March17 @ @ rRandyP comments: mFaithOfJesus kjv@Matthew:19:1-12 LET NO MAN - The answer seems fairly simple, Let no man. There are three test given to this, one from the Pharisees trying to catch Him in a 'no right answer' dilemma, one from the Disciples thinking if it is really that tough then it would be better not to marry, one from their use of Moses making allowance for the hardness of men's heart. What is it that is so difficult about about marriage in the first place? Men's hearts. Why is it so difficult? The heart can not and will not be legislated against, it will always find reason and logical provision out. If it doesn't find a way out it will just make up a different legislation or none at all. Jesus is not trapped by either three, His statement stands above them all: What God has joined. The heart will find infidelity to be found whether married or eunuch or single. One cannot say that one form is better than the other unless one has received such personal direction from God and then it becomes a matter of personal fidelity to God. Where the Lord's answer is simple 'let no man' man's answer revealing 'but, but, but'. The faith of our Lord is in what God has joined together and to that be faithful. Man's faith is in everything else he can come up with not to remain faithful.
March30 @ @ rRandyP comments: mFaithOfJesus kjv@Matthew:22:1-14 MANY ARE CALLED - Of those called, there are those who refuse, there are those who make light of (some of which who strike back at the messengers), those that accept, those who come but are irreverent or ill prepared. The first thing to clarify is that we are not talking about the bride or any portion thereof rejecting Christ, these are strictly guests talked about here. The wedding is going to happen regardless and will be well attended by a most appreciative crowd kjv@Revelation:19:7-9. We are told even of bride's maids not having enough oil for the wait in their lamps having the door shut on them kjv@Matthew:25:1-10. If these people are outside of the bride then we must consider who the bride is. Some would say the Gentile Church; who then are the guests from the highways? Some would say the Raptured Church; where then would Tribulation Israel fit in? Some would say Israel and with Old Testament reasoning; but, she would have to be dressed in the righteousness of the saints kjv@Jeremiah:3:14. Israel would give cause for many of the invited to reject the invitation or run out of oil in the wait. Truth is that we may not know exactly who/what (as in institution) the bride consists, but, we know of the bridegroom. If we are merely guests it is best for us to be dressed as a reverent guest and not ourselves as a bride or a party crasher. If it is the institution instead that we are to witness then we best be reverent to the institution as well so as not the upset the groom. The faith of our Lord is in the marriage made by the Father. He has given Himself wholly and unreservedly for Her. If we see Her as tarnished or unacceptable it is very likely that we know nothing of who she is or have mis-identified Her altogether.
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.
April7 @ @ rRandyP comments: mFaithOfJesus kjv@Matthew:25:1-13 OIL/LAMPS - I guess that I have always figured that the oil was faith; half did not have enough faith to last the wait. How then could they ask the wise maids to share fuel for their lamps? In light of the previous passage the oil more likely is the doing of the Lord's work. the fulfilling of responsibility and obligation. How then could the wise share their fulfillment with those that have carelessly disregarded such? The lamp is then faith, a container filled or emptied of oil. The Lord's work is never done, it never runs out. The only reason a lamp would not have oil is because the lamp doe not contain the sense of urgent calling and diligent obligation. Oil has also often been associated with anointment, which fits in well with this analogy. How does one run out of God's anointing unless he does not hold himself to do what he has been anointed to do? Watch therefore. Watch for His coming? Watch yourself for what you are doing in light of His coming? Anointing carries the obligation to perform. The faith of our Lord has performed and is performing it's obligations. Many of those obligations he has now delegated to us so as to test and build us up. Many will be thankful of His performance and will be awaiting His marriage so as to attend, not everyone one waiting will be able to perform their duties then because of their failure now to be ready.
May8 @ @ rRandyP comments: mFaithOfJesus kjv@Mark:2:18-22 THE BRIDEGROOM - There are some key elements to consider here. There is the purpose, the occassion, the vessel and the substance. The purpose of our Lord has always been the same, to have the Father gather all things back unto Him. Along the timeline of achieving said purpose, different occassions are brought up nessecitating different vessels and substance. Take the illustration of wine. There is wine for everyday events, there is wine for very special events. Approaching the first coming of Jesus a certain container and substance was called for. Now that He has come in person with the intention to marry a new and different container and substance is required, a vessel and substance of much greater honor as the occasion has dramatically shifted. Not that anything is wrong with the old wine, it has and continues to serve the overall purpose. It is not the purpose but, is a step toward the purpose. Pouring the new wine into the old container alongside the old substance is not good for either wine for the old container will burst, both substances will pour to the ground, the overall purpose will not be forwarded. The same truth can be illustrated in the original question as to fasting. The purpose is constant and moving forward, the occasion changes nessecitating totally new attitude of feasting, the occasion is promised to change again shortly, but, for that brief moment we had a glimps of the expectation and honor of being invitees/attendees of a most heavenly marriage banquet of our Lord. Don't get confused by the changing of vessel and substance as occasions are dynamically driven by His purpose. The faith of our Lord is much larger than the finite things our minds are left to consider. He attempts to illustrate them in terms that we can identify with, really though, how much do we actually understand? Just because it is bigger than we can understand doesn't mean that it doesn't exist or is anything less. Wine/Fasting/Sabbath/Law, these are but things to get us to understand slight as that may be His big big picture.
May23 @ @ rRandyP comments: mFaithOfJesus kjv@Mark:6:14-29 AND THEREFORE - How do you explain Jesus? We see how vulnerable human reasoning in this passage. We have the reasoning King Herod, Herodias, her daughter, and others. Each have their bend. Some rationale is being bent by guilt/fear/drunken enticement/exaggerated commitments/justifying unlawful marriages. Other rationale is being bent by retribution/scheming/manipulation/deceit. Anothers' rationale is bent by the vanity of youth/sexual seduction/promiscuity and either a naivete or collusion of her mother's true intents. Others are bent by misinterpreted scripture or myth. All of this and more works against John and now Jesus. People like to think that they are free to make the right choices, that discernment and reasoning is their particular even inherent strength; it is simply not true. The carnal mind is at enmity against the spiritual, the closest it can come to being right is a counterfeit substitution of what God himself has chosen to reveal. Much of that is hidden inside parables and prophecies and large millennium wide swaths of history so that it can't be counterfeited and so that only true diligent seekers can be brought to it. In our own lives the question must be where is our rationale being bent? What sin or carnal trait is obstructing or altering the course of spiritual insight? What keeps us from true discernment of the facts and road map before us? The faith of our Lord is implied in this passage, implied that He knows what He is up against/what we are up against that He must save us from. When He contrasts light to darkness and groups all of mankind into darkness this constant bend is much of what He is talking about. Worse yet people more love this darkness more than surrendering it to His light. They continue to use the same rationale to make the same decisions and take the same actions with the same insolence and self determination and kill off the things that contradict or counteract their torturous corruptions. Somehow they justify this all as being right vaguely aware if at all of what is actually occurring. AND THEREFORE and with this bend they attempt to explain away Jesus.
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?
![[pBiblx2]](/img/menu.png)
![[pBiblx2]](/img/pbiblx2_logo3.png){kind=logo}