February1 @ @ rRandyP comments: mFaithOfJesus kjv@Matthew:8:5-13 MANY SHALL COME SIT DOWN - The Centurion was a gentile Roman captain over one hundred. When the Lord says many from the east east and west, He means to include non-Hebrews at a banquet alongside even the Jewish patriarchs. When He says I have not seen such faith in all of Israel He is pointing to the fact that amongst His own something has been left amiss, apparently with their perception and acknowledgement of His authority. An outsider is portrayed as being in the inner circle while many of the covenant children are left out in the darkness. The man's faith and perception of authority is made an example of. The faith of our Lord believes that both Jew and Gentile would be able to see and sense His authority and thus be petitioned of to be put to use for the good of others. We are not told of the servants faith, but, we do know that he was healed by the faith of another convinced of our Lord's authority.
February13 @ @ rRandyP comments: mFaithOfJesus kjv@Matthew:11:1-19 OFFENDED IN ME - What would John the Baptist have to be offended in Jesus for? In the list of things that He is doing? In the way He is going about it? In the violence the kingdom is suffering because of Him? Is it to John or to John's disciples that Jesus answers? If so they treated the prophets who gave the prophecies, how so would they treat the one who fulfills those prophecies? Offended in Jesus? No rather that we should be offended in man's nature. The faith of our Lord comes as light into the darkness and the darkness receives Him not. Not even John the re-embodiment of Elijah is fully aware apparently. How plain can it be who He is and what He is doing, yet, so hidden by the heart? So tempting to be covered over?
February22 @ @ rRandyP comments: mFaithOfJesus kjv@Matthew:13:24-30 WHILE MEN SLEPT - The Kingdom sowed but, certain men were apparently given the responsibility of watching over the field and did not. While they slept the enemy came in and planted near identical yet false seed. This parable goes hand in hand with the original Parable of the Sower. Wouldn't it be good to know that along with your personal struggle to bring forth fruit that there is a field (world) of other believers going through the same process? Wouldn't it be equally as good to know that not everyone that you would think by appearance is of the same stock? No one would know until the final fruit was harvested. It is interesting that all the enemy had to do is plant the seed and then go about his way. Are these darnel seeds subject to the same process of root and depth and parching sunlight as the wheat? Most likely. Is one required to grow the other? Apparently not. What then is the difference and how can they be identified? Not even the servants from above can tell until the final fruit is bore. Once intermingled, removing the one would uproot the other. Imagine for instance the prospects of the Protestant church if ever the Catholic Church was removed or vise versa. The faith of our Lord is in that while this did not need to happen it was going to and did happen because men do sleep. It is deceptive to say that all paths lead to God when not all seed leads to the same fruit, when not all seed is planted to the same intent by the same kingdom. While we cannot identify the measure now amongst ourselves, He certainly can when all things come to fruition.
April1 @ @ rRandyP comments: mFaithOfJesus kjv@Matthew:22:23-33 YE DO ERR - The Sadducees dict:easton Sadducee were largely defined by their non belief in the resurrection. They attempt the same brain twister on Jesus that stupefied so many a Pharisee. Unless one knows scripture dict:naves Resurrection which points to life after death and considers God's power kjv@Jeremiah:32:17 kjv@Philippians:3:21 one is left to fall into this conundrum of false logic. As to there being no marriage in the resurrection, I believe this is a new revelation or a composite of a larger base of scriptural doctrines. The Sadducee's case seems to involve more human logic than any particular scriptural knowledge, apparently they had not thought through the logic enough to have foreseen the logical resurrection confirming answer Jesus could use to easily escape their supposed trap with. We must be careful ourselves when scripture suggests something and our logic is spent exclusively attempting to disprove it; even more so when we cherry pick single scriptures to say what they do not. The Sadducee's are gone as a power by the time of the destruction of the Temple AD70, suggesting a change of public sentiment regarding resurrection and proof of Messiah hewing down the fruitless trees of that time. The faith of our Lord is rooted deeply in scripture and the sovereign omnipotence of God. It is also in the purpose to which He created man initially for. He is and will forever be the God of the living.
April22 @ @ rRandyP comments: mFaithOfJesus kjv@Matthew:27:32-44 HE TRUSTED IN GOD - King David seemed to have the clearest vision of what the Lord would have to suffer. Many of the articles he would pen into his songs at first reading would seem to point to David or else no one. But, when did David suffer these things he wrote of? Without what we see here happening unto Jesus we would have to conclude that David was near paranoid, highly over exaggerated, consumed with the pressures mounted against him, obsessed with the persecution of the wicked and the silence of a slumbering God. With Jesus we wonder what then is David somewhere in this audience that he can see these things sentenced onto Jesus by the Lord of His Lord? His descriptions are uncanny to the smallest of details; the parting of clothes, the offer of gall, the wagging of heads. Where is David? How did he see this? Who has believed his report? To whom had the arm of his Lord been revealed? While the sign above speaks the official accusation, the words on the ground heard spoken declare the actual accusation, that He trusted in God. This is apparently what one gets for trusting in such a far fetched notion as God, says even the Jews. What would it take for them to believe? For Him to save Himself and come down, but, wait... that would break the commandment of God and of the prophets. In other words, for them to believe in Jesus He would have to break every commandment and become like them. Why would God even want their belief if that is the case? David was deeply troubled by what he foresaw as were the other messianic prophets. Yet in every messianic psalm he come to the conclusion the seed - Jesus would hold true to the end and that the Father would avenge Him with all certainty. David took comfort and inspiration in that. The faith of our Lord is in His Lord the Father and in seeing the plan through to it's end. It is in the words He had had recorded long before hand to remind Himself and to tow us through the dark cloudy mist of perception and truth that we not loose sight of Him. How the Jews lost that sight, it is almost as if they were blinded for the sake of germinating this seed into the far reaches of the Gentile nations by their rejection. The more even that the report/arm of the Lord is being revealed.
July15 @ @ rRandyP comments: mFaithOfJesus kjv@Luke:2:8-20 AS IT WAS TOLD THEM - Did anyone follow up on Luke's proposition that there were Shepherds in/around Bethlehem that could attest to this event or people that knew of these shepherds these many years later? The Apostles seem to know of them or else they would have stopped Luke from making such unsubstantiated claims. These four canonized gospels are almost dares or challenges for others/critics to attempt to disprove the facts as depicted, as there are just so many examinable points put forth. Did the Sanhedrin of 45-70 AD make any effort for instances to investigate/rebut these testimonies; and if not then why not? Could they be refuted? The faith of our Lord is putting this all detail out on the line. His story is largely being told by the people around Him describing it; multiple people from multiple vantages. If anybody at that time did make inquiry worthy of debating the evidences provided here it apparently never got long term traction. One would expect that any counter (reliable or not) information would have received much play from Christianity's many immediate/vehement critics.
August8 @ @ rRandyP comments: mFaithOfJesus kjv@Luke:7:36-50 SOMEWHAT TO SAY - The host of this event apparently did no see Jesus as a sinner. Pharisees as I understand were very much wanting Israel to return to its former glory becoming once again sovereign. They (at least one of them) are still toying with the idea that this Jesus may become if properly swayed this type of messiah. The event must have been open to the public or at least to those Jesus would chose to bring along and thus this woman. The thrust of the parable is that we are all sinners and that regardless of how sinful any of us perceive ourselves to be there is not one dime we can offer to our redemption. The issue is not how much we owe it is that there is nothing we have that can pay that debt. This would be important to tell such a Pharisee because he believes that being a Pharisee is more than enough when in fact like everything else we could offer payment received yet remains zero pence. The debt instead is forgiven by the creditor, the sins of both are forgiven, payment for possession will soon be accomplished in Jesus at the cross, yet only the one is accepting of the transaction that has been made. The host stumbles over whether Jesus has the authority to forgive sins. Though he'd answered correctly his understanding of the parable did not include Jesus as being the creditor. The faith of our Lord is by being a triune member of the Godhead He can act and speak as representative for the other members and at the same time His having become flesh and made to pay for our complete redemption He is also the very transaction. How is it that the debt can be forgiven and still the creditor has to pay for the repossession? Ask yourself, what good is it to forgive when the forgiven remain in bondage to another?
August26 @ @ rRandyP comments: mFaithOfJesus kjv@Luke:11:14-28 WITH THE FINGER OF GOD - A lot is being said here by both sides. It is not a casual "I wonder how He does that" statement, it is a definitive and hardened accusation. Likewise, Jesus is responding in no uncertain terms that if this is the finger of God (and using even simple logic there is a great possibility), you have just blasphemed the work (the finger) of the Holy Spirit and the kingdom which stands before you. It is one thing to have doubts. It is one thing to be skeptical. It is another thing to throw down against God's Son and the Holy Spirit. Then extra insight is given to the disciples as to the inner workings of demons, that it requires one stronger than the strongest demons to cast them out and to keep them out; otherwise they return later in much larger numbers. Recall the times as with Mary Magdeline multiple (7) demons (even Legions) were cast out at once by Jesus. He is saying that not only is He strong enough to cast out any number of demons, He is more than strong enough to keep the increasing numbers out should the person allow Him to. This further information and self declaration is even more convincing to me than the "house divided falls" logic. Demons apparently have no rest in or out. They can bide their remaining time nervously tormenting a human like parasites, that is the closest the can come to striking back, but they know full well of the torment just ahead for them. The faith of our Lord can be stated in this passage as "he that is with Me and he that is against, he that gathers with Me and he that scattereth"; Two types of people as He observes it, no middle road. The others took a big step today declaring for public consumption the work of the Kingdom as the "lord of the flies/dung" doing. They are now against Him and seeking to scatter His supporters. They are perhaps more dangerous than the demons themselves. Even among His supporters, if all you get from this discourse is a polite or feminist appreciation for the womb that bore Jesus, you have missed a huge spiritual point.
September16 @ @ rRandyP comments: mFaithOfJesus kjv@Luke:16:1-15 WISER THAN CHILDREN OF LIGHT - Being wise did not make the unjust servant just. It got him no further than a commendation and an awkward place in a parable. So what is it that Lord is commending and wanting us to see as the example? Spiritually speaking, is the steward in the business of collecting other's debt or relieving it with the Lord's goods? The difference between being just and unjust may come down to the man's perception of this very point. The oddity of this passage is that He says "when ye fail". Servants will fail their Lord; fail in the small things, fail in the large. Many fail for fear of failing. Many will fail for letting the others skate by or trying to collect from the for one's own gain instead of applying the goods toward full relief (two masters). Failure apparently is tied into which of the two possible directions men most esteem. We often limit ourselves into being failures instead of risk our way into successful obedience. Risk may be at times going against that which is more esteemed. The faith of our Lord is much about our stewardship of His goods in service to His business interests here on earth. There is a debt that many others still owe. It is the stewards job to take the spiritual goods of the Lord and relieve the spiritual debt of the others. If His goods are wasted on something else then the steward will be called to accounts and his stewardship may be at jeopardy. We are the Lord's stewards just as this man was. Our best advantage is to be trust worthy at all times beginning with the smallest things including mammon. At various times we will fail that calling (wasting or re-purposing it mainly). Our second best advantage is to go back to proper stewardship of goods versus debt and at least do something in that direction. There is also the danger of despising the service to the Lord because of what it takes away from the more pleasurable forms of wasting and profiting and worldly esteem.
October14 @ @ rRandyP comments: mFaithOfJesus kjv@Luke:22:63-65 PROPHESY WHO - There is someone within eye or ear shot that has relayed this information to us. Peter is no longer nearby and the other disciples no where near. I doubt (though it is a remote possibility) that it could be any of the women folk such as the Marys as this is still early on at the high priests house and guests other than the false witnesses and late coming elders are likely disallowed. That would mean someone we know to be in support such as Nicodemus or someone else unknown that was either sympathetic or later became so. It would be hard to imagine anyone not becoming unsettled about the treatment of any prisoner in this manner let alone a proven miracle man such as Jesus. This is the High Priest's house after all, not exactly accustomed to having prisoners interrogated there I am sure. There are still the Law and Customs as well to make ones conscious convulse, but apparently not. Those who were sincere about these godly things must have been few in number or quite silent. Thus we begin to see the makings of a mob mentality that will mushroom against Jesus. The aggressive are bullying and condescending and unrestrained. The cultured are overly quiet and self protective and timid. They may be brave and tell us about it after the fact, but, certainly not do anything about it at the time. The faith of our Lord is unswayed, He is there for whatever the Father wishes to put Him to. This is not about the sinfulness of these men right now, it is about the righteousness from above, the righteousness of the plan, the righteousness of the act. Like sheep to its' shearers He will remain silent and obediently willing. That was His prerogative. What should have been these men's?
November1 @ @ rRandyP comments: mFaithOfJesus kjv@John:4:1-26 IF THOU KNEWEST THE GIFT - Jesus is apparently avoiding/postponing conflict with the Pharisee's who are now taking notice of Jesus by the numbers He is drawing away from them in Judea. He takes the most direct route to Galilee venturing through the hated Jewish half breed land of Samaria. Jesus stops outside of Sychar and sends His band of Jewish looking fellows into the town to barter with the natives for food. A woman comes to the well to draw water just as she did probably twice a day, this time to find a lone road weary Jew sitting at the step of the well. What ensues is one of the most intimate conversations recorded in the gospels. It describes how Jesus pursued His way past her many defenses to bring her into an understanding of who He really was. First defense was ethnic, though they shared a common ancestry she made it a point to draw out their difference rather than their similarities. Jesus dislodged that defense by suggesting that who He was was someone that both and Jew and Samaritan had long looked forward to and that what He had to give was much anticipated by both. Her second defense was to claim ancestral rights to the lineage of Jacob. His response was to offer her more than an old decaying inherited landmark and to point to the vast difference of the shallow mountain runoff well's water to His eternal living water. Still calling Him "sir", her third defense is to make Him prove His offer. He replies by pointing her politely to a adulterous secret she holds that could not be known by any stranger. Now that she sees Him on the level of maybe a Jewish prophet, her fourth defense is to deflect His piercing gaze into her soul by diverting it to theoretical controversy as to the true singular sacred places of worship. It is an easy answer for Him to turn back on her for it does not matter where one worships as it does who the true object of that worship is given to. Her fifth defense is to put the concept of Messiah off into the future "well when messiah comes he will". Jesus declares "I am He". She has no other defense, she has only to believe His oath or not believe. There is no doubt that Jesus had many such conversations like this with a great many people. The few that we have recorded (like the previous with Nicodemus) are much glossed over and tightly edited with purpose. This seems to be one of the most open and free flowing of them all and show us a very intimate side of Jesus. He was not pushy, but very engaged and direct. He spoke in vivid pictures and concept that could be latched onto and remembered easily with time released multilayer payloads. He was able to work through her defenses with an intriguing honesty and sincerity and passion that she would come to respect. By the time the woman reaches her kinfolk she is convinced that He is Christ. The recorded record of our Lord is fast pace and compact with good reason. The faith of our Lord however is on a much deeper one on one plane that connects with the very core of the people He presents Himself to.
November21 @ @ rRandyP comments: mFaithOfJesus kjv@John:9:13-34 A MARVELOUS THING - Since the world began, that is a long time. A man born blind is made to see. What difference would it make where the healer was from? He would still require serious consideration. How could just any person perform such a thing? Let alone a sinner? It is often asked why Jesus used the mud and the wash. It is commonly held that it was used to help build the man's faith. The man did not see what Jesus was about to do. The man at least would have known by touch that something had been done and feel it all the way down to the bath. Others point to the possible medicinal purposes of the mud (but to heal prenatal blindness?). What if the mud was to mark the man that a miracle had been performed again by Jesus on the Sabbath? What if it was a message to the Pharisees and had little to do with the event itself? The inquisition asked more than once "how was this again? Mud?". It was perplexing to them. Mud sticks to things. In mud things get stuck. If one is trying to get a perplexing puzzle stuck into a group of antagonist's brains why not stick it there with mud? The theory is interesting. As much as these men wanted to control the proceedings and rule out the miracle all together, their perplexity kept the inquiry in play, broadcasting to others that they were not all together sure what had taken place. It aggravated a division already occurring within their group and made to surface a policy they wanted to enforce that commoners insisting Jesus to be Christ would be excommunicated from the assembly. The mud is now on their face. How Jesus had healed has as little to do with the consideration of sin as when He did it or where He was from. The fact is that it hadn't been done to anyone's recollection ever before, that was the most urgent point. Some there came close to the matter, but apparently they lack the political strength and determination of the others. The faith of our Lord is in bringing the darkness to light, to make men to see the spiritual struggle happening daily all around them and the various intentions/motives being played out. Sometimes something as simple as mud can be used to remind one man who cannot see that his eyes are soon to open and at the same time reveal to a great many that certain so called seers are actually driven to blindness. That makes it an even more marvelous thing!
December21 @ @ rRandyP comments: mFaithOfJesus kjv@John:18:28-40 TO THIS END - Apparently when you are breaking your own law by having a trial at night and coming to a judgment of condemnation in the same day it is important that you not break your own traditions of not dirtying your hands by going into a Gentile's house; it makes it all better. Apparently if you yourself do not have legal power to perform capital punishment it is okay to take him to someone that does; it is all right. John doesn't go into the false evidence and witness that the Sanhedrin itself trumped up, but apparently it too is okay as long as you don't sully your hands and your image by expressing concern over not missing the closing hours of the paschal festival. Aren't you glad that they thought this all through and got it to where they could murder God's Son without breaking their ceremonial traditions? Why should Pilate entertain this motion? Because they wouldn't have brought him had He not been what they said he was; you can take their word on that. Oh so Pilate doesn't find anything wrong with the man, but it is okay to offer him in a trade for a seditious robber? Did that come out of left field or what? Is it article ?#$& that says that it is lawful to trade an innocent man for a convict tried by Roman law if the Jews insist? What business does Rome have with a man who won't tell you directly that he is a king, with no army, with no intent of removing anyone from their throne, who has gone out of his way on several occasions not to present himself to the public as someone who would? Some would say that Pilate felt for Jesus but cowarded to the pressure of the Jews. WHat? Pilate (who has been tyrannical and utterly vicious to the Jews as recently as a few months ago on the temple stairs) and the Sanhedrin suddenly being buddy buddy should alert us to something politically motivated happening here in a big way. They are both trying to present themselves to the public (and to history) as having clean hands. Don't riot against me Jerusalem for well I pretended not to want to be involved in this when most vehemently I did. Don't riot against us thousands of followers because we did not kill Jesus, Jesus killed Himself by what He said to Pilate. This is why all the detail is given to public perception. Little did they know that it was going to be written about. A few weeks and all this messiness would be done with, so they thought. It was written in a time span where if the written testimony that we have was false that the many witnesses could have fought back, we would have historical evidence that these misrepresentations had been vigorously disputed.Truth is that Rome didn't think much of this little incident until it had stirred the people so that they had to destroy the Temple, burn the records and ransack the city a few decades latter. What we do have is our Apostles talking about it quite openly to the public in a tone that everyone else knew about it and accepted it; many were convicted by it. The words here of Jesus then take on deeper meaning when He says that He came into this world to "bare witness unto the truth" and everyone that is "of the truth" heareth His voice. Truth is not the perception portrayed of washing ones hands of the matter, nor is it of making it back to the festival in time, truth is why it is you feel the need to trip all over yourself and the law on the way to portraying yourself as innocent of a most guilty matter.Truth is proving man his nature so that then you can show them God's. The faith of our Lord remember is that this is all in the Father's hands. No it is not right what they are doing, but what else could be expected. How does this ever change unless the Son of God suffers this wrong and takes it in His flesh to the grave along with every other wrong so that He might raise up a people free of it's corruption. Born into to bare wittness, to this end completed.
![[pBiblx2]](/img/menu.png)
![[pBiblx2]](/img/pbiblx2_logo3.png){kind=logo}