Comments - bible RecentComments

kjv@Psalms:119:49-104 @ @ RandyP comments: A righteous God does not judge unrighteously. He does not do anything just because of the person asking it. The righteous God is not a respecter of the person but of the statute, of the law, of the principal involved. To be on the right of judgement is to be on the right side of the precept. To be on the right side of the precept one must know and act in accordance which takes study and meditation and daily observance of, to hate and refrain and stand against the opposite. This puts one at odds with those lawless and wicked and often requires the righteous God's re-enforcement.

kjv@1Corinthians:6 @ @ RandyP comments: Just as this divides itself over it's leadership, just as this assembly tolerates fortification, just as they tolerate civil matters between themselves to be brought before a secular court, this body joins itself as if in marriage to these grievous forms of unrighteousness. The leaven mentioned in the previous chapter has raised up into a spiritual adultery of congregational proportions; and this among fellow believers. Surely not all have done individually these sinful things, but, the congregation is effected as a whole none the less. Tolerance and passiveness in this case is a sin just as pungent.

kjv@2Peter:2 @ @ RandyP comments: The righteous souls are vexed by the ungodliness surrounding them. This is much of our tribulation. In particular are a type of godless that once knew of the Lord's righteousness yet returned to their own vomit becoming more unrighteous than before. They seem to elevate themselves to positions of influence in the secular community and cause great anguish with purpose upon the remaining faithful. This may or may not include a host of false teachers also. There is swift judgment upon them though perhaps not as swift as we might sometimes hope. They do however unwittingly perform a function of solidifying and growing our truer faith and resolve.

kjv@2Peter:3:15-16 @ @ RandyP comments: It has been the doctrine of some cults (even the universal church at times) that the unlearned masses must be kept from the holy scrip based on the possible misinterpretation and destruction it might cause them identified by this passage. The context however of this passage in light of kjv@2Peter:2 is more properly of those who once knew of the Gospel/Grace of Christ but chose not to continue, turned to oppress and afflict and teach falsely after their own increased unrighteousness and gain. Paul's writings in particular are targeted by these cherry picking wicked souls as points of fierce contention, points of apparent contradiction, points to slander and attack. Peter here stands up for Paul in uncompromising fashion and therefore endorses the distribution of his works. The general masses are greatly helped rather by the availability of unfiltered scripture, their trust in leadership deeply enhanced in the things that are not easily understood by the things that are. Those who are going to fall away are going to fall away any way. Disputes and factions may arise amongst us over certain points as we try to become learned, but, even that is used to challenge and stir and put essential truths into our remembrance. Challenge does not mean destruction, challenge means hunger and thirst and utter trust in the most certain hope of an eventual divinely revealed answer.

kjv@1John:1 @ @ RandyP comments: The core doctrines of the gospel are simply put to the reader by John in terms anyone even child can understand. From these core points we can expand the doctrine outward. The over arching truth is that any notion contrary to these points is either a lie by us or else a lie by Him; there is no middle ground. Light, fellowship with the Light, fellowship with each other, sin, confession of sin, forgiveness of sin and the cleansing of sin from unrighteousness are all a one way or no way proposition. Who shall be the liar here; man or Christ?

kjv@Daniel:5 @ @ RandyP comments: The kingdoms of men are ruled by God and He appoints them to whomever He will. Would He appoint a tyrant? If it served His purposes. Would He appoint a socialist or a mad man? If it furthered His will. He would? He has and He will. What then about His righteousness, is He not then an unrighteous God by appointing an unrighteous king? This God is righteous, mankind is presently unrighteous, His design is to lead us from our unrighteousness into His righteousness. If a good shepherd commands his flock to move forward and they move not, is it not right for the shepherd to send his dog? If it takes appointing certain men exhibiting the worst of our collective unrighteousness to show and move us off of our unrighteousness when we otherwise would not listen, is that not in itself utterly righteous?

kjv@Daniel:6 @ @ RandyP comments: In the comments of kjv@Daniel:5 I had pondered the righteousness of God and the unrighteousness of man as it came to God appointing rulers, even if of questionable heart. Here immediately after that chapter, we see a demonstration of one of these leaders being played shrewdly/wickedly by a band of political malcontents to a man of God's harm/end. The king was aware of the trickery and sorrowful about it but, was not in a position to go against his own decree. We see a similar occurrence with Pilot regarding the sentencing of Jesus. We should be aware then that matters of righteousness and unrighteousness and leadership are not as cut and dry as we commoners presume, neither is the manner in which the righteous hand of God must deal with them.

kjv@Genesis:20 @ @ RandyP comments: Remember that Sarah is an older women now and yet her beauty is still much desirable by kings. The king knows that he acted out of the integrity of his heart, the Lord knows it as well and warns him, but, the whole thing has the appearance of a threat and the functionality of a curse. How many other things might there be in our lives that are ways of warning us about grave danger that are likely perceived as threats? The Lord is protecting His chosen man as well who fears the unrighteousness of others, fears for his life the possible consequences of the obvious beauty of his wife. This event must have taken place over the amount of time for it to become noticeable that the kings maidservants were not birthing.