Comments - devotion RecentComments

April20 @ @ rRandyP comments: mFaithOfJesus kjv@Matthew:27:11-26 WHETHER OF THE TWAIN - One man washes his hands of the blood guilt and the others pour it on to their heads of themselves and their children. Blood by both is made lite of. One cannot be innocent of the blood simply by washing their hands of the matter. The fact is that matters were poorly and unjustly handled in the first place. Pilate proved coward to the pressures of the Sanhedrin. Others cannot take such minute opinion of any man's life so as to not guarantee a safe and judicious proceedings, so as to not be driven by impulse or shrewd coercion. After all Jesus had done to reveal the sinful hypocrisy and false teaching and spiritual callous blindness of the Pharisees/the Sadducee/the Scribes the make up the Sanhedrin, for the general public to be so easily intimidated and manipulated is a sin equal to that of Judas even if this had not been Christ. What then of the evidences in favor, the many and daily healings, the exorcisms, the wondrous and picturesque sermons, the miracles, the possible ties to long held prophecy, the hope of Israel? Were these possibilities no factor to them at all? The blood stains of guilt cannot be washed away. The price of guilt cannot be negotiated by the guilty parties involved. Jesus' blood is meant to redeem but, if it is not accepted as such it becomes a terrible pronouncement of guilt; guilt then, guilt today. There is a notorious thief that is given amnesty by us even at this hour. He is the embodiment of our being so easily turned and manipulated and used as a driving wedge between justice and those that must judge. Perhaps the greatest revelation of our hearts by Jesus was taught without a word. The faith of our Lord is not in the present but, in the future. It is a future ripped free from the clutches of man's continuous evil imagination and heart that is deceptive above all else. It may be a good time to review kjv@Proverbs:1:20-33 in consideration of this particular multitude and then ours.

April21 @ @ rRandyP comments: mFaithOfJesus kjv@Matthew:27:27-31 HAIL - The accusation of King is what seems to be sticking in everyones craw. We have heard it from the Jews, from the the Governor, now we see it from the Roman guard. That Jesus has said that His Kingdom is not of this world is of little weight, they are all taking Him literally as of this moment. He was delivered into this position by the Jews on the evidence of blasphemy. For the Romans this may be more about the hatred for anything Jewish and about the disturbance. They seem well practiced at the art of mockery and quite creative in adapting common items to their purpose. For us it is a pipeline into the dynamics and mechanics of the mob mentality, the overwhelming proof of man's sinful nature. Everything that man purports himself to be and to have evolved into is contradicted and disproved by the frequent and vile occurrences such as this. Jesus had to endure such contradiction kjv@Hebrews:12:3 because such contradiction is mankind's nature. The faith of our Lord is in the role of revealer. He reveals the heart of man whole as so He does man individual. He is rejected and despised not for what miraculous things He did (those seem to be forgotten) but, for what these things reveal about us. Often He does not even have to say or do a thing to reveal us at the core, has simply to endure our action we mount against Him. Like the Roman guard, we might think that we are on top. For how much longer? Until Kingdom come?

May3 @ @ rRandyP comments: mFaithOfJesus kjv@Mark:1:29-34 PETER'S WIFE - Not much thought ever goes into the tremendous role of Peter's wife in the early church. Her husband in a sense is stolen away. What becomes of the finances and family business while he is away? What becomes of their plans? Who is her daily companion? She is left to care for her mother and possibly raise kids (assumed) by herself. We see that the ministry frequents their house, a blessing to have him near but, extra work for her and her mom none the less. We must also consider the burden of being Peter's wife when she goes out in public. I don't know that we are ever told how she truly felt about this and the types of struggles she endured so that Peter could become the influence that he latter became. We do know that she joined him latter on and came along at least part of the time kjv@1Corinthians:9:5. I have no doubt that she loved her husband and the Lord dearly. I have no doubt that she approved very much of what the 'boys' were out doing. I wish to think knowing my Lord's sensitivity to everything/one around Him that He had private conversation(s) with her maybe out there on her porch in the sunset on other days. The faith of our Lord isn't in just what has been written for us to digest intellectually it is in the practical and personal matters that each of these things imply. As with any ministry there are people and burdens being carried by those people behind the scenes that outsiders may not ever notice. Hopefully the people that they are serving take note. Their service is just as important to the storyline as those up and out front. Their sacrifice is perhaps more than any of ours and they should know with certainty that our Lord is very much pleased and honored. I do not know if this woman lived to see her husband's death, odds are so, if not she would have sensed (or have been gently told) that this was part of the deal. And yet, she would have looked at Peter the way only a wife could and encourage him to continue with the joy of her smile and the tears of her embrace. This women and others like her should be, nay will be highly sainted. They are as much a powerful wittness to Christ as those exorcised of demons.

May18 @ @ rRandyP comments: mFaithOfJesus kjv@Mark:4:35-41 LET US PASS - Fearful and no faith tie together in this passage. This Greek "no" may also suggest the definite no, as in never or not yet faith. Intellectual consent got them into the boat. Intellectual consent assumes that everything ahead will go alright, if trouble comes up there will be time to adjust or abandon. Spiritual consent assumes that no matter what comes up against it it will be as planned, placing more faith in the master of the wind than the obvious physical tumult of the tempest. Fear is natural in either respect, it is where intellectual consent hides to when faced with something greater or more threatening/unknown comes against it's approved consent/control. Just as these men had never faced fear to this level before they had never faced faith. Note that this took place at the end of one of the most successful single days thus far of their discipleship/ministry. The faith of our Lord challenges both faith and fear to it's core and calls for some uncomfortable occassions. It rebukes not the person nor the elements but the forces stirring them toward disturbance. Peace and calm are found in the divine settling of these compulsively consuming momentums. Let us pass over to the other side!

December19 @ @ rRandyP comments: mFaithOfJesus kjv@John:18:19-24 WHY ASKETH THOU - How do a few powerful elite (but not powerful enough to do this deed on their own) sway the perception and support of enough others to get this job done? Think of those others as the jury. The prosecution's effort here is intended to grab the focus of the jury away from anything Jesus might be defending Himself by. The officer appears offended by the defendant's answer with the purpose of setting a definite tone of authority and gamesmanship by the defendant for the room fully in mind. Whether he was told to do this or whether he just felt it necessary we do not know; I believe it though to be staged. The high priest is seeking to set a similar tone releasing into the room air the scent that Jesus is being secretive for the blood hounds to sniff without having to prove it. Irregardless of any answer, the jury (many of the same) is left with the sense of Jesus disrespectfully toying with authority and that authority knows something that Jesus would rather hold back. It is all an act, but very effective in increments. One does not break the will at first, but bends it. Knowing that this ploy is in place our Lord's comments are as they should be, essentially "what is your intention in asking me that". Jesus is not going to defend Himself here. He has already proved Himself on a much bigger stage. His silence instead will be proof against intents and methods of His accusers. The trial is much the same in our age. His accusers are setting the stage for the jury by filling the air with nebulous scents; no need for proofs (less effective). The scent of holding something threatening back, the ora of descent and rebelion, the air of war mongering and brainwashing and alterior motive, the tinge of stirring crowds into fanaticism, all thrown out not to be answered (how could we) but to set the tone and put the adherent on the defensive. Where then is the Lord's defense? Is it really in us becoming more vocal and defensive? Or is it in us keeping true to what He has been teaching and commanding all along? Is not our love and fruitfulness in the knowledge of Him His best defense? The faith of our Lord is in the work that He has already been doing, it is in knowing from this initial work what in the future will be done. His faith is not in the trial or the defense or the court of corruptible opinion, it is in the righteousness of His Father. So must ours! Not everyone else is an accuser, they may simply be the jury. They should be aware of the tactic just the same.