12/2/19

"THE BOOK OF PROVERBS" Wisdom Regarding Authority by Mark Copeland



"THE BOOK OF PROVERBS"

Wisdom Regarding Authority

INTRODUCTION

1. Throughout life, we must deal with the matter of authority...
   a. Sometimes we find ourselves in positions of authority (boss,
      parent, elder, president)
   b. Most of the time we find ourselves having to submit to authority
      (employee, child, citizen)

2. Wisdom regarding authority is a virtue often lacking...
   a. People with authority frequently do poorly, even abusing their authority
   b. People under authority don't always handle it gracefully, making
      their situation worse

3. In Proverbs, we find wisdom regarding authority...
   a. Mostly spoken in terms pertaining to the rule of a king or prince
   b. Which can easily be applied to other areas involving authority
      (work, family, church)

[In this study, we shall seek to summarize what is said in Proverbs
about the subject of authority, beginning with some...]

I. WISDOM FOR THOSE IN AUTHORITY

   A. THEIR DUTIES...
      1. To make judgments - Pr 16:10; 25:2
         a. Those in authority are often called upon to make decisions
         b. Decisions that affect those under their authority
      2. To administer justice - Pr 20:8,26; 29:4a,14
         a. Such is the responsibility of those in authority
         b. Not for their personal benefit, but for those under their authority
      -- Whether one is a king, a company CEO or manager, an elder, or a
         parent, God expects them to exercise authority with justice

   B. THEIR QUALITIES...
      1. They must be righteous - Pr 16:10,12
         a. Necessary to administer justice
         b. To judge righteously and fairly
      2. Free of evil influence - Pr 25:4-5
         a. Such as covetousness, the love of material things - Pr 28:15-16
         b. Such as bribery, the tool of many 'lobbyists' - Pr 29:4
         c. Such as women and alcohol, bane of many politicians and
            businessmen - Pr 31:1-5
      3. They must be fair and merciful - Pr 31:8-9
         a. For those unable to speak for themselves
         b. For those who are poor and needy
      -- Those in authority need the qualities that will ensure
         righteous and merciful judgment

[In other words, the same sort of judgment they would want if they
themselves were not in positions of authority!  Now for some...]

II. WISDOM FOR THOSE UNDER AUTHORITY

   A. THEIR DUTIES...
      1. To honor those in authority - Pr 24:21-22
         a. To fear (reverence, respect) them like we do the Lord
         b. Avoid those given to 'revolution', who often bring calamity
            on themselves
      2. To gain their favor, when possible and appropriate - Pr 16:15;
         19:12; 20:2
         a. For such favor can be a blessing
         b. And their wrath can be a curse
      -- Those in authority deserve our respect - for the position if
         not the occupant

   B. THEIR QUALITIES...
      1. Wise conduct, not shameful - Pr 14:35
      2. Righteous speech - Pr 16:13
      3. Purity of heart and graceful lips - Pr 22:11
      4. Excellence in one's work - Pr 22:29
      5. Self-control of one's passions and appetites - Pr 23:1-3
      6. Humility - Pr 25:6-7
      7. Patience and gentleness - Pr 25:15
      -- Such are the qualities that gain the favor of those in
         authority

CONCLUSION

1. If such wisdom regarding authority were commonplace...
   a. In nations
   b. In businesses
   c. In churches
   d. In families

2. Where those in authority...
   a. Fulfilled their duties with justice
   b. Were men and women of righteous conduct

3. Where those under authority...
   a. Respected those over them
   b. Gained the respect of those over them through their own conduct

Then how wonderful it would be!  With the aid of such wisdom as that
found in Proverbs, it can happen...


Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2016

eXTReMe Tracker 

Snails Kill Thousands by Kyle Butt, M.Div.





Snails Kill Thousands

by Kyle Butt, M.Div.


When we consider deadly animals, we normally think about venomous snakes, ferocious sharks, crocodiles, or bears. You might be surprised to learn that the animals or organisms most deadly to humans don’t match our mental picture of dangerous creatures. The creature that kills the most humans per year (between 750,000-1,000,000) is the lowly mosquito. Because of the various diseases it spreads, such as malaria, mosquitoes are the animal kingdom’s leading human killers. Another creature that has proven to be extremely deadly is the harmless looking freshwater snail. Freshwater snails are host to dangerous parasites known as cercariae that cause an infection in humans known as schistosomiasis. Millions of people each year ingest this parasite through contaminated water,1 and about 10,000 die every year.2 While contamination from water is the most common cause of the infection, another way the parasite can spread is when a person consumes raw or undercooked snail meat.
The fact that many snails carry parasites that are harmful to humans turns out to be another piece of evidence that shows the Bible is the inspired Word of God. When we look at the food regulations written by Moses in approximately 1450 B.C., we find that the Israelites had specific laws about what they could and could not eat. One of those regulations dealt with animals found in water. The Law permitted the Israelites to eat any animal that had both fins and scales, but any creature without both fins and scales was “an abomination” to the Israelites. They were told not to eat them or touch their dead bodies (Leviticus 11:9-12). Land-living snails were also prohibited (Leviticus 11:41-42). Some people contend that the food laws had nothing to do with health regulations and were merely ceremonial, religious rituals. We have documented at length that such is not the case and that the food regulations were specifically designed to help the Israelites avoid many of the diseases that plagued the nations around them.3
When Moses led the Israelites out of the land of Egypt, there were approximately 603,000 males ages 20 years old and above (Numbers 1:46). By adding to that the number of women of the same ages, along with those who were younger, we arrive at an estimated two million Israelites exiting Egypt. Due to their disobedience, they wandered around in the wilderness for 40 years. Many of the laws found in Exodus-Deuteronomy were sanitation, quarantine, hygiene, and disease regulation designed to keep the Israelites healthy and safe during their wilderness wandering and their future lives in Canaan. These regulations exhibited a scientific knowledge that was far beyond any nation’s ability at the time to have acquired through the natural course of human understanding. This characteristic is referred to as scientific foreknowledge and is an attribute of divine inspiration. In short, there is no possible way Moses could have known the science that lies behind the food, hygiene, and sanitation regulations in the books he penned.
Snails provide an excellent example of scientific foreknowledge. Both water-living snails and land-living snails are highly susceptible hosts to numerous parasites. In an article titled “Some Health Risks With Eating Giant African Land Snail,” entomologist Paul Skelley stated, “Most of the infections and deaths from snail-transmitted diseases apparently come from eating raw or undercooked snails or ingesting slime residue left on fresh fruits and vegetables.”4 Skelley went on to say, “In my opinion, eating wild snails should only be done in an ‘eat-snail-or-die’ survival situation” due to the high probability that most snails host dangerous parasites. The CDC put out a blog about snails and slugs carrying a parasite called the rat lungworm that can cause meningitis, blindness, and death in humans. The author said, “Humans become infected by ingesting raw or undercooked mollusks.”5
With two million Israelites moving around in the wilderness, it would have been extremely difficult to properly cook all the food they consumed. There were no meat thermometers that could be used to guarantee that snails, pork, or oysters were cooked to the necessary temperature to kill parasites. Since God provided manna every day for the Israelites to eat, they were not in any type of “eat-snail-or-die” situation. The consumption of meat and animals would have been for the purpose of providing variety to their diets and not at all necessary for survival. Therefore, the best approach to what should or should not be eaten would be to prohibit the consumption of any creatures that had a high probability of carrying parasites or diseases.
Moses could not have taken a microscope to meat samples to identify which animals carry tiny parasites or which animals (such as bats, see Leviticus 11:196) are remarkably prone to diseases such as rabies. We might expect that Moses could have guessed a few such instances correctly. But to have accurately listed numerous regulations that contain in them safety measures that were not understood by any nation until literally thousands of years after the books were written? That is superhuman. That is Divine! It is not surprising that Moses told the Israelites, “Surely I have taught you statutes and judgments, just as the Lord my God commanded me, that you should act according to them in the land which you go to posses. Therefore be careful to observe them; for this is your wisdom and your understanding in the sight of the peoples who will hear all these statutes, and say ‘Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people’” (Deuteronomy 4:5-6).

ENDNOTES

1 Christopher Stephens, “10 Creepy Snails that Will Ruin Your Day,” Listversehttp://listverse.com/2015/01/30/10-exceptional-creepy-or-dangerous-snails/.
2 “What Kind of Health Risks Do Snails Pose?” https://www.curejoy.com/content/diseases-caused-by-snails/.
3 Kyle Butt (2007), Behold! The Word of God, Apologetics Press, http://apologeticspress.org/pdfs/e-books_pdf/Behold%20the%20Word%20of%20God.pdf,  pp. 103-130.
4 Trina Sargalski (2013), “Health Risks With Eating Giant African Snails,” http://wlrn.org/post/some-health-risks-eating-giant-african-land-snail.
5 Alex de Silva (2009), “Snails, Slugs, and Semi-Slugs: A Parasitic Disease in Paradise,” Center for Disease Control, https://blogs.cdc.gov/publichealthmatters/2009/04/snails-slugs-and-semi-slugs-a-parasitic-disease-in-paradise/.
6  Butt, p. 124.

Simcha Jacobovici and the Quest to Find Who Wrote the Bible by Dewayne Bryant, Ph.D.





Simcha Jacobovici and the Quest to Find Who Wrote the Bible

by Dewayne Bryant, Ph.D.


The media is often critical of the Bible. This is nothing new to Christians, who can see mischaracterizations of the Bible virtually everyday. Documentaries and television programs describe the Bible in terms that most Christians find strange. Interviews often feature leftist scholars who seem to specialize in casting doubt on God’s Word. There are a few refreshing voices in the media that take a rather high view of the Bible, however.
Simcha Jacobovici is a Jewish Canadian filmmaker who hosts the television program the “Naked Archaeologist.” His goal is to “demystify” archaeology, thus making it “naked” for all to see. Naked archaeology is like the naked truth—stripped of preconceptions and exposed for all to see. To most of us living in the United States, he is familiar for his documentaries The Exodus Decoded and The Lost Tomb of Jesus. Both programs offered a new take on the biblical texts that differed from traditional, straightforward interpretations. Yet Jacobovici is also an Orthodox Jew and holds the Bible in the highest esteem. This makes him something of an enigma for many viewers.
The subject of one of Jacobovici’s television programs is to find proof underlying the events recorded in the biblical text. The Biblical Archaeology Review Web site has a free episode of “The Naked Archaeologist” entitled, “Who Wrote the Bible?” (http://www.bib-arch.org/multimedia/who-wrote-bible-free-video.asp). During the program, Jacobovici interviews Baruch Halpern, a professor of Jewish Studies at Pennsylvania State University. Halpern is a historian and archaeologist, and has led the archaeological dig at Tel Megiddo (biblical Megiddo). He is highly regarded by most biblical scholars, but he seems to meet his match in Jacobovici.  Near the beginning of the episode, the two discuss the authorship of the Pentateuch:
Jacobovici: “I wonder, who wrote the Bible?”
Halpern: “A bunch of different people.”
Jacobovici: “I read the five books of Moses, the Torah, and I never get the feeling that Joe wrote book number one, and Sam wrote book number two. I don’t get that impression.”
Halpern: “That’s because you’re coming at it from the perspective of the tradition rather than from a fresh, unbiased view.”
For thousands of years, Christians and Jews have read the first five books of the Bible as the singular work of Moses. Modern readers are no different. Scripture claims in numerous places that Moses wrote the Pentateuch (Exodus 34:27; Matthew 19:8; Romans 10:5; et al.). Given features such as opposition to Egyptian mythology and the presence of Egyptian loanwords and names, there is nothing to indicate that Moses could not have written the Pentateuch. Halpern claims that it is only because of tradition that Jews and Christians view the Pentateuch as the work of Moses. The problem with Halpern’s statement is that his view is anything but unbiased. He also approaches the Bible from the perspective of tradition! In his case, it is from a particular academic viewpoint: the documentary hypothesis.
The documentary hypothesis states that the Pentateuch is composed of four major documents: J (the Yahwist), E (the Elohist), D (the Deuteronomist), and P (the Priestly writer). Allegedly, these were edited together over hundreds of years by redactors, eventually producing what we call the Pentateuch. Proponents of this view claim Moses never wrote a single word, with most of the work being pious fiction authored by anonymous scribes.
One of the characteristics of modern scholarship is the absolute refusal to reappraise the documentary hypothesis. It is passed dogmatically from professor to student in university Bible and religious studies departments. The theory is as inviolable and as sacrosanct in biblical studies as Darwinian evolution is in scientific studies. That demonstrates the key difficulty with the theory: proponents of the view are not open to considering new evidence that may overturn part, or all, of the theory. They, too, are firmly rooted in their own tradition.
It may be difficult for some viewers to conceal a smile when Jacobovici says, “Nowhere do I get the feeling that there are different authors.” That is precisely what Christians also believe. Halpern’s response is interesting. He fires back with a single shot aimed to prove the multiple authorship of the books of Moses: the presence of “doublets” in the Bible. He defines these as “pairs of identical or nearly identical stories with slight variation.” Examples would be the “two” creation stories of Genesis 1-2 or the stories in which Abraham and Isaac lie to the Egyptian pharaoh about their wives.
Doublets occur frequently in the biblical text, not only in the Pentateuch, but elsewhere. The assumption is that these stories bear strong resemblance to one another because they are duplications. In truth, the biblical writers, like other authors in the ancient Near East, used repetition for effect. Readers should also recognize that scholars have no tangible evidence that these stories are duplications. The only place they occur is in Scripture, and the assumption is that ancient scribes duplicated the stories. There is no evidence that they ever did, and it is grossly unfair to judge ancient writers by modern standards. Many modern scholars no longer consider this as evidence for the documentary hypothesis.
Jacobovici later forces Halpern to admit that there is no tangible evidence for the documentary hypothesis:
Jacobovici: “The point is that unless you have a reason to go to the fantastical, why shouldn’t you just accept the simple, which is, you know, it’s not two traditions, or three or four, it’s one tradition?”
Halpern: “There’s nothing fantastic about the idea that tradition grows over time and that various parties contribute to a tradition. In fact, that’s what we see in every other religious tradition that we have.”
Jacobovici: “You have to agree that not a single archaeological shred has ever been found of the existence of the documentary hypothesis.”
Halpern: “That’s absolutely correct.”
Jacobovici could have gone farther. Not only have critical scholars failed to produce so much as a single shred of physical evidence for the putative documents of J, E, D, and P, they have yet to produce any document from the ancient world that was edited in like manner. Not one example exists of the kind of editorial activity critics propose went into the production of the books of Moses. Religious texts in the ancient Near East were not whimsically altered by scribes. The scribe’s duty was to copy canonical compositions, such as religious texts, with complete fidelity. Concerning the absence of evidence, Kenneth Kitchen states:
[T]he basic fact is that there is no objective, independent evidence for any of these four compositions (or for any variant of them) anywhere outside the pages of our existing Hebrew Bible…. The standards of proof among biblical scholars fall massively and woefully short of the high standards that professional Orientalists and archaeologists are long accustomed to, and have a right to demand (Kitchen, 2003, p. 492, emp. added).
When questioned about whether Moses wrote any of the Bible, Halpern responds, “Not a thing.” He follows with the shocking statement: “I forgot to tell you these people were illiterate until basically the 8th century B.C.” Jacobovici’s response? “I think I’ve got him on that one.” He travels to the Sinai desert to see an alphabetic inscription dating at least as early as the time of Moses. While the inscription is not conclusive, there is other evidence Jacobovici could have considered. Three important Hebrew inscriptions dating to the tenth century B.C. contradict Halpern’s outlandish statement. The Tel Zayit Inscription is an abecedary—a list of the letters in the Hebrew alphabet. The Gezer Calendar is a small tablet outlining the agricultural seasons. The oldest inscription found to date is a potsherd from Khirbet Qeiyafa, whose text has distinct parallels to several biblical passages (see Bryant, 2010). If the Hebrews were illiterate until the 8th century, who created these Hebrew inscriptions in the 10th century?
It is entertaining to see a filmmaker and amateur archaeologist outduel an ancient historian widely recognized as an authority in his field. The episode demonstrates a vital point that every Christian should note: just because a person is a recognized scholar does not mean he or she is inevitably correct in their criticisms of the Bible. The history of biblical scholarship is full of antiquated theories that were once held as absolute fact, but are now totally abandoned. Given the evidence that archaeologists and biblical scholars now have, the documentary hypothesis is surely destined to join them. Moses may not have signed his work, but theories offered by critics thus far have failed to pass the test of plausibility when all of the evidence is considered. [NOTE: Over a century ago, J.W. McGarvey wrote a masterful and decisive refutation of the documentary hypothesis, titled The Authorship of the Book of Deuteronomy With its Bearings on the Higher Criticism of the Pentateuch.]

REFERENCES

Bryant, Dewayne (2010), “The Khirbet Qeiyafa Inscription,”  http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=124&article=3492.
Kitchen, Kenneth (2003), On the Reliability of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans).

Sewage Problems! by Kyle Butt, M.Div.




Sewage Problems!

by Kyle Butt, M.Div.


In their book, None of These Diseases, physicians S.I. McMillen and David Stern discussed why the hygienic rules laid out by God for the children of Israel were so effective, and why they still are applicable. To illustrate their point, they related the story of a man by the name of Edwin Chadwick.
Chadwick had accepted a seat on the Board of Health in London, where he and his comrades faced a deadly dilemma. The year before, in 1846, a cholera epidemic had swept England’s capital city and killed more than 16,000 people. This year, 1847, things were looking much worse. How could cholera infiltrate such an advanced city? Why could the premier doctors of the day do nothing to combat the spread of the deadly disease? And how many more people would die before the epidemic could be stopped? Questions with no answers wafted from the lips of the city’s inhabitants as the chill of death continued to sweep over its streets.
Death first visited the houses of the poor. Chadwick, who had been studying diseases in England for the past 14 years, had determined that the rich could expect to live to the ripe old age of 43, while the poor could expect to live to be around 22. Why were the poor the first to endure the carnage of cholera? Chadwick thought he had the answer.
The poor lived in basements. But why would living in a basement cause so many poor people to die? The city of London had a serious problem with sewage disposal. Its drainage system was inadequate, the money allotted to the problem was insufficient, and to make matters worse, very few people even recognized the magnitude of the problem. The streets were filled with raw sewage that people dumped indiscriminately from second and third story windows. When rain fell in sufficient quantities to run through the streets, the then-tainted water naturally settled in the lowest places it could find—basements.
In one orphans’ home that housed 1,400 children, 300 of them contracted the deadly disease, and 180 of those died. When Chadwick inspected the facility, he found that the basement was a cesspool into which the sewage drained. Sadly, many of the children slept in the filth night after night. And Chadwick found that the same situation could be found in basement areas all over London. No wonder so many poor people were dying!
Chadwick identified the problem and implemented a new drainage system that eventually saved many lives, and could have saved many more had people not refused to believe that sewage was the cause of such an epidemic. They resented the idea of someone telling them how they needed to configure pipes and drains in their own homes. Therefore, they ignored Chadwick’s sound advice, balked, and neglected to install proper drainage systems—a course of action that cost thousands of lives over the next several years.
Raw sewage carries disease. If only the people of London had turned in their Bibles to Deuteronomy 23:12: “Also, you shall have a place outside the camp, where you may go out; and you shall have an implement among your equipment, and when you sit down outside, you shall dig with it and turn and cover your refuse.” More than 3300 years before London’s epidemic, the Lord, through his servant Moses, implemented a plan to stop such epidemics before they started. Such tragedies as those that befell London could have been prevented if people simply had accepted God’s Word on the matter and observed the kind of hygiene that the Israelites had practiced so many years before. How did Moses know to instruct the Israelites in such public health practices, when the nation from which he came, and the nations surrounding the Israelites, knew no such practices? Just a lucky guess—or by inspiration of God?

DENOMINATIONAL ECUMENISM? BY STEVE FINNELL



DENOMINATIONAL ECUMENISM?  BY STEVE FINNELL


The contemporary movement formed to encourage cooperation between those denominations that believe Jesus is the Christ is the "Ecumenical Assembly"? Regardless of doctrinal differences those with the ecumenical mindset join together to feed and clothe the poor, gather together for preaching God's word, study God's word, and various other joint religious activities. Is that consistent with God's plan? Is believing that Jesus is the Christ the only essential doctrine of Christianity? I do not believe so.

Can you imagine the apostle Paul being involved in an "Ecumenical Assembly" with the Church of Judaizers, the Church of The Resurrection Is Past, or the Church of Knowing Only the Baptism of John?

1. The Church of Judaizers: Acts 15:1-5 And certain men came down from Judea and taught the brethren, "Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses you cannot be saved.".........5 But some of the sect of the Pharisees who believe rose, saying, "It was necessary to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses."(NKJV)

The Judaizers believed that Jesus was the Christ. The apostle Paul did not join in joint efforts with them to feed and clothe the poor. Paul did not join in preaching the gospel, church revivals nor Bible studies with them. What Paul did, do, was condemn their doctrine, and point out their eternal abode. Galatians 5:4 You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified  by law; you have fallen from grace.(NKJV)

Simply believing that Jesus is the Christ does not qualify anyone as a coworker in Christ.

2. Church of The Resurrection is Past: 2 Timothy 2:17-18 And their message will spread like cancer. Hymenaeus and Philetus are of this sort, 18 who have strayed concerning the truth, saying that the resurrection is already past; and they overthrow the faith of some.(NKJV)

The apostle Paul did not encourage the followers of Jesus to join in ecumenical endeavors with the Church of of the Resurrection is Past, he said the opposite. 2 Timothy 2:16 But shun profane and vain babblings...(NLKV)

 Note: Hymenaeus and Philetus strayed from the truth. They did believe that Jesus was the Christ.

3. Church of Knowing Only the Baptism of John: Acts 18:24-26 Apollos.....25 This man had been instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in spirit, he spoke and taught accurately the things of the Lord, though he knew only the baptism of John. 26 So he began to speak boldly in the synagogue. When Aquila and Priscilla head him , they took him aside and explained to him the way of God more accurately.(NKJV)

Apollos was not permitted to continue preaching false doctrine, he was taught the truth. Simply believing that Jesus is the Christ is not good enough.

The apostle Paul came upon some of the men Apollos had taught incorrectly. And taught them the truth. They were baptized into Christ. John's baptism was no longer valid. (Acts 19:1-5)

The apostle Paul did not engage with ecumenical activities with the Church of Knowing Only the Baptism of John until they were taught and believed the true gospel plan of salvation.

Why do believers in Christ join "Ecumenical Assemblies" with denominations that hold various and sundry doctrines?

Ecumenical Assemblies include those who pray to the Virgin Mary, those who deny that immersion in water is essential to salvation, those who believe once saved always saved, those who believe only a select few have been individually selected for salvation, those who believe there are many ways to heaven other than Jesus.

Should the Lord's Church participate in feeding and clothing the poor, joint Bible studies, and other religious activities with those who teach doctrine contrary to the apostles doctrine?

The apostle Paul was not an advocate for "Ecumenical Assemblies". Romans 16:16-17.....The churches of Christ greet you. 17 Now I urge you, brethren, note those who cause divisions and offenses, contrary to the doctrine which you learned and avoid them.(NKJV)

Simply believing that Jesus is the Christ is not enough, Satan and his demons believe that.    

You Are What You Do by B. Johnson



You Are What You Do

If you read a list of professions from earlier times, it reads like a roster of surnames. That’s because people were strongly identified by what they did for a living (as opposed to recently, when we pay attention to what’s on their iPod). John Smith was a person named John who worked as a blacksmith; Bill Sawyer was a lumberjack, and so on. In India, in the Parsee community, you’ll find people with surnames such as Contractor, Doctor, Engineer, etc. But watch and see: when someone asks, “Who is he;” “Who is she,” almost invariably, people start to describe what they do and who they are associated with. “Oh, he is a salesman over at the Ford dealership,” or, “She is the preacher’s wife.”
So who are you? How would you be identified today if someone in the crowd of people asked a friend who you were? How would the crowd expect you to behave? Would they have a right to expect more of you than someone whose profession identifies them as something else? Are you the wife of the local doctor or school principal? Are you a Bible class teacher? Are you a mother? Are you the sister to any one of these?
The world expects certain behavior of certain people. Under the Old Testament it was no different. The priests were spiritual leaders of the nation of Israel and were not to marry a widow, a divorced woman, a profane woman, or a harlot (Lev 21:12-15). There was a higher standard expected of spiritual leaders and their wives. Obviously, leading by example is one of the ways spiritual leaders do their work. The wives are naturally an extension of their husbands, so they too are expected to be above reproach.
The children of priests also were held to a higher standard. If the daughter of a priest were to play the harlot, she was to be burnt with fire (Lev 21:9). That was a much stronger punishment than for other men’s daughters. More was expected of them because they had been entrusted with more (Luke 12:48).
How was Jesus identified, when people asked who he was? “And when he was come into Jerusalem, all the city was moved, saying, Who is this? And the multitude said, This is Jesus the prophet of Nazareth of Galilee” (Mat 21:10-11). There are actually two identities associated with Jesus. The ones who wanted to defame him made reference to the fact that he came from Nazareth-a despised place (John 1:46). Yet the ones who were his disciples remembered that he spoke for God (John 7:16). Jesus did not “live down” to the scoffers’ expectations of him, nor did he live in such a way to justify their disbelief of his teaching and his miracles.
Whether we consciously judge or not, almost all men expect everyone else to be “perfect,” whether in driving, keeping one’s place in line, performing an operation, directing traffic, rearing children, etc. Naturally, expectations for spiritual leaders and their wives are no different.
Part of man’s judgment is based in the amount of power or money with which they have been entrusted. “But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more” (Luke 12:48). The ten talent man was expected to produce more than the five talent man.
Our spiritual leaders (preachers, elders, deacons, Bible class teachers) are in a position of speaking for the Lord (Mt 23:1-3) and as such are expected to obey the commands they impart to those who have not yet obeyed. “With what judgment we judge, we will be judged,” whether by God or men (Mt 7:1-3).
Even though we may judge others harshly, we ourselves expect to receive lenient judgment (Rom 2:1-2). Nevertheless, the way we judge is the way we will be judged whether by God or man. The Jew assumed a position of authority for God (Rom 2:17-20). Nevertheless, the world condemned him for his hypocrisy (Rom 2:21-24).
When someone describes what you “do,” will they be able to say, she is a preacher’s wife, a Bible class teacher or an elder’s wife-a leader of the people who is above reproach? When someone asks where you attend church, will they say you are a member of the Lord’s body and a faithful Christian? We all should live in such a way that Christ is not ashamed to call us his own.

Beth Johnson

The Scripture quotations in this article are from
The King James Version.

Published in The Old Paths Archive
(http://www.oldpaths.com)

Jesus is... by Gary Rose




I can’t fill in the blank for you; this is just something that you must do for yourself. Think about this before you fill in the blank because it could be the most important answer of your life. My answer is listed below.

JESUS: MY EVERYTHING


INTRODUCTION

A. WHO IS JESUS TO THE WORLD??---MANY DIFFERENT THINGS

B. WHO IS JESUS TO THE CHURCH--EVERYTHING FROM A TO Z
        REV 1: 17--18

BODY

A. Jesus is our ALL--Phil 1:21

B. Jesus is our BROTHER-- Rom 8:29

C. Jesus is our CHOICE(personal) Joshua 24:15 ; 1 kings 18:21

D. Jesus is our DEFENSE against eternal death--Heb 9:27 ; 1jn2:1

E. Jesus is our EXAMPLE of a perfect life Jn14:6 ; Heb 5:8--9

F. Jesus is our FRIEND-- Jn15:10-14

G. Jesus is our GREAT HIGH PRIEST-- Heb 4:14-15

H. Jesus is our HOPE 1 Peter 1:3

I. Jesus is our IMAGE OF GOD --Heb 1:1-3

J. Jesus is our JUSTIFICATION --Ehp1:3; Rom8:1-2

K. Jesus is our KIND COMPANION Heb 13:5

L. Jesus is our LIFE-- Jn 14:6

M. Jesus is our MIGHTY GOD--Matt.17:1-5 ; Jn1:1-5

N. Jesus is our NEWS---Lk 2:10 ; Rom 10:16

O. Jesus is our ONE AND ONLY WAY --Jn 14:6

P. Jesus is our PROPITIATION    Heb 9:14---16; Rom 3:21--26

Q. Jesus is our QUESTION --What will you do with Jesus????

R. Jesus is our REDEMPTION--1 Pet 1:18-20 ; Jn 10:10 ;Lk 19:10

S. Jesus is our SAVIOR--Titus 3:3-4 ; Lk 19:10

T. Jesus is our TESTIMONY-- Matt 28:18-20 ; Acts 4:20

U. Jesus is our ULTIMATE COMPANION Rev 21:3-4

V. Jesus is our VICTORY OVER DEATH-- 1 Cor 15:54-55

W. Jesus is our WITNESS BEFORE GOD THE FATHER-- Rev 1:5

X. Jesus is our XTRA SOURCE OF STRENGTH-- Phil 4:13

Y. Jesus is our YESTERDAY, TODAY, TOMORROW-- Heb 13:8

Z. Jesus is our ZENITH-- Matt 17 & heb 1:1-4 (peak, highest goal)


CONCLUSION: 


SONG: READ HE IS MY EVERYTHING

SIMPLE INVITATION: LET JESUS BE YOUR EVERYTHING....

You guessed it; Jesus is my everything. Your turn to fill in the blank...