Randy Green's Blog, page 444
April 29, 2013
Janus the Baptist? – Part 2
For all the prophets and the Law prophesied until John [Matthew 11:13].
We concluded our last study by observing how the Roman god Janus signified the end of one thing and the start of another thing. This concept has great bearing on the text quoted to begin this study. The Covenant of Law lasted until John Baptist arrived on the scene. Suddenly the Covenant of Grace took center stage, whether it was evident to folks at the time or not. Can anyone say “Janus the Baptist”?
The period of time from John the Baptist until the day of Pentecost fifty days after Jesus rose out of death was a sort of transition period. God sent His Son Jesus into the world, Jesus the God-man, in fulfillment of His promise to provide mankind with the seed of the woman. Jesus is Israel’s promised Messiah. Jesus is the prophet like Moses (Deut.18:15). Jesus is the One who implemented the Covenant of Grace (John 1:17).
John the Baptist was the person sent from God to identify the Messiah. John baptized people as a sign of repentance, in order to prepare them for the Messiah when He appeared. Then John identified Jesus as the Messiah, after which he directed people to follow Jesus their Messiah.
This means John began his ministry while Israel was under the Covenant of Law, but he departed this earth after the Covenant of Grace was being proclaimed by Jesus. Ergo, the time of John the Baptist was a transition period between the Covenant of Law and the Covenant of Grace. This made John the Baptist a sort of Janus. Janus the Baptist… Has a nice ring to it.
The transition period ended and the Covenant of Grace came in full force, when the Church was born on Pentecost. The birth of the Church signified the temporary setting aside of the nation of Israel as the people through whom God would carry out His plan for the earth. From that time until the Rapture of the Church at the end of the Church Age, the Church contains the people through whom God is carrying on His work on earth.
The Law came through Moses and was given to the Israelites as the legal code for the Promised Land while Israel dwelt there. Grace came through Messiah Jesus and is given to the Church during the Church Age.
This is why Jesus declared that the the Old Covenant was preached until John the Baptist came on the scene. John introduced Jesus the Messiah to Israel under the Law. Jesus did several things as the Messiah of Israel and Savior of the world (i.e., the seed of the woman). Here are some of them:
1. He fulfilled the Law for Israel
2. He died on the cross to pay the penalty for mankind’s sins
3. He rose out of death to provide forgiven sinners with new life
4. He ascended to heaven as the high priest for redeemed men
5. He sent the Holy Spirit to give birth to the Church
So why would anyone in his right mind want to put himself under bondage to the Law and the prophets again? That’s lunacy! Jesus freed us from bondage to the Law, enabling us to freely live for Him in holiness.
The Law and the prophets lasted until John the Baptist. John’s long been gone. Now is the day of grace. Believe on the Lord Jesus and you shall be saved!
To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Deuteronomy: Volume 5 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. To purchase my books please go to:
http://www.amazon.com/-/e/B005PJ761C
https://sites.google.com/site/heavenl...
We concluded our last study by observing how the Roman god Janus signified the end of one thing and the start of another thing. This concept has great bearing on the text quoted to begin this study. The Covenant of Law lasted until John Baptist arrived on the scene. Suddenly the Covenant of Grace took center stage, whether it was evident to folks at the time or not. Can anyone say “Janus the Baptist”?
The period of time from John the Baptist until the day of Pentecost fifty days after Jesus rose out of death was a sort of transition period. God sent His Son Jesus into the world, Jesus the God-man, in fulfillment of His promise to provide mankind with the seed of the woman. Jesus is Israel’s promised Messiah. Jesus is the prophet like Moses (Deut.18:15). Jesus is the One who implemented the Covenant of Grace (John 1:17).
John the Baptist was the person sent from God to identify the Messiah. John baptized people as a sign of repentance, in order to prepare them for the Messiah when He appeared. Then John identified Jesus as the Messiah, after which he directed people to follow Jesus their Messiah.
This means John began his ministry while Israel was under the Covenant of Law, but he departed this earth after the Covenant of Grace was being proclaimed by Jesus. Ergo, the time of John the Baptist was a transition period between the Covenant of Law and the Covenant of Grace. This made John the Baptist a sort of Janus. Janus the Baptist… Has a nice ring to it.
The transition period ended and the Covenant of Grace came in full force, when the Church was born on Pentecost. The birth of the Church signified the temporary setting aside of the nation of Israel as the people through whom God would carry out His plan for the earth. From that time until the Rapture of the Church at the end of the Church Age, the Church contains the people through whom God is carrying on His work on earth.
The Law came through Moses and was given to the Israelites as the legal code for the Promised Land while Israel dwelt there. Grace came through Messiah Jesus and is given to the Church during the Church Age.
This is why Jesus declared that the the Old Covenant was preached until John the Baptist came on the scene. John introduced Jesus the Messiah to Israel under the Law. Jesus did several things as the Messiah of Israel and Savior of the world (i.e., the seed of the woman). Here are some of them:
1. He fulfilled the Law for Israel
2. He died on the cross to pay the penalty for mankind’s sins
3. He rose out of death to provide forgiven sinners with new life
4. He ascended to heaven as the high priest for redeemed men
5. He sent the Holy Spirit to give birth to the Church
So why would anyone in his right mind want to put himself under bondage to the Law and the prophets again? That’s lunacy! Jesus freed us from bondage to the Law, enabling us to freely live for Him in holiness.
The Law and the prophets lasted until John the Baptist. John’s long been gone. Now is the day of grace. Believe on the Lord Jesus and you shall be saved!
To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Deuteronomy: Volume 5 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. To purchase my books please go to:
http://www.amazon.com/-/e/B005PJ761C
https://sites.google.com/site/heavenl...
April 28, 2013
Janus the Baptist? – Part 1
For all the prophets and the Law prophesied until John [Matthew 11:13].
It’s Final Four week, that time of the year when the four best men’s college basketball teams go at it to determine a national champion. Consider how men’s college basketball games are structured. There are two halves, with each consisting of twenty minutes, for a total of forty minutes per game.
Once a college player graduates, if he is fortunate enough to move on to the NBA, he discovers he must make some changes in his perception of the game. For one thing there are no more “halves”, and for another the game no longer lasts forty minutes. The NBA game is divided into quarters, with each consisting of twelve minutes, for a total of forty-eight minutes per game.
And then there is the matter of how many games are played in a season. For the college ranks the number hovers around thirty, but for the NBA it soars to eighty-two. Hmm. “30” versus “82”. That’s a lot of difference! So no longer are there around 30 games per year, each consisting of only forty minutes. Suddenly the one-time college player must play 82 games of forty-eight minutes each. Think those guys are worn down by the end of the regular season?
I thought about this when I read the quoted text which began our study today. College rules apply for a time, then suddenly new and entirely different rules apply for the NBA. So it was with the Covenant of Law versus the Covenant of Grace.
Jesus noted how long the Covenant of Law lasted when he declared, “all the prophets and the Law prophesied until John”. That would be the John of John Baptist fame. UNTIL JOHN, i.e., up until the time of John the Baptist, the Law and the prophets were in effect. The Old Covenant was God’s rule of Law for Israel.
Then suddenly the forty minute games became forty-eight minutes long, and the two halves transformed into four quarters. What once consisted of about 30 games suddenly metamorphosed into 82 games. Things were drastically different, you see, once John the Baptist came on the scene.
This calls to mind the Roman god Janus. Janus had two faces, with one facing behind and the other facing forward. The name “Janus” is where our month “January” derives its name. Janus looked to the past and to the future at the same time. Just as January 1 begins a new year by looking backward and then going forward, so too did the Roman god Janus. Janus signified the end of one thing and the start of another.
Oh, dear. We’ve come to the end of the line already. Let’s call it a day and begin afresh tomorrow. Some time alone with Jesus sounds about right just now. Won’t you join in?
To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Deuteronomy: Volume 5 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. To purchase my books please go to:
http://www.amazon.com/Randy-Green/e/B...
It’s Final Four week, that time of the year when the four best men’s college basketball teams go at it to determine a national champion. Consider how men’s college basketball games are structured. There are two halves, with each consisting of twenty minutes, for a total of forty minutes per game.
Once a college player graduates, if he is fortunate enough to move on to the NBA, he discovers he must make some changes in his perception of the game. For one thing there are no more “halves”, and for another the game no longer lasts forty minutes. The NBA game is divided into quarters, with each consisting of twelve minutes, for a total of forty-eight minutes per game.
And then there is the matter of how many games are played in a season. For the college ranks the number hovers around thirty, but for the NBA it soars to eighty-two. Hmm. “30” versus “82”. That’s a lot of difference! So no longer are there around 30 games per year, each consisting of only forty minutes. Suddenly the one-time college player must play 82 games of forty-eight minutes each. Think those guys are worn down by the end of the regular season?
I thought about this when I read the quoted text which began our study today. College rules apply for a time, then suddenly new and entirely different rules apply for the NBA. So it was with the Covenant of Law versus the Covenant of Grace.
Jesus noted how long the Covenant of Law lasted when he declared, “all the prophets and the Law prophesied until John”. That would be the John of John Baptist fame. UNTIL JOHN, i.e., up until the time of John the Baptist, the Law and the prophets were in effect. The Old Covenant was God’s rule of Law for Israel.
Then suddenly the forty minute games became forty-eight minutes long, and the two halves transformed into four quarters. What once consisted of about 30 games suddenly metamorphosed into 82 games. Things were drastically different, you see, once John the Baptist came on the scene.
This calls to mind the Roman god Janus. Janus had two faces, with one facing behind and the other facing forward. The name “Janus” is where our month “January” derives its name. Janus looked to the past and to the future at the same time. Just as January 1 begins a new year by looking backward and then going forward, so too did the Roman god Janus. Janus signified the end of one thing and the start of another.
Oh, dear. We’ve come to the end of the line already. Let’s call it a day and begin afresh tomorrow. Some time alone with Jesus sounds about right just now. Won’t you join in?
To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Deuteronomy: Volume 5 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. To purchase my books please go to:
http://www.amazon.com/Randy-Green/e/B...
April 27, 2013
Who Turned Out the Lights? – Part 3
Let your light shine before men in such a way that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in heaven [Matthew 5:16].
We concluded our study yesterday by noting how the kingdom of God on earth used to be located in Israel in the Temple in Jerusalem. Because of Israel’s idolatry the Lord vacated the Temple and returned to heaven. Thenceforth God’s kingdom was no longer on earth. It was in heaven.
This is why Matthew, in writing his gospel narrative to the Hebrews, makes reference to the “kingdom of heaven” and not to the “kingdom of God”. Once upon a time God’s kingdom on earth was Israel, but no longer. Back then the Hebrews referred to the kingdom of God, but no more. So neither did Matthew.
It was quite otherwise for the Gentiles, however. They were never a part of God’s kingdom. Only Israel was. Any Gentile who wanted to be a part of God’s kingdom back then had to convert to Judaism and become a full-fledged Jewish proselyte. He had to renounce being a Gentile of whatever nationality and become a Jew, period.
All peoples of the world, back then and still today, recognize a god or gods of some sort or other. Everyone knows their god has his kingdom. The phrase the “kingdom of God” is therefore universal. This is why the three gospel writers other than Matthew identify God’s kingdom by the phrase “kingdom of God”. They wrote to the Gentiles.
When Matthew recorded the Sermon on the Mount, he wrote how Jesus referred to the Father “in heaven”. God no longer was on earth. He now ruled from heaven because the time of the Gentiles was in full swing on the earth.
God’s people, the Israelites, were no longer a sovereign nation. At the time the Romans ruled them. King YHWH (the Lord) vacated His throne on earth as chastisement to His people for their idolatry. Until the time of the Gentiles is fulfilled, God’s kingdom will continue to be in heaven, not on the earth.
This doesn’t mean that God is no longer in control on the earth. It means His visible presence is no longer on the earth. It used to be so in the tent of meeting in the midst of Israel’s camp. Later His visible presence appeared in the Temple in Jerusalem.
But not until the end of the Great Tribulation and the Second Coming of Jesus to the earth will God’s kingdom be on earth again. That time will signal the end of the time of the Gentiles. At that time the Lord Jesus will sit on His throne in Jerusalem and rule the earth with a rod of iron. He will take up His people Israel once again, and every promise to the Israelites not yet fulfilled will be fulfilled during the Millennium.
These are exciting realities taught in the Bible, dear friends. I trust your heart is palpitating from such revelations. I do hope you are excited for this to transpire and watching for it. May the Lord Jesus Christ be praised!
To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Joshua: Volume 6 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. To purchase my books please go to:
http://www.amazon.com/Randy-Green/e/B...
We concluded our study yesterday by noting how the kingdom of God on earth used to be located in Israel in the Temple in Jerusalem. Because of Israel’s idolatry the Lord vacated the Temple and returned to heaven. Thenceforth God’s kingdom was no longer on earth. It was in heaven.
This is why Matthew, in writing his gospel narrative to the Hebrews, makes reference to the “kingdom of heaven” and not to the “kingdom of God”. Once upon a time God’s kingdom on earth was Israel, but no longer. Back then the Hebrews referred to the kingdom of God, but no more. So neither did Matthew.
It was quite otherwise for the Gentiles, however. They were never a part of God’s kingdom. Only Israel was. Any Gentile who wanted to be a part of God’s kingdom back then had to convert to Judaism and become a full-fledged Jewish proselyte. He had to renounce being a Gentile of whatever nationality and become a Jew, period.
All peoples of the world, back then and still today, recognize a god or gods of some sort or other. Everyone knows their god has his kingdom. The phrase the “kingdom of God” is therefore universal. This is why the three gospel writers other than Matthew identify God’s kingdom by the phrase “kingdom of God”. They wrote to the Gentiles.
When Matthew recorded the Sermon on the Mount, he wrote how Jesus referred to the Father “in heaven”. God no longer was on earth. He now ruled from heaven because the time of the Gentiles was in full swing on the earth.
God’s people, the Israelites, were no longer a sovereign nation. At the time the Romans ruled them. King YHWH (the Lord) vacated His throne on earth as chastisement to His people for their idolatry. Until the time of the Gentiles is fulfilled, God’s kingdom will continue to be in heaven, not on the earth.
This doesn’t mean that God is no longer in control on the earth. It means His visible presence is no longer on the earth. It used to be so in the tent of meeting in the midst of Israel’s camp. Later His visible presence appeared in the Temple in Jerusalem.
But not until the end of the Great Tribulation and the Second Coming of Jesus to the earth will God’s kingdom be on earth again. That time will signal the end of the time of the Gentiles. At that time the Lord Jesus will sit on His throne in Jerusalem and rule the earth with a rod of iron. He will take up His people Israel once again, and every promise to the Israelites not yet fulfilled will be fulfilled during the Millennium.
These are exciting realities taught in the Bible, dear friends. I trust your heart is palpitating from such revelations. I do hope you are excited for this to transpire and watching for it. May the Lord Jesus Christ be praised!
To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Joshua: Volume 6 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. To purchase my books please go to:
http://www.amazon.com/Randy-Green/e/B...
April 26, 2013
Who Turned Out the Lights? – Part 2
Let your light shine before men in such a way that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in heaven [Matthew 5:16].
Yesterday we noted the distinction in Matthew’s gospel narrative, when compared to the other three gospel accounts. Only Matthew makes reference to the “kingdom of heaven”. The other three accounts refer to the “kingdom of God”. Both expressions refer to God’s kingdom. The difference between them lies in the words “God” and “heaven”. Let’s continue our vetting of this topic now.
The context for Matthew is that he wrote to the Hebrew people, while the other three wrote to the Gentiles (i.e., everyone else). To understand why Matthew refers to God’s kingdom as the “kingdom of heaven”, we need to examine the understanding of the Hebrew people of the day. This is to be discovered in the Old Testament.
The Gentiles didn’t know or even have the Hebrew Scriptures, so they weren’t influenced by its theological instruction. The Hebrews were steeped in their Scriptures however. Consequently their entire comprehension of theology and anything spiritual was formed from the instruction found in the Old Testament. So let us betake ourselves to a brief overview of the Old Testament.
The Lord saw that all the peoples of the world walked away from Him to do their own thing. They twisted the truths He taught mankind about Himself and eternity, creating their own set of beliefs about gods and idols and religion. All mankind became idolaters and heathens, falling into the most despicable degradations imaginable.
So the Lord called one man out of all the peoples of the world, Abram by name, and created a new nation from him. That would be the Israelites, by the way. He served as their King and gave them His laws, the Law of Moses. He also gave them some real estate to serve as their national location, viz., the Promised Land.
This land was located smack dab in the middle of the two major empires back in the day, viz., Egypt and Mesopotamia. Israel was the Lord’s witness to the world about the truths of the one true God. The rest of the world’s peoples could have “read” the Israelites to learn the truth about God and what He expected of mankind.
Alas, but the Israelites were sinners just like all the Gentiles. It wasn’t long before they stopped reading their Scriptures and obeying the Word of God. Soon they were indistinguishable from the Gentiles, and God’s witness was as non-existent in Israel as it was in all the world.
So the Lord sent His people, the Israelites, into exile in Babylon. Before that time the tent of meeting and later the Temple served as the location of the Lord’s visible presence on earth. Of course this location was in the midst of the camp of Israel and later within the confines of Israel’s geographical borders. Its final site was in Jerusalem atop Mount Moriah (aka Mount Zion).
When the Babylonians captured Jerusalem, they sacked the city and burned the Temple. Ezekiel had a vision of the Lord leaving the Temple and returning to heaven. Thenceforth King Yahweh (aka the Lord) no longer dwelt on earth in His kingdom of Israel. The light of the world went out when the Shekinah glory returned to heaven.
Accordingly the Israelites no longer knew God’s kingdom as the kingdom of God on earth. Thereafter they recognized His kingdom as existing no longer on earth but in heaven because King YHWH exited His throne in the Temple and returned to heaven. Ergo, to the Hebrews back in the day, God’s kingdom was the “kingdom of heaven”.
We must desist now and take our rest. We will finish this topic on the morrow. Enjoy your time with Jesus now.
To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Joshua: Volume 6 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. To purchase my books please go to:
http://www.amazon.com/Randy-Green/e/B...
Yesterday we noted the distinction in Matthew’s gospel narrative, when compared to the other three gospel accounts. Only Matthew makes reference to the “kingdom of heaven”. The other three accounts refer to the “kingdom of God”. Both expressions refer to God’s kingdom. The difference between them lies in the words “God” and “heaven”. Let’s continue our vetting of this topic now.
The context for Matthew is that he wrote to the Hebrew people, while the other three wrote to the Gentiles (i.e., everyone else). To understand why Matthew refers to God’s kingdom as the “kingdom of heaven”, we need to examine the understanding of the Hebrew people of the day. This is to be discovered in the Old Testament.
The Gentiles didn’t know or even have the Hebrew Scriptures, so they weren’t influenced by its theological instruction. The Hebrews were steeped in their Scriptures however. Consequently their entire comprehension of theology and anything spiritual was formed from the instruction found in the Old Testament. So let us betake ourselves to a brief overview of the Old Testament.
The Lord saw that all the peoples of the world walked away from Him to do their own thing. They twisted the truths He taught mankind about Himself and eternity, creating their own set of beliefs about gods and idols and religion. All mankind became idolaters and heathens, falling into the most despicable degradations imaginable.
So the Lord called one man out of all the peoples of the world, Abram by name, and created a new nation from him. That would be the Israelites, by the way. He served as their King and gave them His laws, the Law of Moses. He also gave them some real estate to serve as their national location, viz., the Promised Land.
This land was located smack dab in the middle of the two major empires back in the day, viz., Egypt and Mesopotamia. Israel was the Lord’s witness to the world about the truths of the one true God. The rest of the world’s peoples could have “read” the Israelites to learn the truth about God and what He expected of mankind.
Alas, but the Israelites were sinners just like all the Gentiles. It wasn’t long before they stopped reading their Scriptures and obeying the Word of God. Soon they were indistinguishable from the Gentiles, and God’s witness was as non-existent in Israel as it was in all the world.
So the Lord sent His people, the Israelites, into exile in Babylon. Before that time the tent of meeting and later the Temple served as the location of the Lord’s visible presence on earth. Of course this location was in the midst of the camp of Israel and later within the confines of Israel’s geographical borders. Its final site was in Jerusalem atop Mount Moriah (aka Mount Zion).
When the Babylonians captured Jerusalem, they sacked the city and burned the Temple. Ezekiel had a vision of the Lord leaving the Temple and returning to heaven. Thenceforth King Yahweh (aka the Lord) no longer dwelt on earth in His kingdom of Israel. The light of the world went out when the Shekinah glory returned to heaven.
Accordingly the Israelites no longer knew God’s kingdom as the kingdom of God on earth. Thereafter they recognized His kingdom as existing no longer on earth but in heaven because King YHWH exited His throne in the Temple and returned to heaven. Ergo, to the Hebrews back in the day, God’s kingdom was the “kingdom of heaven”.
We must desist now and take our rest. We will finish this topic on the morrow. Enjoy your time with Jesus now.
To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Joshua: Volume 6 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. To purchase my books please go to:
http://www.amazon.com/Randy-Green/e/B...
April 25, 2013
Who Turned Out the Lights? – Part 1
Let your light shine before men in such a way that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in heaven [Matthew 5:16].
When preachers employ this text for a sermon, they exhort Christians to let God’s light shine through their lives to others. And they are quite correct in their understanding of the text. But there is another truth in the text which deserves honorable mention. This truth runs throughout the Gospel According to Matthew. We will assay it today.
The New Testament contains four Gospel accounts: Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. These are broken down in theology textbooks into two categories. On the one hand there is the Gospel According to John, on the other are the three synoptic gospel accounts: Matthew, Mark, and Luke.
The word “synoptic” comes from the Greek preposition “sun” which means “with” or “together with”, and the Greek word from which we derive “optics” or “optical”, which has to do with sight or vision or appearance. Hence the word “synoptic” refers to things which present the same appearance or vision.
Anyone who reads Matthew, Mark, and Luke, and then reads John, recognizes readily enough how John follows a different framework than the other three. Matthew, Mark, and Luke present the story of Jesus’ first advent in much the same light, even employing the same stories overall. Matthew, Mark, and Luke’s gospels are written as historical accounts.
John, contrariwise, presents the story of Jesus from a philosophical perspective, not a historical one. When we read the Gospel According to John, we are taken on flights into the heavenlies. We encounter visions of glory unlike the way Jesus’ life is recorded in the other three gospel accounts. The other three Gospel writers are quite pragmatic in their telling, while John is a visionary and who sees beyond the pragmatic to the deep things of God.
What we want to delve into today is a different dichotomy which occurs within the four gospel accounts:
1. kingdom of God
2. kingdom of heaven
Only Matthew refers to the “kingdom of heaven”, which he does predominantly in his account. He also makes mention of the “kingdom of God” a few times. The other three gospel accounts never speak of the “kingdom of heaven”, while they do point to the “kingdom of God” quite often.
Why this distinction? What does it mean? Right fine questions these and worthy of answers. Time’s a-wastin’! So let us betake ourselves to the answers.
Matthew’s gospel account was written to the Hebrew people. We won’t spend our time today proving this is true. Suffice it to say that many occurrences in Matthew’s account point to this reality. His emphasis can only be explained by recognition of this verity.
The other three gospel accounts, contrariwise, were written to the Gentiles (i.e., all non-Hebrews). The audience to whom Matthew wrote provides the answer as to why he alone uses the phrase “kingdom of heaven” rather than “kingdom of God”.
The difference in the two phrases is found in the words “heaven” and “God”. This leads to the logical query, “Why does Matthew refer to God’s kingdom as the ‘kingdom of heaven’?” It is obvious why the other three gospel authors identify God’s kingdom as the “kingdom of God”. We needn’t waste paper and ink (or computer bytes) to explain this! But Matthew’s reference, now that requires some deciphering.
Oh, but we must stop for the night and get our rest. We will continue this journey on the morrow. Enjoy some time with the Lord Jesus before calling it a day. See you tomorrow.
To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Joshua: Volume 6 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. To purchase my books please go to:
http://www.amazon.com/Randy-Green/e/B...
When preachers employ this text for a sermon, they exhort Christians to let God’s light shine through their lives to others. And they are quite correct in their understanding of the text. But there is another truth in the text which deserves honorable mention. This truth runs throughout the Gospel According to Matthew. We will assay it today.
The New Testament contains four Gospel accounts: Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. These are broken down in theology textbooks into two categories. On the one hand there is the Gospel According to John, on the other are the three synoptic gospel accounts: Matthew, Mark, and Luke.
The word “synoptic” comes from the Greek preposition “sun” which means “with” or “together with”, and the Greek word from which we derive “optics” or “optical”, which has to do with sight or vision or appearance. Hence the word “synoptic” refers to things which present the same appearance or vision.
Anyone who reads Matthew, Mark, and Luke, and then reads John, recognizes readily enough how John follows a different framework than the other three. Matthew, Mark, and Luke present the story of Jesus’ first advent in much the same light, even employing the same stories overall. Matthew, Mark, and Luke’s gospels are written as historical accounts.
John, contrariwise, presents the story of Jesus from a philosophical perspective, not a historical one. When we read the Gospel According to John, we are taken on flights into the heavenlies. We encounter visions of glory unlike the way Jesus’ life is recorded in the other three gospel accounts. The other three Gospel writers are quite pragmatic in their telling, while John is a visionary and who sees beyond the pragmatic to the deep things of God.
What we want to delve into today is a different dichotomy which occurs within the four gospel accounts:
1. kingdom of God
2. kingdom of heaven
Only Matthew refers to the “kingdom of heaven”, which he does predominantly in his account. He also makes mention of the “kingdom of God” a few times. The other three gospel accounts never speak of the “kingdom of heaven”, while they do point to the “kingdom of God” quite often.
Why this distinction? What does it mean? Right fine questions these and worthy of answers. Time’s a-wastin’! So let us betake ourselves to the answers.
Matthew’s gospel account was written to the Hebrew people. We won’t spend our time today proving this is true. Suffice it to say that many occurrences in Matthew’s account point to this reality. His emphasis can only be explained by recognition of this verity.
The other three gospel accounts, contrariwise, were written to the Gentiles (i.e., all non-Hebrews). The audience to whom Matthew wrote provides the answer as to why he alone uses the phrase “kingdom of heaven” rather than “kingdom of God”.
The difference in the two phrases is found in the words “heaven” and “God”. This leads to the logical query, “Why does Matthew refer to God’s kingdom as the ‘kingdom of heaven’?” It is obvious why the other three gospel authors identify God’s kingdom as the “kingdom of God”. We needn’t waste paper and ink (or computer bytes) to explain this! But Matthew’s reference, now that requires some deciphering.
Oh, but we must stop for the night and get our rest. We will continue this journey on the morrow. Enjoy some time with the Lord Jesus before calling it a day. See you tomorrow.
To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Joshua: Volume 6 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. To purchase my books please go to:
http://www.amazon.com/Randy-Green/e/B...
April 24, 2013
Proud Lawyers and Humble Saints – Part 2
Behold, as for the proud one, his soul is not right within him; but the righteous will live by his faith [Habakkuk 2:4].
In our last study we noted three positions which man can take with regard to eternal life. Two of them were cited by Habakkuk in the verse we quoted above. The other one, legality, was not. We already gave the Scriptural presentation of legality. Now let’s consider the other two positions man can take vis-à-vis salvation and eternal life.
Habakkuk penned his words in response to the Babylonians. Those fierce warriors were having a heyday. The peoples of the world were falling before them. No one could resist their mighty military.
But they were some of the worst idolaters ever! They perceived all their worldly success and victories as their own achievement. They were big and bad. They were self-made men. They conquered one nation after another, and they cruelly abused those they conquered. They needn’t fear, however, because they were invincible.
This is spelled p-r-i-d-e, PRIDE, dear friends. It is utter arrogance, and a concomitant disdain for fellow man accompanies it. They had their pantheon of Babylonian gods, yes, but those gods should consider themselves lucky to have the Babylonians in their service. “Just look at all we accomplished by our own prowess!” was the motto on the Babylonian seal.
Such was the way of Babylon, when it came to their eternal destiny. They were self-achievers, not by obeying the gods and keeping a set of laws, but by doing what they felt like because they were just that good! If anyone would ever make it to heaven or paradise or nirvana or wherever eternal life was, you just know it had to be them.
So much for the second position man can take vis-à-vis eternal life. This position, pride, winds up in the same place as does the first position, legality. Both pride and legality embrace the belief that man deserves eternal life because he is just that good. He earns his own way because he is good enough to do everything the Lord says.
The third and final position is faith. Faith has nothing to do with pride or legality. Faith is the opposite of deserving or earning eternal life. Faith begins with certain spiritual truths:
1. every man is a sinner
2. the wages of sin is death
3. ergo, every man must die, i.e., not have eternal life
4. the only way out is via a Savior
5. the Savior has no sin of His own for which to die
6. the death of the Savior pays the penalty for others’ sins
7. accepting the Savior’s payment for my sins affords me eternal life
Biblical faith is the way I accept the Savior’s payment for my sins. I don’t do anything to earn eternal life. The Savior already accomplished it for me. I don’t deserve eternal life because I am a sinner who deserves eternal death. The Savior has eternal life and freely provides me with it. I simply accept the Savior’s offer by believing His Word, the Bible. Voilà! Biblical faith.
We conclude our presentation of the three positions man can take with regard to eternal life. Which one do you take?
To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Leviticus: Volume 3 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. To purchase my books please go to:
http://www.amazon.com/Randy-Green/e/B...
In our last study we noted three positions which man can take with regard to eternal life. Two of them were cited by Habakkuk in the verse we quoted above. The other one, legality, was not. We already gave the Scriptural presentation of legality. Now let’s consider the other two positions man can take vis-à-vis salvation and eternal life.
Habakkuk penned his words in response to the Babylonians. Those fierce warriors were having a heyday. The peoples of the world were falling before them. No one could resist their mighty military.
But they were some of the worst idolaters ever! They perceived all their worldly success and victories as their own achievement. They were big and bad. They were self-made men. They conquered one nation after another, and they cruelly abused those they conquered. They needn’t fear, however, because they were invincible.
This is spelled p-r-i-d-e, PRIDE, dear friends. It is utter arrogance, and a concomitant disdain for fellow man accompanies it. They had their pantheon of Babylonian gods, yes, but those gods should consider themselves lucky to have the Babylonians in their service. “Just look at all we accomplished by our own prowess!” was the motto on the Babylonian seal.
Such was the way of Babylon, when it came to their eternal destiny. They were self-achievers, not by obeying the gods and keeping a set of laws, but by doing what they felt like because they were just that good! If anyone would ever make it to heaven or paradise or nirvana or wherever eternal life was, you just know it had to be them.
So much for the second position man can take vis-à-vis eternal life. This position, pride, winds up in the same place as does the first position, legality. Both pride and legality embrace the belief that man deserves eternal life because he is just that good. He earns his own way because he is good enough to do everything the Lord says.
The third and final position is faith. Faith has nothing to do with pride or legality. Faith is the opposite of deserving or earning eternal life. Faith begins with certain spiritual truths:
1. every man is a sinner
2. the wages of sin is death
3. ergo, every man must die, i.e., not have eternal life
4. the only way out is via a Savior
5. the Savior has no sin of His own for which to die
6. the death of the Savior pays the penalty for others’ sins
7. accepting the Savior’s payment for my sins affords me eternal life
Biblical faith is the way I accept the Savior’s payment for my sins. I don’t do anything to earn eternal life. The Savior already accomplished it for me. I don’t deserve eternal life because I am a sinner who deserves eternal death. The Savior has eternal life and freely provides me with it. I simply accept the Savior’s offer by believing His Word, the Bible. Voilà! Biblical faith.
We conclude our presentation of the three positions man can take with regard to eternal life. Which one do you take?
To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Leviticus: Volume 3 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. To purchase my books please go to:
http://www.amazon.com/Randy-Green/e/B...
April 23, 2013
Proud Lawyers and Humble Saints – Part 1
Behold, as for the proud one, his soul is not right within him; but the righteous will live by his faith [Habakkuk 2:4].
The phrase “the righteous will live by his faith” is quoted in the New Testament and is oft repeated. It is a key expression to express the Biblical concept of salvation by grace through faith. We would do well to give serious consideration to what the phrase teaches us about invisible spiritual reality.
There are three foundational positions for mankind to take in Scripture. Two of them wind up in the same place, while the other one finds eternal habitation in quite the opposite place. Here are the three:
1. pride
2. legality
3. faith
The first and third ones are presented in the quoted text with which we began this study. The other one, legality, isn’t. So let’s begin with it, shall we?
Leviticus 18: 5 reads,
So you shall keep My statutes and My judgments, by which a man may live if he does them; I am the Lord.
The Apostle Paul quoted this verse in Galatians 3:12. The Lord verbally proclaimed the Ten Commandments to the Israelites from atop Mount Sinai. What with all the smoke and fire, lightning and thunder and earthquake, the Israelites were petrified with fear.
They demanded of Moses that he keep God away from them. Let Moses go and fetch the Word of God from Him and then return and repeat it to them. They pledged to do everything the Lord demanded of them. But don’t let God near them anymore or else they’d die!
Here was the Lord, desiring to create a personal relationship between the Israelites and Himself, and the Israelites wanted none of it. They preferred a more high church approach—you know, some clergy to stand between the Lord and them, leaving them to perform some rituals while the clergy did the personal relationship part.
So the Lord acquiesced and gave them His Law through Moses. The numerous rules and regulations did not comprise many “laws”, of which they could pick and choose which to obey and which to ignore. All of the regulations in the Law of Moses were an indivisible whole. Obey all of it perfectly all the time, or else be a lawbreaker and thus be unfit to live with the Lord.
Hence the Law was not given to save anyone because no sinner can obey all of it perfectly all the time without any failure. The Law was given to show sinful man with his proud heart that he cannot save himself. Ergo, he needs a Savior. That was the purpose of the Law of Moses, and it was given only to the Israelites while they lived in the Promised Land.
Nonetheless, the Israelites were determined to earn their own salvation. They were determined to have a relationship with the Lord by keeping the Law. When they failed to obey the Law perfectly all the time without failure even once, they didn’t get it. They figured the Lord must grade on a curve to accommodate them. Such is the usual and typical thought process of sinful man with respect to salvation. It stems from the pride which lurks in sinful man’s heart.
This is a fine location to camp for the night. Let’s pitch our tents here and spend time alone with the Lord Jesus before falling asleep. We will meet around the camp fire tomorrow to finish this study.
To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Leviticus: Volume 3 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. To purchase my books please go to:
http://www.amazon.com/Randy-Green/e/B...
The phrase “the righteous will live by his faith” is quoted in the New Testament and is oft repeated. It is a key expression to express the Biblical concept of salvation by grace through faith. We would do well to give serious consideration to what the phrase teaches us about invisible spiritual reality.
There are three foundational positions for mankind to take in Scripture. Two of them wind up in the same place, while the other one finds eternal habitation in quite the opposite place. Here are the three:
1. pride
2. legality
3. faith
The first and third ones are presented in the quoted text with which we began this study. The other one, legality, isn’t. So let’s begin with it, shall we?
Leviticus 18: 5 reads,
So you shall keep My statutes and My judgments, by which a man may live if he does them; I am the Lord.
The Apostle Paul quoted this verse in Galatians 3:12. The Lord verbally proclaimed the Ten Commandments to the Israelites from atop Mount Sinai. What with all the smoke and fire, lightning and thunder and earthquake, the Israelites were petrified with fear.
They demanded of Moses that he keep God away from them. Let Moses go and fetch the Word of God from Him and then return and repeat it to them. They pledged to do everything the Lord demanded of them. But don’t let God near them anymore or else they’d die!
Here was the Lord, desiring to create a personal relationship between the Israelites and Himself, and the Israelites wanted none of it. They preferred a more high church approach—you know, some clergy to stand between the Lord and them, leaving them to perform some rituals while the clergy did the personal relationship part.
So the Lord acquiesced and gave them His Law through Moses. The numerous rules and regulations did not comprise many “laws”, of which they could pick and choose which to obey and which to ignore. All of the regulations in the Law of Moses were an indivisible whole. Obey all of it perfectly all the time, or else be a lawbreaker and thus be unfit to live with the Lord.
Hence the Law was not given to save anyone because no sinner can obey all of it perfectly all the time without any failure. The Law was given to show sinful man with his proud heart that he cannot save himself. Ergo, he needs a Savior. That was the purpose of the Law of Moses, and it was given only to the Israelites while they lived in the Promised Land.
Nonetheless, the Israelites were determined to earn their own salvation. They were determined to have a relationship with the Lord by keeping the Law. When they failed to obey the Law perfectly all the time without failure even once, they didn’t get it. They figured the Lord must grade on a curve to accommodate them. Such is the usual and typical thought process of sinful man with respect to salvation. It stems from the pride which lurks in sinful man’s heart.
This is a fine location to camp for the night. Let’s pitch our tents here and spend time alone with the Lord Jesus before falling asleep. We will meet around the camp fire tomorrow to finish this study.
To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Leviticus: Volume 3 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. To purchase my books please go to:
http://www.amazon.com/Randy-Green/e/B...
April 22, 2013
Scary Teddy Bears – Part 2
For behold, He who forms mountains and creates the wind and declares to man what are His thoughts, He who makes dawn into darkness and treads on the high places of the earth, the Lord God of hosts is His name [Amos 4:13].
We paused our last study by noting I am a human and my name is Randy. The “human” part is impersonal, the “Randy” part is quite otherwise. Let’s now see how this applies to the Divine Being.
The words “God” and “LORD” when used to identify the Deity, the Supreme Being, accomplishes the same function as the words “Randy the human” in identifying me. In the Bible when the Divine Being is referred to as “God”, the emphasis is upon His being the Creator, the high and mighty One Who is far above His creation, including mankind. It is impersonal, evoking dread in man and prompting us to draw back and move away from Him.
On the other hand when His name “LORD” is used, the emphasis is personal. It denotes man as having a personal relationship with the Supreme Being, as knowing Him personally and being involved with Him. It is a pleasant blessing, not an atmosphere of awkward and uneasy formality.
Such is the intimation presented by Amos’ usage of the phrase “the Lord God of hosts is His name”. The high and mighty Creator, the all-powerful and intimidating Supreme Being is inseparably bound together with the loving and personable Deity Who wants to have a relationship with man.
So how does this express itself in the remainder of the quoted text? Let’s assay Amos’ words and see for ourselves. First let’s hear the words which express personal relationship: He who…declares to man what are His thoughts.
Those words don’t leave the impression of the almighty Supreme Being calling into existence the heavens and the earth. They express the concept of the Divine One speaking to man and explaining Himself and His plans. It is personal. It is relationship. It is personal relationship. In theology textbooks this personal aspect of God’s character wears the appellation “immanence”.
Now for Amos’ words which express God as way up there in the sky and impersonal, far removed from man and unapproachable. Since there are considerable more words used to express this concept, we will employ a bulleted list:
• He who forms mountains and creates the wind
• He who makes dawn into darkness
• He who…treads on the high places of the earth
It should be readily evident to you how suchlike depictions of God differ drastically from the words “He who…declares to man what are His thoughts”. In the case of the bulleted list the Supreme Being is behaving as, well, a supreme being! He isn’t talking with man and explaining His purposes. He is creating mountains and wind and darkness, and He is walking around on the high places, far above man’s habitations. In theology textbooks this aspect of God’s character goes by the jargon “transcendence”.
The two aspects of God, the personal and impersonal, are true simultaneously. However, they only display themselves simultaneously to those humans who accept Him as their God, as their Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. With such folks He is indeed personal. At the blink of an eye He also marches into battle on their behalf as the mighty and invincible God.
Alas, but for those humans who reject Him as their Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, He only appears to them as the impersonal and not so friendly Judge of all the earth. They don’t win His favor or garner His blessings. They are under a curse for sin and, after the Millennium will stand before His tribunal, the great white throne, to be condemned eternally (cf., Revelation 20:5, 11-15).
This is not a topic which wins friends and influences people, dear souls. It is the Word of God nonetheless. We determine by our response to the Lord Jesus whether or not we know Him personally. My heart’s desire is that all men will be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth.
To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Genesis: Volume 1 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. To purchase my books please go to:
http://www.amazon.com/Randy-Green/e/B...
We paused our last study by noting I am a human and my name is Randy. The “human” part is impersonal, the “Randy” part is quite otherwise. Let’s now see how this applies to the Divine Being.
The words “God” and “LORD” when used to identify the Deity, the Supreme Being, accomplishes the same function as the words “Randy the human” in identifying me. In the Bible when the Divine Being is referred to as “God”, the emphasis is upon His being the Creator, the high and mighty One Who is far above His creation, including mankind. It is impersonal, evoking dread in man and prompting us to draw back and move away from Him.
On the other hand when His name “LORD” is used, the emphasis is personal. It denotes man as having a personal relationship with the Supreme Being, as knowing Him personally and being involved with Him. It is a pleasant blessing, not an atmosphere of awkward and uneasy formality.
Such is the intimation presented by Amos’ usage of the phrase “the Lord God of hosts is His name”. The high and mighty Creator, the all-powerful and intimidating Supreme Being is inseparably bound together with the loving and personable Deity Who wants to have a relationship with man.
So how does this express itself in the remainder of the quoted text? Let’s assay Amos’ words and see for ourselves. First let’s hear the words which express personal relationship: He who…declares to man what are His thoughts.
Those words don’t leave the impression of the almighty Supreme Being calling into existence the heavens and the earth. They express the concept of the Divine One speaking to man and explaining Himself and His plans. It is personal. It is relationship. It is personal relationship. In theology textbooks this personal aspect of God’s character wears the appellation “immanence”.
Now for Amos’ words which express God as way up there in the sky and impersonal, far removed from man and unapproachable. Since there are considerable more words used to express this concept, we will employ a bulleted list:
• He who forms mountains and creates the wind
• He who makes dawn into darkness
• He who…treads on the high places of the earth
It should be readily evident to you how suchlike depictions of God differ drastically from the words “He who…declares to man what are His thoughts”. In the case of the bulleted list the Supreme Being is behaving as, well, a supreme being! He isn’t talking with man and explaining His purposes. He is creating mountains and wind and darkness, and He is walking around on the high places, far above man’s habitations. In theology textbooks this aspect of God’s character goes by the jargon “transcendence”.
The two aspects of God, the personal and impersonal, are true simultaneously. However, they only display themselves simultaneously to those humans who accept Him as their God, as their Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. With such folks He is indeed personal. At the blink of an eye He also marches into battle on their behalf as the mighty and invincible God.
Alas, but for those humans who reject Him as their Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, He only appears to them as the impersonal and not so friendly Judge of all the earth. They don’t win His favor or garner His blessings. They are under a curse for sin and, after the Millennium will stand before His tribunal, the great white throne, to be condemned eternally (cf., Revelation 20:5, 11-15).
This is not a topic which wins friends and influences people, dear souls. It is the Word of God nonetheless. We determine by our response to the Lord Jesus whether or not we know Him personally. My heart’s desire is that all men will be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth.
To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Genesis: Volume 1 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. To purchase my books please go to:
http://www.amazon.com/Randy-Green/e/B...
April 21, 2013
Scary Teddy Bears – Part 1
For behold, He who forms mountains and creates the wind and declares to man what are His thoughts, He who makes dawn into darkness and treads on the high places of the earth, the Lord God of hosts is His name [Amos 4:13].
Once upon a time when I had a couple of teeny tiny tots to rear, I discovered a spiritual truth by means of experience. Sometimes I was Mr. Dad, with his course and stern voice and disciplinary disposition. At other times I was Nice Guy Dad, who took his kids to the recreation center and coached their basketball teams.
And you know what? Neither of my rug rats was ever confused by the split personality involved in proper parenting. Not once did we enjoy a time of play and relaxation at the rec center, and then come home to become discombobulated by the switch from Nice Guy Dad to Mr. Dad the rules enforcer. It just didn’t happen.
Do you know why? Well, it’s like this. Kids want to have fun with their parents, yes, they most certainly do. But if that’s all they get—if Dad and Mom are simply one of the gang of kids from the neighborhood—kids cannot help but feel insecure. They need guidance and protection from their parents. It’s why the Lord gave them parents!
In the quoted text which commenced this study, Amos acknowledged these two simultaneous attributes of God. God has them, which explains where we got them! We share with God these same two attributes. I believe it’s part of what the Bible labels “the image of God”.
There is a qualification to this as it applies to God, however. Amos identified God as “the Lord God of hosts is His name”. The two attributes don’t stand out in the case of “God”, at least as the Bible employs the identifier. In order for both attributes to receive honorable mention at the same time, the terminology for deity requires both the words “Lord” and “God”.
Allow me to explain. The word “God” is a term which identifies deity or the divine being. It is used in much the same way the word “human” or “human being” is used to identify humanity or man. Such is not the case with the word “Lord” in Scripture. The word “Lord” (written in the Bible as all capital letters, LORD) is the actual name of God.
Let me present an equivalent as applied to myself. I am a human being and my name is Randy. The word usage “the Lord God” as applied to me would be “Randy the human being”. God’s actual name is YHWH (aka Yahweh or Jehovah). In the English Bible His name is written as “LORD”. When you see those four capital letters used together in the Bible, recognize it as the actual name of God.
At times I have been addressed as “Pastor” or “Teacher” or “Reverend”. At other times I’ve been addressed as “Randy” or “Mr. Green”. What’s the difference? Well, the words “pastor”, “teacher” and “reverend” are not names. The words are impersonal, formal, stiff, and not necessarily friendly.
On the other hand the word “Randy” is my personal name. By using it another person is being personal with me. Perhaps he’s even taking undue liberties because he doesn’t know me and shouldn’t speak to me in such a personal way. But the word “Randy” when employed appropriately toward me is personal. It implies a relationship between the speaker and myself.
When both these aspects express themselves in a parent, a scary teddy bear materializes. But let us pause here and continue on the morrow. Enjoy your time with the Lord Jesus now.
To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Genesis: Volume 1 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. To purchase my books please go to:
http://www.amazon.com/Randy-Green/e/B...
Once upon a time when I had a couple of teeny tiny tots to rear, I discovered a spiritual truth by means of experience. Sometimes I was Mr. Dad, with his course and stern voice and disciplinary disposition. At other times I was Nice Guy Dad, who took his kids to the recreation center and coached their basketball teams.
And you know what? Neither of my rug rats was ever confused by the split personality involved in proper parenting. Not once did we enjoy a time of play and relaxation at the rec center, and then come home to become discombobulated by the switch from Nice Guy Dad to Mr. Dad the rules enforcer. It just didn’t happen.
Do you know why? Well, it’s like this. Kids want to have fun with their parents, yes, they most certainly do. But if that’s all they get—if Dad and Mom are simply one of the gang of kids from the neighborhood—kids cannot help but feel insecure. They need guidance and protection from their parents. It’s why the Lord gave them parents!
In the quoted text which commenced this study, Amos acknowledged these two simultaneous attributes of God. God has them, which explains where we got them! We share with God these same two attributes. I believe it’s part of what the Bible labels “the image of God”.
There is a qualification to this as it applies to God, however. Amos identified God as “the Lord God of hosts is His name”. The two attributes don’t stand out in the case of “God”, at least as the Bible employs the identifier. In order for both attributes to receive honorable mention at the same time, the terminology for deity requires both the words “Lord” and “God”.
Allow me to explain. The word “God” is a term which identifies deity or the divine being. It is used in much the same way the word “human” or “human being” is used to identify humanity or man. Such is not the case with the word “Lord” in Scripture. The word “Lord” (written in the Bible as all capital letters, LORD) is the actual name of God.
Let me present an equivalent as applied to myself. I am a human being and my name is Randy. The word usage “the Lord God” as applied to me would be “Randy the human being”. God’s actual name is YHWH (aka Yahweh or Jehovah). In the English Bible His name is written as “LORD”. When you see those four capital letters used together in the Bible, recognize it as the actual name of God.
At times I have been addressed as “Pastor” or “Teacher” or “Reverend”. At other times I’ve been addressed as “Randy” or “Mr. Green”. What’s the difference? Well, the words “pastor”, “teacher” and “reverend” are not names. The words are impersonal, formal, stiff, and not necessarily friendly.
On the other hand the word “Randy” is my personal name. By using it another person is being personal with me. Perhaps he’s even taking undue liberties because he doesn’t know me and shouldn’t speak to me in such a personal way. But the word “Randy” when employed appropriately toward me is personal. It implies a relationship between the speaker and myself.
When both these aspects express themselves in a parent, a scary teddy bear materializes. But let us pause here and continue on the morrow. Enjoy your time with the Lord Jesus now.
To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Genesis: Volume 1 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. To purchase my books please go to:
http://www.amazon.com/Randy-Green/e/B...
April 20, 2013
Vegetarian Delight – Part 2
Please test your servants for ten days, and let us be given some vegetables to eat and water to drink. Then let our appearance be observed in your presence and the appearance of the youths who are eating the king’s choice food; and deal with your servants according to what you see [Daniel 1:12-13].
Daniel and his three friends were slaves to ol’ King Neb of Babylon. He fed them food offered in sacrifice to his idols, a violation of God’s commandment against idolatry. They wanted a menu of only vegetables and water, but the person in charge of their food was afraid it would leave them sickly and he’d lose his head for it. What to do? It was a toughie.
Actually it wasn’t. It just took a bit of godly wisdom on Daniel’s part. He knew the Lord would help them not to defile themselves with the king’s food because they belonged to Him first and to ol’ King Neb a distant second. So Daniel asked the king’s steward in charge if he would feed him and his three Hebrew buddies only vegetables and water.
It’s like this. The heathens didn’t offer their gods vegetables and water. Ergo, any vegetables and water eaten by Daniel & friends would not have been sacrificed to the false gods of Babylon. Hence Daniel & friends would not be defiled by eating vegetables and drinking water. They would maintain their ritual purity, thus maintaining their relationship with the one true God YHWH.
But anyone of us who has lived for more than a day knows things seldom go as planned. The steward was loath to agree to Daniel’s menu request, notwithstanding how tactfully it was presented. He feared that vegetables and water alone would leave the Hebrews weak and sickly in appearance. In that case the Queen of Hearts, er, I mean ol’ King Neb would demand, “Off with his head!”
Refusing to take “No!” for an answer, Daniel deftly offered a test to prove the validity of his request. “Allow my three friends and me, O steward, to eat only vegetables and water for ten days. Then examine us to determine if we are healthy or sickly.” The steward took the bait, and the Hebrews had their kosher food for ten days.
Ten days came and ten days went, and the steward came too. He eyeballed the four Hebrews and couldn’t believe his eyes. The Hebrews ate only vegetables and water for ten days, while all the other slaves-in-training feasted on the rich food from the king’s table. Nonetheless the four Hebrews appeared much healthier than the other slaves, sporting a ruddy complexion and a sanguine disposition.
The steward figured he just hit the mother lode! It was a free pass into the good graces of the king. By his own astute judgment and wisdom the four Hebrews excelled all the others. He was a master chef par excellence. The king would be so proud of him…or that’s the way he planned to spin the tale anyway.
So the steward persisted with fetching vegetables and water as the Hebrew’s victuals, and the Hebrews persisted in growing healthy and wise. In fact it wasn’t long before Daniel was second in command in Babylon, and his three friends were not far below him either.
The moral of the story is a good one. Serve the Lord regardless of the consequences. He alone is God. There is none other. At the same time don’t be obnoxious in serving Him. Our service to the Lord Jesus is to be done in a way which represents Him, not our bad attitudes! If we reflect Him to others, they will be given two choices: either receive Him as their Savior or else reject Him.
In any case their decision will be vis-à-vis Him, not us personally. If they refuse to receive, it will be Him they reject. And the chances of them accepting Him go up exponentially, if only we have the wisdom to keep self in the background and Jesus on the front burner.
So let’s learn the moral to this story and exalt the Lord Jesus. Sounds like a plan. Let’s do it!
To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Deuteronomy: Volume 5 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. To purchase my books please go to:
http://www.amazon.com/Randy-Green/e/B...
Daniel and his three friends were slaves to ol’ King Neb of Babylon. He fed them food offered in sacrifice to his idols, a violation of God’s commandment against idolatry. They wanted a menu of only vegetables and water, but the person in charge of their food was afraid it would leave them sickly and he’d lose his head for it. What to do? It was a toughie.
Actually it wasn’t. It just took a bit of godly wisdom on Daniel’s part. He knew the Lord would help them not to defile themselves with the king’s food because they belonged to Him first and to ol’ King Neb a distant second. So Daniel asked the king’s steward in charge if he would feed him and his three Hebrew buddies only vegetables and water.
It’s like this. The heathens didn’t offer their gods vegetables and water. Ergo, any vegetables and water eaten by Daniel & friends would not have been sacrificed to the false gods of Babylon. Hence Daniel & friends would not be defiled by eating vegetables and drinking water. They would maintain their ritual purity, thus maintaining their relationship with the one true God YHWH.
But anyone of us who has lived for more than a day knows things seldom go as planned. The steward was loath to agree to Daniel’s menu request, notwithstanding how tactfully it was presented. He feared that vegetables and water alone would leave the Hebrews weak and sickly in appearance. In that case the Queen of Hearts, er, I mean ol’ King Neb would demand, “Off with his head!”
Refusing to take “No!” for an answer, Daniel deftly offered a test to prove the validity of his request. “Allow my three friends and me, O steward, to eat only vegetables and water for ten days. Then examine us to determine if we are healthy or sickly.” The steward took the bait, and the Hebrews had their kosher food for ten days.
Ten days came and ten days went, and the steward came too. He eyeballed the four Hebrews and couldn’t believe his eyes. The Hebrews ate only vegetables and water for ten days, while all the other slaves-in-training feasted on the rich food from the king’s table. Nonetheless the four Hebrews appeared much healthier than the other slaves, sporting a ruddy complexion and a sanguine disposition.
The steward figured he just hit the mother lode! It was a free pass into the good graces of the king. By his own astute judgment and wisdom the four Hebrews excelled all the others. He was a master chef par excellence. The king would be so proud of him…or that’s the way he planned to spin the tale anyway.
So the steward persisted with fetching vegetables and water as the Hebrew’s victuals, and the Hebrews persisted in growing healthy and wise. In fact it wasn’t long before Daniel was second in command in Babylon, and his three friends were not far below him either.
The moral of the story is a good one. Serve the Lord regardless of the consequences. He alone is God. There is none other. At the same time don’t be obnoxious in serving Him. Our service to the Lord Jesus is to be done in a way which represents Him, not our bad attitudes! If we reflect Him to others, they will be given two choices: either receive Him as their Savior or else reject Him.
In any case their decision will be vis-à-vis Him, not us personally. If they refuse to receive, it will be Him they reject. And the chances of them accepting Him go up exponentially, if only we have the wisdom to keep self in the background and Jesus on the front burner.
So let’s learn the moral to this story and exalt the Lord Jesus. Sounds like a plan. Let’s do it!
To further research this issue, I direct you to my book Deuteronomy: Volume 5 of Heavenly Citizens in Earthly Shoes. To purchase my books please go to:
http://www.amazon.com/Randy-Green/e/B...
