Comments - devotion RecentComments

April18 @ @ rRandyP comments: mFaithOfJesus kjv@Matthew:26:69-75 THRICE - It would be hard for any Galilean in Jerusalem to deny that He is not a follower of the accused Galilean, his speech/inflections would give him away. No one was fooled of course and the more he tried to deny it the more insistent others became. So why then did he continue? Keep in mind that he swore that he wouldn't. I feel that the sense of personal danger must have been too great. If the authorities wanted to reign in the rest of Jesus' group what better place to start than with the interogation of Peter. Torture could be used to discover the whereabouts of the remainder. The mood of the public had certainly changed as well, Peter may not have made it into the hands of the authorities if taken by the hand of the mob. Peter's testimony of what Jesus had declared could be used against Jesus as well. There is so much unknown and suspicious tide to consider. Earlier Peter had thought that he understood the pressures that would come to bare against him as a disciple of the captured Christ; he underestimated the depths that this late night could erode down into and the sentiments of the aroused mobs now gathering. There are well thought out reasons not just cowardice at work in Peter's denial. Extreme danger brings with it different angles and realities that Peter had not before considered. Jesus had considered these pressures and angles though and yet was not condemning. Peter would weep bitterly. A river would flow of embarrassment and shame and powerlessness and complete let down, but, most of all a torrent of love for the man that he had invested all his devotion and hope into. Even though we may not know the full weight of momentum behind this denial, we can certainly sympathize with it as we are just as likely or more so to do the same under lesser conditions. The faith of our Lord understands the pressures His word can bare on us just as much as He knows our strengths and weaknesses. He knows that what we intend to be/do for Him is rarely what comes out; and frankly He is okay with that as long as there is open repentance and progress made. The way of our lives is a constant correction. This is a real and correctable experience Peter has stepped into that will mold and shape the remainder of his life. Not many would have the guts to step into the danger so far as Peter did, it is almost as miraculous as stepping out onto the raging waters. We cannot say that what Peter ended up doing as he realized the storm set against him was right but, we can say that it was transformative; love and devotion will continue and grow. The Lord knows how to lead us from here in our bitter and broken tears to there into His secure and loving arms. This as much as anything is the trust that we must come to have in Him.

June12 @ @ rRandyP comments: mFaithOfJesus kjv@Mark:10:46-52 MADE THEE WHOLE/SAVED - kjv@Matthew:20:29-34; kjv@Luke:18:35-43 also give the same account. Mark here says "whole", Luke says "saved", Matthew omits the response noting Jesus' compassion but, he says that there are two beggars. Is there contradiction? Only if you want there to be. Why would you want there to be? So that you don't have to believe it. Is it that you believe that sight can't be restored as in a communicable eye disease? Is it that two men can't be present and one remembered in particular by Peter because of his name and perhaps as reference to those who might know him further? Is that being made whole cannot mean being saved? Is it that you think the Holy Spirit would make such an obvious mistake? There are plenty of other seeming contradictions if you want there to be. I would rather see it that the fame of Jesus was known well enough to the many beggars along the road near Jericho that some called to Him causing a disruption to the caravan of pilgrims to passover Jerusalem. The more they called out the more people tried to quiet them until finally Jesus was close enough to call at least two to where He was. They gladdly came and made petition of Him. He had compassion on them and seeing their faith was assured Himself that they were made whole/saved through the encounter. As others later read the account those who knew Peter would recognize the one name and be able to certify that he indeed could see and did remain in the faith perhaps having done or become something significant/memorable. The faith of our Lord is in the testimony that both had preceded Him and would follow Him. Where things needed to be further explained He made sure to mention, even repeat. Where things did not need but the benefit of a doubt He left it alone as a testing point. There are certainly challenging areas in our faith as there needs to be to prove our sincerity and give us room to grow, but, not one is contradiction unless one wants it to be. I would ask are you certain that you want this particular challenge to be the point your two paths split?

September22 @ @ rRandyP comments: mFaithOfJesus kjv@Luke:18:1-8 ALWAYS PRAY - There is a nearly constant theme throughout the Old Testament of the just praying that God avenge them. Even in Revelations the martyrs under the throne are crying out "when". It may be something that we today miss as we look to the faith for prosperity and wellness, not to put us in a position of needing call upon God in our persecution to be avenged. Simply put, we at least in the west no longer have an adversary. Is that because there are no longer the unjust? Is that because the widow and orphaned and poor are so justly treated? Is that because the disadvantaged are so well off that we the just don't need to stick our nose into their business? Is that because the cause of God's righteousness is so widely excepted and welcome that the adversary is kept in his place? Jesus begins by saying "men out to pray and not faint". What have we today that we have to pray for other than our own comfort and self worth? What do we have that would cause us to faint if not for prayer? This widow? That poor man? The other persecuted elect? The prayers of David especially reflect a very interesting conflict, he himself being anointed being not able to lay his hand against another of God's anointed in hot pursuit. Much of what the early Christians suffered was from the other elect. Much of what the early reformists suffered was from within the church. Men ought always pray indeed, but that ought to be in a position of needing to pray as well. Not for prayer's sake, but for divine justice's sake. The faith of our Lord was always tried and tested. He put Himself in a position of needing to be avenged. He put His own self out there on behalf of those who are treated unjustly. His voice is the clearest of all those voices that have cried out and up, voices some to this day met above with only long-suffering for now.

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.

December22 @ @ rRandyP comments: mFaithOfJesus kjv@John:19:1-16 EXCEPT IT WERE GIVEN THEE - Judas delivered Jesus to Caiaphas, Caiaphas to Pilate, Pilate to Herod, Herod back to Pilate, Pilate to the wishes of the mob. Who has the greater sin? Jesus in this case directly associates it with power/authority. Caiaphas delivered Jesus to Pilate. Caiaphas had been given the authority of high priest. Caiaphas had sought by various means to capture Jesus, Judas had approached the high priest but it was Caiaphas' decision to take Judas up on the offer, it was Caiaphas that had pronounced the expediency of one man dying, it was Caiaphas that not only had the scripture known to himself but had every further resource to investigate it with, it is Caiaphas that every other member of the Sanhedrin looks to and loyally follows.As for Pilate, this matter would have little concern to him if Caiaphas had not made it a concern; Pilate would just as soon had Caiaphas drag Jesus out to the desert and end it all secretly there. Herod was humored by the whole incident. The issue for Caiaphas boils down to Jesus making Himself to be the Son of God; there is no Roman law against making one's self such, so he has to make it appear the treasonous sedition presenting one's self as king. Let's go back then to the triumphant day of Jesus' entry with donkey and palms. Jesus had not allowed Himself ever to be portrayed as such until now. Why did He do it? He knew that it would be the last straw for Caiaphas. The moment Jesus ever portrayed Himself as He really is and on Caiaphas' turf that would be the tipping point as the entire matter was concerned. Caiaphas had long been after Jesus to kill Him, but know he had the power he needed over Pilate. Was it then Caiaphas? Now go back to the parable of Jesus stating that the keepers of the vineyard knew the son and wanted for themselves his inheritance. What reason would Caiaphas have to approach all of this in this way? Who would know and want Jesus' inheritance? (Think back to the Temptation a top the temple). Whose voice would have made Caiaphas to believe that Jesus was merely "making" Himself to be the Son of God? Who would have had the power to threaten Caiaphas of his own high position and authority? We began by asking who had the greater sin? Who had delivered Jesus to Pilate? I ask you, who had a hand with Judas? Who had a hand with Caiaphas? Who had a hand with drunkard Herod? Who had a hand with Caiaphas? Who had a hand with the mob? Who then delivered Jesus with the greater sin? Who had tried previously to get Jesus to volunteer His inheritance over to him? The faith of our Lord is in the process laid out and implemented by His Father. It is a process intended to go much farther and deeper than any one of us fully realizes because it is a process that needs to affect something none of us are fully willing to admit has happened to the whole of mankind. It goes all the way back to a garden with a man and a women and a serpent. A serpent that would bite the heel of the woman's seed and a seed that would crush the head of that serpent. Today is that day. That day is here. We know where the Son of God/Man has been all of this time, the question is where have we been? Where has that subtle serpent been? We know where Jesus' power is given from, the question is where has been our from? What other powers are there for us to get our authority from? Why is it that God has been so displeased and building to do something with all of this? Answer this and you will answer why it is Jesus must be raised back into the His ultimate power and why we must then un-yeildingly follow.