April16 @ @ rRandyP comments: mFaithOfJesus kjv@Matthew:26:47-56 THUS IT MUST BE - kjv@Acts:1:16 David prophesied about the betrayal by a friend/equal/guide kjv@Psalms:41:9 kjv@Psalms:55:12-15 and the crucification kjv@Psalms:22:1-31. All this kjv@Acts:2:23 by the determined counsel and foreknowledge of God as Isaiah and others reported kjv@Isaiah:53:1-12. The faith of our Lord is in the Father and the pathway Divinely reported to Him through the prophets. Jesus places a very heavy emphasis on the prophets as should we. In modern times prophecy is uncommon and near silent dry hard ground. We lack to see it's former miraculous operation and necessity in revealing divine depth. Jesus' course was laid out before Him and well written for continuous direction and confirmation. He was out to fulfill it's every word. We should now know that we have the more sure word because of the more sure word of prophecy. We should know the tremendous arm/power of the Lord revealed in the fulfillment of the prophets report kjv@Isaiah:53:1. Modern spiritualism teaches that all things are within ones power, legions of angels can be called by us as well; yet we are taught power and prudence are two separate things. What is all important is obeying God's will, much of it revealed by the prophets, if true for our savior than surely for us.
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?
November4 @ @ rRandyP comments: mFaithOfJesus kjv@John:4:43-54 EXCEPT YOU SEE SIGNS - I do not believe that Jesus was attempting to rebuke the nobleman by what He said, but was preparing Him. It is not as if the man had come to Jesus, sought a sign in order to have the confidence afterward to ask Jesus for a miracle then on his son's behalf. The man had heard of the wedding miracle in Cana and the buzz from the pilgrims returning from the Feast in Jerusalem and had enough belief so as to wait for Him during His brief delay in Samaria. The statement is to focus the man upon the Messianic claims and not on all the observable things done up to this. The strength of faith is not in what has been done prior, but in what is about to occur and why. As to why, many would consider that they like the man because they believe strong enough to receive the healing that the healing takes place; like a partnership with the healer, our faith/His power. Here you will notice that Jesus told the man of the healing before the mention of the man believing. What if the man had delayed in his believing until further down the road? Would the healing have occurred two hours later? I fear that people who believe that their faith in healing must be there in order to receive the healing are the same type of people who seek signs and evidences to buttress up their faith prior. They are close kin to the people have to have a healing or observe directly a miracle themselves before they would ever consider that the performer to be in the class of a Messiah. John has verbally taken us to three distinct spiritual climates so far, the hyper religious in Jerusalem, the distant and half bread in Samaria, and now returns to a commoner's middle ground in Galilee. He has had tremendous success in all three and now previous successes are beginning to compound or multiply on top of each other. Knowing these distinct base climates now, we should begin seeing strange evolution's and twist's of these bases as people begin to talk themselves out of what appears to be the long awaited messianic fulfillment and the efforts of the elite to regain their control. The faith of our Lord is that He can compel us toward the core belief in His Lordship. It is not all about His showmanship and what we might be able to have Him do for us personally, it is about His being and presence and authority over all creation.
November18 @ @ rRandyP comments: mFaithOfJesus kjv@John:8:42-47 UNDERSTAND MY SPEECH - You may have noticed that everything that Jesus is saying is being taken entirely the wrong way. It is as if He is not talking at all, they cannot hear it. It is not even logical point and counterpoint, it is logical point and outright bastardization. Why is it that His speech cannot be understood? How prevalent is this? We see His opponents doing this, do we see His allies doing this as well? Is it universal? Chances are yes! If we were to add back in the topic from the previous passage of believers/continuers being set free indeed, we may have a clue as to what our bondage largely consists of. He states that the lusts of our father we "will" do; the language suggests that it would be impossible not to do his (the Devil's) lusts unless He Himself (Jesus/Truth) has set us free. At the point of this passage no one has been set free yet. Can we say then at this specific time that no one is from the Father yet and that no one truly loves Jesus? Is there anyone on scene that clearly hears God's words? No; therefore they hear not because they are not yet of God. If this hypothesis is true it would mean that the faith of our Lord is standing utterly alone at this time a complete foreigner to both friend and foe looking forward to a time after the cross when friends one by one would be crossing over into the adoption of the sons of men. Now we should ask whether this same universal condition still exists? For this we must caution believers with the words of kjv@John:8:31-32 that it is not merely the belief in Jesus that sets us free but the continuing in His word as disciples that reveals the truth and then it is this revealed truth that sets us free. If this means free from the bondage of doing the lusts of our former father then we see that continuance toward discipleship must then come first. If this hypothesis is true then it would mean that the Lord stands with some looking out as near strangers at a field of potential masses whose chains have been lifted but have yet to trust and experience the continuance up from the cellars into the open light of discipleship. We must then again ask... are we hearing the word of Jesus so as to continue in it? Do we understand what He is really saying or are we making it out to whatever we want it to be? Are we bastardizing it? As to the points I have already hypothesized about our Lord, one would think "isn't this a terrible and lonely thing we are watching Him go through". To this we must ask "is this not why He came"? The faith of our Lord is in making a way for the completely detached to come unto their true Father. God is their Father, but they have sold themselves over to another. There is no other course for them out unless He purchase them back first. Now maybe we can hear His speech!
November23 @ @ rRandyP comments: mFaithOfJesus kjv@John:10:1-21 BUT THE SHEEP DID NOT HEAR THEM - There are many revealing things spoken in this passage that might have gone unseen. First, for there to be a door to enter there has to be a wall or partition preventing entry elsewhere. What is this partition that would make there to be only one way in? God's will? His judgment? It says that there are those that would climb up it other ways, avoid the door, put themselves above His judgment, but it does not say that these others are making it. There are those entering in and that He is leading out called by name that know His voice. They will not follow a strangers voice and will not hear them. There is another fold that He mentions, however the two folds are make one; the same door, the same calling, the same recognition of voice. Note also that there is a porter at the door to open it. Even if one came to the gate the porter (Holy Ghost) would have to let one in. It is interesting that the old prophets (Isaiah Ezekiel etc) referred to the religious leadership of their day as shepherds. These prophetic references would mean something to the Pharisees. Jesus referred to His time as being shepherd-less. Something has happened between then and then removing the former corrupt shepherds. If these men now are the hirelings there is another to whom they are hired and to whom they are being scared off deserting their posts; "He" would be the one who comes to steal/kill destroy. "He (The Thief)" in context is likely to come in the form of the chief priests and/or the political structures who are not deserting yet, that desire Jesus dead. Note that there are the true sheep, the ones for whom the Shepherd gave His life and took it back again that know His voice and follow. The partition is of little consequence to them as it is, they freely follow where He leads. The faith of our Lord is knowledgeable of a very complex web of story lines strung together moving against Him with increasing energy. He remains certain however of what this means and what it will mean to His sheep fold. Are we aware and certain?
December31 @ @ rRandyP comments: mFaithOfJesus kjv@John:21:15-25 FOLLOW ME - Two of our favorite personalities of the bible Peter and John face the ultimate question in our final passage. Peter is asked directly by Jesus "do you love me". John reports to us from a curious distance. Three times Peter is asked and what could he honestly say? What could any of us say? Peter just a week or so ago had denied Jesus three times. Peter has learned first hand of the often cloudy climate of intention and misguided result within our hearts. So must we. Jesus twice is asking however if Peter loves with the "agape" that Jesus loves him with. With much thought Peter admits that he loves Him more like a brother. Could any of us truly respond rather in the affirmative? Peter answers with naked honesty. I don't know whether John understands at this point either. He writes some sixty years later with much introspection addressing himself simply as "the one Jesus loved"; perhaps the best answer of all. We love Jesus best we can because He first loves us best that anyone can, in so doing He teaches us what it means to be agape loved. Any agape form of love we have is solely a reflection of the love with which He has always loved us. Peter is asked the third time "do you love me then like you say as a brother"? Taking the inquiry a step further, do any of us even know what the brotherly form of love is all about? Could we know without first knowing His agape love? Jesus here presents these questions to Peter further as a "if/then" conditional statement. It is almost better translated "if you feed on My agape then feed My agape to My other sheep as well". We easily fall into the trap of thinking that it is our love that we are to show and so too we forget that we are all His sheep; our love/our (or scattered disassociated) sheep/our feeding. His sheep need fed His agape not the mere human resemblance of it. If we have any resemblance of love of our own for Jesus we would know this. This ties into the notion of abiding fully in His love and therein/thereby producing fruit. The moment we step out of that love into a lesser forms of love from our own reserve our fruitfulness withers detached from the vine. It also ties into the notion that we are to crucify our former self daily as a living sacrifice being transformed by the renewing of our minds, as much of our mind is going about doing our own forms of love and not His. Couldn't the question be interpreted "I know from which love you love me by the love with which you are feeding my sheep"? Peter's love one day will become sacrificial and will glorify this very Savior, not to confuse it with the Saviors though. It will remain within the agape love Jesus has shown all men. In Peter's case it matters not what the other men like John will be called to do because it all is the working of the Lord's agape. We are compelled by the agape love of Christ to freely partake and distribute of said agape to the benefit of all His children. The faith our Lord is that we can come to know His agape love and that it is His agape love will can be presented and distributed to all men world wide. It is often best combined with our more agape infused brotherly forms of love as that is what we are more generally suited to produce. However, it must always be the focus of His agape not our forms for that is where all credit truly lays. The honor of fielding His banner into the unknown territories is the greatest form of due respect to Him possible. It is an honor men like Peter and John and others have followed and for some even died for.
![[pBiblx2]](/img/menu.png)
![[pBiblx2]](/img/pbiblx2_logo3.png){kind=logo}