [stuff]. Here Paul uses this term in speaking of our
identification with Christ’s sufferings. ‘If we suffer with him, we too shall
share [joint heir!] in his glory’ [future glorification at the resurrection- we
shall see him and be changed in a moment, at the twinkling of an eye. This
mortal shall put on immortality]. It’s a symptom of modern American
Christianity to view all these scriptures thru a materialistic lens, Paul held
to the promise of a future reward [at the resurrection] that enabled him to go
thru great difficulty and suffering in this present life. He counted the
suffering as a privilege that he shared with Christ.
(843)ROMANS 8: 19-25 ‘the
sufferings of this present time [are you ‘presently’ suffering?] are not worthy
to be compared with the glory that shall be revealed in us’. Paul compares the
difficulty to the reward. The reward here is the future resurrection. Paul did
not see suffering as ‘from the devil’ or the reward as something material
[monetary stuff! The resurrection body will be ‘material’ - real]. Paul teaches
that the whole creation is waiting for this day. Not only will we get a
‘makeover’ but there will be a new heaven and a new earth! The creation itself
longs for this [almost as much as Al Gore!] This resurrection is called ‘the
redemption of our body’. The next verse says ‘we are saved by hope’. John also
says [1st John] that the future reality of the resurrection ‘causes us to be
pure in this life’ [every one that has this hope in him purifies himself, even
as he is pure]. Why? Because we know God has a purpose for our bodies as well
as our spirits! The ‘getting saved by hope’ simply means the future hope of the
resurrection ‘encourages’ us to live clean now. Once again ‘saved’ is a neutral
term. In can apply to all sorts of things. I always found it funny how when you
read certain commentaries, that you see the difficulty Christians have when
coming across these types of verses. There’s a verse that says ‘the woman will
be saved thru childbearing’ geez, you wouldn’t believe the difficulty some
writers have when they come across this stuff. Some teach ‘she will be ‘saved’
thru the birth of a child [Jesus]’ and all sorts of stuff. I think if we simply
changed the word ‘saved’ for ‘delivered’ [which are basically the same thing]
that maybe this would help. But thank God that we have a future resurrection to
look forward to, let this truth ‘deliver’ you from the temptation to think
‘what’s all this suffering worth, why even go thru it?’ Because we have a great
promise at the other end!
(845)ROMANS 8:26-28 ‘Likewise the
Spirit also helpeth our infirmities’ why does Paul say ‘likewise’? He is saying
‘not only does the future hope of the resurrection sustain us, but also Gods
Spirit helps us’! He knows how to make intercession for us in ways that we
cannot. I just finished an hour prayer time, not an ‘official’ intercession
time [which I do a few times a week now]. But an ‘unofficial’ time where I try
and hear what the Spirit is speaking. When you are ‘praying in the Spirit’
[which can include the charismatic expression of tongues] you are depending
upon the Spirit to transcend your limited ability to articulate what needs to
be said. ‘All things work together for good to them that love God, to them who
are ‘the called’ according to his purpose’. A very famous verse indeed. What
does it mean? It means what it says! Over the years I have heard so many
excuses for trying to get around difficult things. Why do the righteous suffer?
Some taught it was because of their ignorance of scripture. Why did the things
that happened to Job happen? Some said it was because he ‘feared’ that the
things would happen [this group seems to miss the whole underlying reason for
the book. Job’s friends are continually looking for a reason thru out the book.
The point is, sometimes there is no reasonable explanation. I realize you can
pick apart certain statements from Job and come up with ‘reasons’, but the meaning
of the book is God is sovereign and we shouldn’t always think we can figure him
out or ‘work the system’]. Here Paul says ‘whatever is happening to you right
now [even very bad stuff!] will eventually work out for you benefit’. What
about Hitler? Did he love God? I don’t believe so. This scripture says ‘to them
that love God’. Your only responsibility thru the difficulty is to ‘love God’.
(846)ROMANS 8:29-30 ‘for whom he
did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed into the image of his Son,
that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom he did
predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified:
whom he justified, them he also glorified’. Let’s talk a little. When I first
became a Christian I began a lifelong study of scripture, where I continually
read a certain amount of scripture every day for many years. Over the years I
have varied on how fast I should read [that is how many chapters per day and so
forth]. But during the early stages I always took these verses to teach
predestination in the classical sense. Simply put, that God ‘pre chose’ me [and
all whom come to him] before we ‘chose him’. The Fundamental Baptist church I
began to attend [a great church with great people!] taught that ‘classic
Calvinism’ [predestination] was false doctrine, and they labeled it ‘Hyper
Calvinism’. I simply accepted this as fact. But I never forgot the early
understanding that I first gleaned thru my own study. I also was very limited
in my other readings outside of the scripture. I did study the Great awakenings
and Charles Finney. I read some biographies on John Wesley and other great men
of God. These men were not Calvinistic in their doctrine [which is fine], as a
matter of fact Wesley would eventually disassociate from George Whitefield over
this issue. Whitefield was a staunch Calvinist! Over time I came to believe the
doctrine again, simply as I focused on the scriptures that teach it. Eventually
I picked up some books on church history and realized that Calvinism was [and
is] a mainstream belief among many great believers. I personally believe that
most of the great theologians in history have accepted this doctrine. Now, for
those who reject it, they honestly struggle with these portions of scripture. Just
like there are portions of scripture that Calvinists struggle with. To deny
this is to be less than honest. The Arminians [Those who deny classic
predestination- the term comes from Jacob Arminias, a Calvinist who was writing
and studying on the ‘errors’ of ‘arminianism’ and came to embrace the doctrine
of free will/choice] usually approach th the verses that say ‘he predestined
us’ by teaching that Gods predestination speaks only of his foreknowledge of
those who would choose him. This is an honest effort to come to terms with the
doctrine. To be ‘more honest’ I think this doesn’t adequately deal with the
issue. In the above text, as well as many other places in scripture, the idea
of ‘Gods foreknowledge and pre choosing’ speak specifically about Gods choice
to save us, as opposed to him simply knowing that we would ‘choose right’. The
texts that teach predestination teach it in this context. Now the passage above
does say ‘those whom he foreknew, he also did predestinate to be conformed into
the image of Christ’ here this passage actually does say ‘God predestinated us
to be like his Son’. If you left the ‘foreknowledge’ part out, you could read
this passage in an Arminian way. But we do have the ‘foreknowledge’ part. So I
believe Paul is saying ‘God chose us before we were born, he ‘knew’ ahead of
time that he would bring us into his Kingdom. Those whom he foreknew he also
predestinated to become like his Son.’ Why? So his Son would be the firstborn
among many. God wanted a whole new race of ‘children of God’. Those he
predestinated he ‘called’. He drew them to himself. Jesus said ‘all that the
Father give to me will come to me, and him that cometh to me I will in no way
cast out’. Those who ‘come’ are justified, those who are justified are [present
tense] glorified. Gods design and sovereignty speak of it as a ‘finished task’
like it already happened. God lives outside of the dimension of time. I believe
in the doctrine of predestination. Many others do as well. You don’t have to
believe it if you don’t want to, but I believe scripture teaches it.
(847)ROMANS 8: 31-39 ‘What shall
we say then to these things? [what things? The fact that God predestined us and
has guaranteed completion of the purpose he has designed us for!] If God be for
us, who can be against us?’ Paul teaches that Christ is the only one with the
‘right’ or authority to pass judgment. If the only person in existence who can
‘officially’ condemn and pass legal judgment has actually died for us for the
purpose of ‘freeing us from a state of condemnation’, then who ‘gives a rip’
about others opinions and views of us? Most of us struggle with how others view
us. Paul did teach that Elders should have good character and a fine reputation
in the community. But there is another type of ‘persona’ that preachers can
fall into. A sort of ‘concern’ about what the critics are saying. In this
context Paul says ‘If the opinion of the only person in existence whose opinion
really matters, is one of “I accept you unconditionally, I declare you free
from what others think, you are my beloved son in whom I am well pleased. Ever
since I have known you, you have been pleasing in my sight” [all true
scriptures by the way] Then who cares what others think! Paul also teaches that
nothing can separate us from Christ’s love ‘not tribulation or distress or
famine or persecution’ IN all these things we are more than conquerors thru him
who loved us. Most times we view this passage from a ‘Calvinistic’ lens. I want
you to see the impact of this statement thru a different lens. In the American
church we have taught people ‘would a good father not pay the bills of his
kids? Would a good father allow his kids to suffer? If you were really
partaking of the New Covenant you would have it made’. While I do realize that
many well meaning ministers have taught these viewpoints with honest and
sincere hearts, I also have seen how this mindset accuses the saints. It
basically tells the struggling believer ‘what kind of father do you have? If he
really loved you would you be going thru these things’? In essence we are
saying ‘tribulation and distress and persecution’ are all signs that ‘you have
been separated from Gods love’! Paul blows this false [materialistic] mindset
out of the water. He says it is thru these things that we are more than
conquerors. It is the ability to look into the face of Pontius Pilate and say
‘you have no power over me, my father has permitted these things to take place.
I am here to lay my life down for his glory’. Paul said all these things we are
suffering are opportunities to glorify our father. To look into the face of
society and say ‘nay, we are more than conqueror's thru him that loved us’. The
early church set the world on fire when they were laying their lives down for
the cause, refusing to deny their Lord even at the point of death. They were
‘more than conquerors’.
ROMANS 9-
.PAUL- SPURGEON- AND DAVE HUNT-
DID THEY BELIEVE IN PREDESTINATION?
.HOW DOES PAUL DEFEND AGAINST THE
SEEMING ‘UNFAIRNESS’ OF IT?
(630) JOHN
19 (radio # 602) The reality of redemption! I want to stress the fact that
Jesus actually dieing on the Cross and really shedding his Blood for us is what
saves us. No spiritualizing here! Over the years I have seen and read how
believers in an attempt to ‘see’ the deep truths of God will sometimes fudge on
the real Blood of Christ redeeming us. Let’s make it clear, the New Testament
teaches that it was the real Blood of Jesus and his death on the Cross that
saves man. Now, were there spiritual aspects to it? Sure. But don’t
‘spiritualize’ the death and real shedding of Blood. Like the recent reproof we
did on some who taught that Jesus was not the Messiah, so here we warn that his
Blood really saves. I remember reading one of the founders of the Word of faith
movement, E.W. Kenyon. He would eventually teach that the ‘death of Jesus
[physically] didn’t touch the sin issue’ he would then teach that it was the
‘spiritual death’ that saved us. Then teach that Jesus was the ‘first born
again man’ who was separated from God and ‘born again’. The New Testament
teaches Jesus was ‘the first begotten from the dead’ meaning the first to rise
from the dead to never die again. Not the first person to ‘be born again’!
Later on you would have another famous Word of Faith brother teach the same
thing. I don't know why we have to always ‘see deeper’ than the plain truth? I
guess it offends the natural mind to believe that Jesus physical death and
separation from the father actually redeems man. I do believe Jesus ‘went to
hell’ I don't teach the ‘hell’ being a separate place called ‘paradise’ that
was really like heaven. It would seem strange for David in Psalms to say ‘thou
wilt not leave my soul in hell [paradise] nor suffer thy Holy one to see
corruption’. It just seems to fit as being ‘hell’, not ‘paradise. But I also
believe it was the real death of Jesus on the cross that saves us. He really
died and really shed his Blood and it was really finished when he said ‘it is
finished’. Jesus will also say to John ‘behold your mother’ and tell Mary to go
home and live with John after his death. Catholic apologists use this to defend
their belief in the perpetual virginity of Mary. They say ‘if Mary had other
natural kids, then it would have been offensive in Jewish culture for Mary to
not have gone and lived with them’ good point. But heck, I defend our Catholic
brothers an awful lot. Let me defend the Protestants a little. It is also
possible that Jesus strong teaching on putting the spiritual family before the
natural one might have played a role here. This could be the beginnings of the
strong family mindset that you will see playing out later in the book of Acts.
True believers living and sharing as strong [or even stronger!] than natural
families. Also we already taught how Jesus knew that John would outlive the
others. Even Jesus brother James, one of the lead apostles at Jerusalem will be martyred. Maybe Jesus knew
[maybe!] that committing Mary over to Johns care was a more long term thing
than handing her over to his brothers? We also see Nicodemus openly follow Jesus
in this chapter. He is the first of the Pharisees to confess Christ openly.
Later in the book of Acts we will see ‘Pharisees who believe’ but most times
leaders are the last to repent and change positions. Why? Well some of it has
to do with the whole persona of leadership. With this calling comes a type of
character that says ‘I preached it, any one who disagrees is simply
persecution’. While there are times when this is true, there are also times
where God calls leadership to new levels. Some get it on it early [Nicodemus]
others later! [some never!] Be part of the early group. I forgot to mention we
also see the Jews appeal to ‘King Caesar’ as opposed to King Jesus. They will
tell Pilate ‘we have no King but Caesar’. They hated Caesar. The whole Jewish nation
were treated like 2nd class citizens under Roman rule, sure they
benefited from ‘Pax Romana’ [the peace of Rome] but they hated to be living
under an occupying govt. Jesus told them earlier in this gospel ‘you refuse my
testimony of who I am, yet you will accept the testimony of another’s name’
some feel this is a reference to anti Christ. I think it fits in good right
here!
VERSES-
. 20 For the kingdom of
heaven is like unto a man that is an householder, which went out early in the
morning to hire labourers into his vineyard.
2 And when
he had agreed with the labourers for a penny a day, he sent them into his
vineyard.
3 And he
went out about the third hour, and saw others standing idle in the marketplace,
4 And said
unto them; Go ye also into the vineyard, and whatsoever is right I will give
you. And they went their way.
5 Again he
went out about the sixth and ninth hour, and did likewise.
6 And about
the eleventh hour he went out, and found others standing idle, and saith unto
them, Why stand ye here all the day idle?
7 They say
unto him, Because no man hath hired us. He saith unto them, Go ye also into the
vineyard; and whatsoever is right, that shall ye receive.
8 So when
even was come, the lord of the vineyard saith unto his steward, Call the
labourers, and give them their hire, beginning from the last unto the first.
9 And when
they came that were hired about the eleventh hour, they received every man a
penny.
10 But when
the first came, they supposed that they should have received more; and they
likewise received every man a penny.
11 And when
they had received it, they murmured against the goodman of the house,
12 Saying,
These last have wrought but one hour, and thou hast made them equal unto us,
which have borne the burden and heat of the day.
13 But he
answered one of them, and said, Friend, I do thee no wrong: didst not thou
agree with me for a penny?
14 Take that
thine is, and go thy way: I will give unto this last, even as unto thee.
15 Is it not
lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? Is thine eye evil, because I am
good?
16 So the
last shall be first, and the first last: for many be called, but few chosen.
Matt
2041 And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain.
Matt 5:41
19 Then
Pilate therefore took Jesus, and scourged him.
2 And the
soldiers platted a crown of thorns, and put it on his head, and they put on him
a purple robe,
3 And said,
Hail, King of the Jews! and they smote him with their hands.
4 Pilate
therefore went forth again, and saith unto them, Behold, I bring him forth to
you, that ye may know that I find no fault in him.
5 Then came
Jesus forth, wearing the crown of thorns, and the purple robe. And Pilate saith
unto them, Behold the man!
6 When the
chief priests therefore and officers saw him, they cried out, saying, Crucify
him, crucify him. Pilate saith unto them, Take ye him, and crucify him: for I
find no fault in him.
7 The Jews
answered him, We have a law, and by our law he ought to die, because he made
himself the Son of God.
8 When
Pilate therefore heard that saying, he was the more afraid;
9 And went
again into the judgment hall, and saith unto Jesus, Whence art thou? But Jesus
gave him no answer.
10 Then
saith Pilate unto him, Speakest thou not unto me? knowest thou not that I have
power to crucify thee, and have power to release thee?
11 Jesus
answered, Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given
thee from above: therefore he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin.
12 And from
thenceforth Pilate sought to release him: but the Jews cried out, saying, If
thou let this man go, thou art not Caesar's friend: whosoever maketh himself a
king speaketh against Caesar.
13 When
Pilate therefore heard that saying, he brought Jesus forth, and sat down in the
judgment seat in a place that is called the Pavement, but in the Hebrew,
Gabbatha.
14 And it
was the preparation of the passover, and about the sixth hour: and he saith
unto the Jews, Behold your King!
15 But they
cried out, Away with him, away with him, crucify him. Pilate saith unto them,
Shall I crucify your King? The chief priests answered, We have no king but
Caesar.
16 Then
delivered he him therefore unto them to be crucified. And they took Jesus, and
led him away.
17 And he
bearing his cross went forth into a place called the place of a skull, which is
called in the Hebrew Golgotha:
18 Where
they crucified him, and two other with him, on either side one, and Jesus in
the midst.
19 And
Pilate wrote a title, and put it on the cross. And the writing was Jesus Of Nazareth The King Of The Jews.
20 This
title then read many of the Jews: for the place where Jesus was crucified was
nigh to the city: and it was written in Hebrew, and Greek, and Latin.
21 Then said
the chief priests of the Jews to Pilate, Write not, The King of the Jews; but
that he said, I am King of the Jews.
22 Pilate
answered, What I have written I have written.
. Genesis 15:1 After these things the word of the LORD came unto Abram in a vision, saying, Fear not, Abram: I am thy shield, and thy exceeding great reward.
Genesis 15:2 And Abram said, LORD God, what wilt thou give me,
seeing I go childless, and the steward of my house is this Eliezer of Damascus?
Genesis 15:3 And Abram said, Behold, to me thou hast given no
seed: and, lo, one born in my house is mine heir.
Genesis 15:4 And, behold, the word of the LORD came unto him,
saying, This shall not be thine heir; but he that shall come forth out of thine
own bowels shall be thine heir.
Genesis 15:5 And he brought him forth abroad, and said, Look now
toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them: and he said
unto him, So shall thy seed be.
Genesis 15:6 And he believed in the LORD; and he counted it to him
for righteousness.
For he hath
made him to be sin for us, who knew nosin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.
2nd Cor. 5:21For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truthcame by Jesus Christ. Jn. 1:17

No comments:
Post a Comment