Comments - devotion RecentComments

March6 @ @ rRandyP comments: mFaithOfJesus kjv@Matthew:16:1-4 YE DISCERN THE FACE OF THE SKY - Is there any difference between Satan tempting Christ at the temple peak and the Pharisees/Sadducees here on ground zero? In their minds these men are simply demanding an indisputable sign, something in/from the heavens that would prove once and for all that Jesus is/isn't the Son of God. Where in their scriptures was it ever said that there would be a sign such as this given? Was it not said rather that the sign given would be that He would heal the lame and the sick, proclaim deliverence the captives, be rejected by His own....? Is not the fact that they are asking for a sign a sign in itself? Why would He not just give them/us a certain sign? What about doing so would be tempting God thereby proving that He is not the promised one? Are we certain that such a sign would even be accepted? That such a heavenly declaration would not be an immediate then eternal curse to our rebellious hearts that would go about it's own way regardless? The faith of our Lord is in His installments of faith into man. He believes in the faith we will someday have even though there is no certain and present sign. He believes that with His slow and steady and methodical pressure that the heart will be brought to see their errors of it's direction and will turn eventually to follow His. A sign if it weren't for tempting God would only scare the heart further away; destroy the process that He is using to build faith and trust and desire within us with. Besides, there are great and wondrous signs big and little all around us, if with discerning eye we were to see. Faith comes through the knowledge of the righteousness of God and of our Lord Jesus Christ kjv@2Peter:1:1

April25 @ @ rRandyP comments: mFaithOfJesus kjv@Matthew:27:62-66 THAT DECEIVER - We see the hatred or else the guilt of the priests and Pharisees turning to paranoia. As they saw it the first error was to be deceived into believing Jesus to be Christ, the last error to be deceived into believing His resurrection. If one could be deceived into either of these errors, one could be deceived into staging events and evidence to deceive others. Apparently, Pilate did not trust the Jewish temple guard either. Roman guards were already attached to the temple, so they were to be used to secure the sepulcher. So the tomb was sealed, move the stone/break the seal, and the guard was placed around it. This is the day after. The question becomes, with the evidence of the resurrection so central to the debate, why wasn't more done by either side to make sure the evidence? Given the accusation of deceit by the one and the accusation of extreme hatred and blood guilt by the other? The only one truly that could have done any better would have been Pilate and he had attempted to wash his hands of the matter. Others might feel that Jesus or the Father could have done better, but, really how much is enough? How much secured evidence does it take to make the issue convincing to ardent skeptics? Will there not always be areas of doubt? What about doubt and debate though is unhealthy? The Word of God has always been carried to the farther reaches more by its' opposition than it has its' friendly alliances. The faith of our Lord is in His read of the nature of man doing what it is going to do, the plan of God accounting for exactly that, consent and opposition to Him both carrying out His objective. Remember that He/we has thousands of years of historical insight into spreading His word ahead of this to know man's sparse obedience and coagulating opposition. He knows how to get things done.

May10 @ @ rRandyP comments: mFaithOfJesus kjv@Mark:3:7-12 LEST THEY THRONG - Arrangements have to be made for Jesus' safety; not hostile endangerment per se but, eager/desperate. The pressing of the crowds were like those in a famine at a food distribution line where innocent people do get trampled. Perhaps the most dangerous thing is that people now presume that they can get healed simply by touching Jesus. They don't even have to converse with Him or receive His consent/action. We are told of this being true in a few cases but, not as I am aware as a general rule. With this inhibition torn down the people feel free to press in on and through and around anything or anyone that might stand in their own way. Crowd control is always a major factor as multitudes take on a illogical unpredictable dynamic all of their own. As we see with modern terrorist tactics, a crowd can even be used against itself by malcontents when excited into a stampede or incited into a riot. How odd/nightmarish it must of seemed to be packed into a tight space of sickly even demon possessed people all moving in without self prohibition toward the center. The plan was to stay close to the shoreline cutting off half of the encirclement, providing a means of retreat via small swift boat. The faith of our Lord is very bold but, certainly not stupid. The nature of men, the nature of desperation, the nature of crowds is all taken into account. Being a disciple was often like being a body guard, intense, physical, eerie, and dangerous; not the place for mere academics. The whole experience must have been becoming more and more unimaginable to them. The Lord I am sure takes that into account too.

May31 @ @ rRandyP comments: mFaithOfJesus kjv@Mark:8:27-30 THAT I AM - There is a voice predicted that will prepare His way in the desert kjv@Isaiah:40:3. This is not necessarily Elijah or it can be Elijah in two roles. kjv@Luke:1:17 describes John as having the spirit of. There is also Elijah coming before the great and dreadful day of the Lord kjv@Malachi:4:5, speaking directly about the Day of Judgment kjv@Malachi:4:6 turning the hearts of the children to their fathers. kjv@Matthew:11:14 Jesus connects John to Elias if we will receive it. Since the great day (moon blood red, burning the wicked as stubble kjv@Joel:2:31) has yet to come we must conclude that Elias comes twice. If John is Elias Jesus then is not, He is the one whom will have His way prepared before Him and later the one whose Day will be great and terrible. If Elias comes twice so then does Son of Man. Jesus is aware that His disciples are struggling between what Jesus tells them and what they are hearing on the streets. In a sense Jesus is forcing them into deciding which Jesus they are going to choose to believe. This is the second time He has asked them. That there is so much talk in that day recorded is important today as the modern Jews attempt to state that Messiah is just anyone anointed with oil, as it shows that the Jews of that time expected something much more. They also have it so tightly wrapped up that prophecy can only be fulfilled in just one way and since it didn't happen their way what the Gospels/Jesus declare is just plain stupid or even blasphemous errors. The Spirit not flesh and blood will have to reveal this to a man's heart individually. While they seek to minimize the meaning of all this and contort prophecy to get there, the faith of our Lord has all of this in clear perspective. Prophecy also has one day their 'veil' being lifted.

June19 @ @ rRandyP comments: mFaithOfJesus kjv@Mark:12:18-27 DO YE NOT ERR - It is obvious in the scriptures that the Sadducees do not believe in the resurrection and we know from encounters with them after Jesus in Acts that they were not convinced by this argument. They come like the others to trap Jesus, to shore up their own believers for the sentencing immediately ahead by means of stark theological differentiation. This also shows us why that they can be so bold in seeking Jesus death; they do not believe that He can raise again. The raising from the dead is so central to the approach Jesus is taking that it appears as a severe weakness to those who believe it impossible. Over and over the scriptures directly speak of and confirm resurrection, from Job to Ezekiel and others, and is implied in nearly everything else said including the phrases God of Jacob, God of Abraham, etc... I do not see Old Testament evidence that men and women will not marry after the resurrection; Jesus' argument almost seems to be "who ever said that they will". As the reason for marriage is for man not to be alone and for procreation and the weakness of the flesh, resurrection then is saying that man is no longer alone and no longer procreating and no longer weak; why then would there be need for marriage. As much as the Sadducees knew about the scriptures they really knew very little. They, like others have a form of godliness but, deny the power thereof. The power of God is proven in the resurrection. The power of God is proven in that what has been sown in corruption can be raised in incorruption. The faith of our Lord is firmly in not only His own resurrection but, that from His resurrection all others will be resurrected as well; some to eternal fellowship and some to eternal contempt. If Jesus does in fact raise from the dead then they do greatly err. If He does not, then the rest of the Bible they say they believe does greatly err. I guess they error either way. How great then is that?

September15 @ @ rRandyP comments: mFaithOfJesus kjv@Luke:15:11-32 A CERTAIN MAN HAD TWO SONS - Who are these sons? One son has served his dad all this time and has not transgressed his command. Every thing the dad yet possess is this son's. That takes every man/woman that I know out of the running. This son complains about the celebratory nature of his brother's return. The other son takes his inheritance in advance, squanders it, falls upon difficult times. This son would portray every single human in relation to God. This particular man realizes the error of his way and goes back to the dad even if to be a servant. This would portray every believer. So if one son is all people and the other is none, who is the other son? Who has not transgressed and retains their rightful inheritance that would now be confused and upset about the prodigal return of all repentant believing men? We heard in the previous parts of this discourse about the Angels rejoicing when a lost sinner is brought back by the Good Shepherd. Are all Angels that have not transgressed and still retain their rightful inheritance happy about mankind's celebrated return (unproven return) from such carnal reprobacy? I would say yes the Angels are happy, but with conscious effort. If this interpretation is true it would also suggest that the merriment amongst friends (like believers) is another area of initial angelic contention. It is better understood as the joy of the dad for the sons return being enjoyed amongst them rather than the friends carousing at the dad's expense. The faith of our Lord not only has to deal with the hearts and sincere feelings of men, but also of the Heavenly host. It would be easy for the dad to become so consumed by the actions of the lost son so as to diminish the sincerity and loyalty of the other. The righteousness of our Lord is that His mind/designs is always on both.

October8 @ @ rRandyP comments: mFaithOfJesus kjv@Luke:21:5-38 POSSESS YOUR SOULS - At a time when all of this is happening around you the command is "In your patience possess ye your souls". It would be easy for the heart to be over charged, men's hearts failing them for fear, being distress and perplexed. This is not however the heart of the follower of Jesus. Listen to the commands stated here - go ye not therefore after them, be not terrified, settle it therefore in your hearts, in your patience possess your souls, then look up, lift hands, know that the kingdom is nigh, take heed to yourselves, watch ye therefore, pray always to be found worthy. It would be easy for the mind to chase after only the maze of prophetical details. One could ask how are all these odd un-connectable details ever connect to be fulfilled. The Jews looked upon the earlier messianic prophecies the same way and saw the near impossibility of putting all the prophetic pieces together. So much so that they missed the actual fulfillment happening before their eyes in real time. It was really quite easy to put all the many pieces together once we saw how easily God fulfilled them. These end time prophecies could very well be the same for us; illogical or impossible to see as one completed puzzle, but there is no doubt God will have an easy time preforming them all as one as well. More than the individual details revealed, we should consider that within the many details is a fairly straight forward way of keeping ones head through the time to come; obey the commandments contained therein. They are nearly the same commands that would see us through most any other trial or personal tribulation. One other thought. When this time comes what has ever happened to all the tolerant secularists and intellectuals? What has happened to humanism and pacifism and the great enlightenment? Why are they attacking the elect so? Could it be that they cannot withstand the terrors and perplexities of what is come? The faith of our Lord calls a whole lot upon the obedience of these end time saints. The things that they are asked to do and suffer is almost for to shame to us who have it so good now. It may not be their time now, but it certainly is our time now. What have we been asked to do and suffer? Should not we get to doing it before this time sneaks up unawares?

December29 @ @ rRandyP comments: mFaithOfJesus kjv@John:20:24-31 BECAUSE THOU HAST SEEN - What would of happened with Thomas had Jesus not returned for Him? Thomas would have to come into his belief just like any other of us; by the testimony of others. The thing is that there are plenty of Thomas's out there that have their mind fixed that there is nothing in these testimonies to believe, that it is something that they will have to see and feel for themselves. Is Jesus obligated to return for them as well? The thing is that that don't really need to see and feel in so many other areas of their lives, why is it so important to them in this particular case? They will take another's word when it comes to politics. They will take another's word when it comes to economics, investments, history, future prediction, court testimony, science, global warming, etc... They will also swallow rumor and innuendo and false premise and distortion and murmuring and intimidation and unjust balance. Why is it not their intellectual creed in these cases? The point is that we try intellectually to be these things and to a certain respect we are, but the reality is that it is close to impossible to be this in the broadest respect. Truth is that we are inescapably made to rely upon the testimonies and opinions of others. Yes it is difficult and error prone and requires discernment; even trust. Yes others have their personal motives and view points and see the same event with dissimilar details. But for men like Thomas (well meaning though they think that they are) to say to the others "no, I won't allow your word even into my preliminary consideration" or "you all are liars" or "this is something so much different than what Jesus told us that would happen; I think you are all reaching" such is not much more than self inflating pride. So you won't believe until you see for yourself. Well where were you Thomas when the rest of us saw Him? How many times do you think Thomas that He has to come back when you just happen to show up? Is Jesus really obligated to meet you on your terms and with your objections? In a sense it is important for the over all record that there was dissent observed in the group, at least for us that long after would follow, but in Thomas's case it is merely a stroke of God's grace that he was given another opportunity to satisfy his hypocritical and prideful demands. What if Jesus had not come to any disciple? What if He had appeared to the common public or to Pilate and Ananias instead? Would that have changed the fact of our Lord's resurrection? The faith of our Lord is in the testimony of others testifying to the veracity of His word. He didn't even attempt to write it down Himself. He may be the only major world messianic figure that went about it this way. Such a defense would be more than proper in a court of law. Why would it not in the court of individual belief?