3/25/20

"STUDIES IN THE MINOR PROPHETS" Zechariah - I Am Zealous For Zion (7:1-8:23) by Mark Copeland

                    "STUDIES IN THE MINOR PROPHETS"

              Zechariah - I Am Zealous For Zion (7:1-8:23)

INTRODUCTION

1. Thus far in our survey of the book of Zechariah...
   a. We noticed "A Call To Repentance" - Zech 1:1-6
   b. We surveyed the "Visions In The Night", of which there were eight
      1) The rider and the horses - Zech 1:7-17
      2) The four horns and four craftsmen - Zech 1:18-21
      3) The man with the measuring line - Zech 2:1-13
      4) Joshua the high priest - Zech 3:1-10
      5) The gold lampstand and two olive trees - Zech 4:1-14
      6) The flying scroll - Zech 5:1-4
      7) The woman in a basket - Zech 5:5-11
      8) The four chariots - Zech 6:1-8
   c. We considered "The Command To Crown Joshua" - Zech 6:9-15

2. In these different ways God used Zechariah...
   a. To motivate Joshua, Zerubbabel, and the captives who returned 
      with them to rebuild the temple - cf. Ezra 6:14-15
   b. To increase their anticipation of the future as well, as they 
      would wonder about the fulfillment of these visions

3. Zechariah's work was not yet finished...
   a. About two years later, as the temple was still in construction, 
      he was asked concerning the observance of certain fasts
   b. This provided the Lord the opportunity to do two things:
      1) To remind the people of what prompted their exile
      2) To once again proclaim His great zeal for Zion (Jerusalem)

[An important lesson or two can be gleaned from this section (Zech 7:1-8:23)
 that Christians would do well to remember.  Also, God's zeal for
Zion as expressed in this section appears to have Messianic ramifications...]

I. THE QUESTION ABOUT THE FIFTH MONTH FAST

   A. THE PRIESTS ARE ASKED...
      1. In the fourth year of King Darius (ca. 518 B.C., nearly two years later) - Zech 7:1
      2. When the people send messengers - Zech 7:2

   B. THE PEOPLE WISH TO KNOW...
      1. Should they continue to weep and fast in the fifth month? - Zech 7:3
      2. The fifth month was the time of the year the temple was 
         destroyed nearly seventy years before - cf. 2Ki 25:8,9; Jer 52:12,13

[Perhaps because the temple was being rebuilt, they wanted to know if
they should continue with a fast designed to commemorate the temple's 
destruction.  In response, the Lord challenges them to evaluate their devotion...]

II. THE FAILURE OF THE PEOPLE REVIEWED

   A. THEIR FASTS:  FOR THE LORD, OR FOR THEMSELVES?
      1. In addition to the fast on the fifth month, there was one on
         the seventh (mourning the murder of Gedaliah - cf. 2Ki 25:25; Jer 41:1-3)
      2. These fasts were developed during their seventy year exile
      3. But the people are challenged to consider whether they had 
         been serving themselves or the Lord in keeping these fasts - Zech 7:4-6
      4. The Lord would have preferred them to obey Him from the beginning - Zech 7:7
      5. Note:  Which is better...
         a. To worship God as He first instructed?
         b. Or to develop traditions to bemoan your state after you 
            have disobeyed Him?
         -- Clearly God desired the former

   B. THEIR EXILE WAS BECAUSE OF THEIR SINS...
      1. The Lord had asked them to display justice, mercy and compassion - Zech 7:9-10
      2. But the people refused to hear, so God scattered them among the nations - Zech 7:11-14

[Their fasting, while appearing to express devotion for the loss of the
temple, should never have been necessary.  If they had served God to
begin with, there would be no need to fast!

As the Lord continues, He explains why their fasts should now be occasions for feasting...]

III. A TIME FOR FEASTING, NOT FASTING

   A. THE LORD'S ZEAL FOR JERUSALEM...
      1. The Lord is zealous for Zion with great zeal - Zech 8:1-2
      2. He will return to Zion, and dwell in Jerusalem - Zech 8:3a
      3. Jerusalem will be called "the City of Truth", "The Mountain of
         the LORD of hosts", and "The Holy Mountain" - Zech 8:3b

   B. THE LORD'S FUTURE FOR JERUSALEM...
      1. It will be place of peace for the elderly and young - Zech 8:4-6
      2. The Lord will bring His remnant back, and He shall be their God - Zech 8:7-8
      3. Those building the temple should take heart, for the Lord
         shall make them a blessing - Zech 8:9-13
      4. Just as God once sought their punishment, now He is determined
         to do good for them - Zech 8:14-15

   C. THE LORD'S DESIRE FOR JERUSALEM...
      1. For the people to speak truth, show justice and peace, not
         evil (to do what should have been done before the exile!)- Zech 8:16-17
      2. To let the fasts be a time for joy, gladness and cheerful feasts - Zech 8:18-19
         a. The fast of the fourth month had commemorated the breaching
            of the walls when Jerusalem was destroyed - 2Ki 25:3,4;Jer 52:6,7
         b. The fast of the fifth month commemorated the destruction of the temple
         c. The fast of the seventh month commemorated the murder of Gedaliah
         d. The fast of the tenth month commemorated the beginning of
            the siege of Jerusalem - 2Ki 25:1,2; Jer 39:1; 52:4,5
         -- But now these were to be replaced with feasting!

   D. THE LORD'S PROMISE FOR JERUSALEM...
      1. Many nations will come to seek the LORD of hosts in Jerusalem - Zech 8:20-22
      2. People of every language will seek to know the God of the Jews - Zech 8:23

CONCLUSION

1. How comforting and exciting this must have been to those in Zechariah's day!
   a. It certainly should have encouraged them to continue with rebuilding the temple
   b. It should have encouraged them to look forward to the future

2. While there may have been a partial fulfillment to these prophecies
   with the rebuilding of the temple and walls of Jerusalem, it is 
   likely that there are Messianic elements as well...
   a. With fulfillment beginning with the establishment of the church
      in Jerusalem - cf. Isa 2:2-3; Ac 2:1-47; He 12:22
   b. With fulfillment culminating with the ushering in of the "New 
      Jerusalem" in the "new heavens and new earth" following the 
      Lord's second coming - cf. He 11:16; 13:14; 2Pe 3:10-13; Re 21:1-22:5

3. Finally, is there a not a lesson to be learned about "self-imposed religion"?
   a. The exiles had begun fasting by their own design
   b. What the Lord preferred was for them to have heeded His Word in the beginning!
   c. Jesus taught that man-made traditions lead to vain worship - Mt 15:8-9
   d. Paul described the inability of self-imposed religion to deal 
      with the flesh - Col 2:20-23

If we desire to truly be citizens in the "New Jerusalem", then let's 
concentrate on doing the will of the Father, not on making up new ways
to worship Him.  As Jesus warned:

   "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' shall enter the kingdom
   of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven.
                                                              (Mt 7:21)

In our acts of devotion, are we doing the Father's will, or things 
devised by men?
 


Do Animals Have Souls? by Bert Thompson, Ph.D.


http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=582

Do Animals Have Souls?

by  Bert Thompson, Ph.D.

Q.

I know the Bible teaches that every human has an immortal soul. But do animals have souls?

A.

If you ever owned a dog, a cat, or any other kind of animal to which you grew attached, you may have wondered whether or not that animal had a soul. Men and women through the ages have pondered the same question. Animals— whose vast numbers stretch into the millions—are ubiquitous as our co-inhabitants on planet Earth. They serve as an unpaid, ever-dependable, and quite invaluable work force as they help the farmer plow a rough field or the blind person cross a busy city street. They account for a considerable portion of the total world food supply for humans. They provide joy and companionship for young and old alike. They are an undeniable boon to mental health, especially for sick children and the infirm elderly. Surely none among us would doubt the many benefits that accrue as a result of the presence of animals among us.
But do animals possess souls? And if they do, is their soul the same as a human soul? That is to say, is it immortal—will it eventually inhabit either heaven or hell?
The English word “soul” derives from a number of different words in the Old and New Testaments and is used in the Bible in a variety of ways. First, it is employed as a synonym for a living, breathing person. Moses wrote: “All the souls that came out of the loins of Jacob were seventy souls” (Exodus 1:5; cf. Deuteronomy 10:22). In legal matters also, the word soul was used to denote any individual. The Lord told Moses: “Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, ‘If a soul shall sin through ignorance against any of the commandments of the Lord concerning things which ought not to be done’ ” (Leviticus 4:2). When Jacob was speaking of himself in Genesis 49:6, he used the expression, “O my soul”—which meant simply “me.” In each of these instances, actual people—individually or collectively—were under discussion.
Second, the word soul can be used to describe the physical form of life that both men and animals possess and that ceases to exist at death. In their Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament, Brown, Driver, and Briggs noted that the word “soul” (Hebrew nephesh) often is employed to mean “life principle” (1907, p. 659). In Genesis 1:20,24,30, God spoke of the nephesh hayyah—literally “soul breathers” or “life breathers” (often translated as “living creatures” or “life”—cf. Leviticus 11:10). The writer of Proverbs observed in regard to animals: “A righteous man regardeth the life (nephesh) of his beast; but the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel” (12:10). Hebrew scholar Hugo McCord therefore suggested:
Then the translators realized that the first meaning of nephesh is “breath,” and so Genesis 1:20,24,30 and Genesis 2:7 all fit together in understanding Moses as saying that all animals and man too are breathers. Breathers, coupled with hayyah, “living,” the translators thought, would be well translated, in the case of animals, as “living creatures,” and in the case of man as a “living being” (1995, 23[1]:87-88).
Third, the word soul can be used to describe something that is immortal and thus never dies. In speaking of Rachel’s death at the birth of her son, Moses wrote: “And it came to pass, as her soul was departing (for she died)” (Genesis 35:18). While Elijah was at the house of a widow in the city of Zarephath, the woman’s son died. But Elijah “cried unto Jehovah, and said..., ‘O Jehovah my God, I pray thee, let this child’s soul come into him again’” (1 Kings 17:21). Hezekiah celebrated the fact that the soul survives the death of the body: “But thou hast in love to my soul (nephesh) delivered it from the pit of corruption” (Isaiah 38:17).
Centuries later, the Lord Himself warned: “And be not afraid of them that kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell” (Matthew 10:28) When the apostle John was allowed to peer into the book “sealed with seven seals” (Revelation 5:1), he “saw underneath the altar the souls of them that had been slain for the word of God” (Revelation 6:9). Each of these passages is instructive of the fact that there exists within man a soul that survives the death of the body.
The question therefore becomes: Can the word “soul” be used correctly in referring to animals? The first definition obviously cannot apply to animals since animals are not persons. But the second definition most certainly would apply to animals. Compare the following passages. In Psalm 78:50 we find an example of the usage of “soul” as “life” when the writer said in speaking of the people of Egypt (who tried in vain to prevent the Israelites from leaving their country’s slavery) that God “spared not their soul from death, but gave their life over to the pestilence.” In this instance, the word “soul” (Hebrew nephesh) is used to denote the physical life of humans. But in Genesis 1:20,24, the identical Hebrew word is employed to speak of animals as “living creatures” (Hebrew nephesh hayyah). In this sense, then, yes, it is correct to say that animals have “souls”—since the word soul means only physical life. In responding to the question, “Do animals have souls?,” McCord wrote: “Yes, when the word soul, nephesh, only means ‘breath,’ as in Genesis 1:20 (ASV), ‘Let the waters swarm with swarms of living creatures,’ nephesh hayyah, literally, ‘living soul’” (1999).
But can the third definition be applied to animals? Do animals possess immortal souls that one day will inhabit heaven or hell? In this era of evolutionary fervor and an increasing fascination with all kinds of “rights,” we are reminded constantly that man shares a “kinship” with members of the animal kingdom that positively must not be overlooked. Michael Fox wrote:
There is indeed a kinship in the present diversity and evolutionary continuity of all life.... It is more important today than ever before for human beings to be aware of their kinship with all life. It is essential for our survival that we have a strong reverence for all forms of life as our kin... (1978, p. 121).
Those who do not believe in God or accept the Bible as His Word (and thus deny the existence of an immortal soul) generally perceive animals as man’s equal in almost every aspect. Thus, they often refer to animals as being not one whit behind humans in regard to how they should be viewed or treated. For example, in his book, The Case for Animal Rights, Tom Regan acknowledged that each human is “the experiencing subject of a life, a conscious creature having an individual welfare” (1987, p. 59). But he likewise viewed animals as “the experiencing subjects of a life, with inherent value of their own” (p. 59) and so he asked:
What could be the basis of our having more inherent value than animals? Their lack of reason, or autonomy, or intellect? Only if we are willing to make the same judgement in the case of humans who are similarly deficient. But it is not true that such humans—the retarded child, for example, or the mentally deranged—have less inherent value than you or I. Neither, then, can we rationally sustain the view that animals, like them, in being the experiencing subjects of a life have less inherent value. All who have inherent value have it equally, whether they be human animals or not. Inherent value, then, belongs equally to those who are the experiencing subjects of a life (p. 60).
This type of thinking—that men and animals both possess “inherent value equally”—has set the stage for those who profess a belief in God to set forth their claim that animals do indeed possess immortal souls. In his book, All Creatures Here Below, Frank Hoffman stated:
...if the animal sacrifice is the precursor, or type of the final sacrifice of our Lord and Savior, which is a mainstream Christian teaching, is God’s Word not also telling us that animals do have souls?... Now then, why are we reluctant to accept the fact that animals do have souls? Because we are still trying to hold on to some of our pride, and perhaps our greed. If we do not accept the fact that animals have souls, then we may have a self-acceptable excuse for the way we treat the rest of God’s creatures, which is not in accordance with God’s desire, but ours (1998, emp. added).
The position advocated by such writers is completely at odds with the teaching found in God’s Word. First, man and animals do not share kinship—all the claims of evolutionists (and those sympathetic to them) notwithstanding. The apostle Paul addressed this very point in 1 Corinthians 15 when he wrote: “All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one flesh of men, and another flesh of beasts, and another flesh of birds, and another of fishes” (v. 39, emp. added). As Stuart Walker correctly commented: “Genesis 1:26-30 and 2:7,21-25 clearly states that man was a special creation with no phylogenetic relationship to any other creature. Thus, there is a phylogenetic discontinuity between man and animals—we are not physically interrelated” (1991, 5[2]:21, emp. added). As Adam previewed the animals in the Garden of Eden for a mate and went about naming them (Genesis 2:18-20), this “discontinuity” became clear. Among all the animals that God had created, there was none that corresponded to him. Not one sufficed to remove him from his personal isolation of being “alone” (Genesis 2:18). As Walker went on to note:
Thus, we share in the life principle, but it is not the life principle itself that is precious.... Ontological continuity cannot be established upon the experiences of life, the intrinsic value of life itself, or physical parallels between animals and humans; rather, we are separated from the animal world by an impassable gulf—a chasm of essential difference in who we are (1991, 5[2]:22, emp. added).
Second, man was commanded to “subdue and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the heavens, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth” (Genesis 1:28). The Hebrew word for “subdue” (kabash) is described in Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance as meaning “to tread down,” “to bring under subjection,” etc. The same word is used in Numbers 32:22, 29 and Joshua 18:1 where it is used to describe the subduing and pacifying of Israel’s enemies. To kabash, therefore, is to
face that which opposes us and is inimical in its present state to our goals and well-being, and bring it into conformity with our needs—completely pacifying it.... Thus it can be inferred that when God gave Adam dominion over the creative order, He was describing a pre-emptive authority which man would wield over the creation as he interpreted the cosmos and manipulated its functions to man’s benefit... (Walker, 5[2]:25).
Man’s “pre-emptive authority” over the creation, including the animal kingdom, was demonstrated quite forcefully in a single stroke when God granted mankind permission to kill and eat animals for food (Genesis 9:3-4). Interestingly, however, within the same context God specifically forbade manslaughter “for in the image of God made he man” (Genesis 9:5-6). If man “shares kinship” with animals or if animals possess immortal souls, why would God permit him to kill his own kin—relatives whose souls are no different than his own? As Neale Pryor commented: “Animals also have a ruach [a Hebrew word for “breath” or “life”—BT/SE] (Genesis 6:17). Killing one who has a ruach or nephesh would not necessarily constitute murder; otherwise animals could not be sacrificed or slaughtered” (1974, 5[3]:34). God’s prohibition against murder carried over even into New Testament times (Matthew 19:18). At the same time, however, God broadened the list of animals that men could kill and eat (Acts 10:9-14). Why was it that men could not kill other men, but could kill animals? The answer lies, of course, in the fact that animals were not created “in the image of God.”
Third, although it is true that at times the Bible uses the same terms to refer to the life principle/force in both humans and animals (e.g. Genesis 7:22), and although it is true that those terms may be used to refer to the immortal soul of humans (Ecclesiastes 12:7; Matthew 10:28), they never are employed by Bible writers to refer to an immortal soul in animals. In their Commentary on the Old Testament, Keil and Delitzsch observed:
The beasts arose at the creative word of God, and no communication of the spirit is mentioned even in ch. ii:19; the origin of their soul was coincident with that of their corporeality, and their life was merely the individualization of the universal life, with which all matter was filled in the beginning by the Spirit of God. On the other hand, the human spirit is not a mere individualization of the divine breath which breathed upon the material of the world, or of the universal spirit of nature; nor is his body merely a production of the earth when stimulated by the creative word of God. The earth does not bring forth his body, but God Himself puts His hand to the work and forms him; nor does the life already imparted to the world by the Spirit of God individualize itself in him, but God breathes it directly into the nostrils of the one man, in the whole fulness of His personality, the breath of life, that in a manner corresponding to the personality of God he may become a living soul (1982, 1:79-80, emp. added).
Man alone was created “in the image and likeness of God” (Genesis 1:26-27)—something that may not be said of animals. Walker therefore asked: “If the putative parallels either do not exist or are insignificant before God, what then is the critical essence of man that distinguishes him from all of creation, and what are the ramifications of this distinction? The key is found in Genesis 1:26-28, 2:18-25, and 9:5-7; it is that only man is created in the image of God” (1991, 5[2]:22, emp. added). Gary Anderson addressed this same point when he wrote:
Man’s concepts of spiritual values, his recognition of morals and his universal acknowledgement that he is responsible for his own behavior set him far apart from the animal world. That is to say, they have no immortal soul, as the following point documents. The spirit of man returns to God who gave it when one dies (Eccl. 12:7). Such is not said of the animal! Adam is called the son of God in Luke 3:38, obviously by creation. What animal is called the son of God or offspring of God? (1989, p. 76, emp. added).
Nowhere does God’s Word indicate that animals were created in God’s image. As Philip Hughes commented:
Only of man is it said that God created him in his image. It is in this charter of his constitution that man’s uniqueness is specifically affirmed as a creature radically distinguished from all other creatures. In this respect a line is defined which links man directly and responsibly to God in a way that is unknown to any other creature. Nothing is more basic than the recognition that being constituted in the image of God is of the very essence of and absolutely central to the humanness of man. It is the key that unlocks the meaning of his authentic humanity (1989, p. 30, emp. added).
But do animals have souls? Animals may be said to have souls—if the word “soul” is used as the Bible employs it in discussing members of the animal kingdom (i.e., to describe only the physical life force found within all living creatures). But if the word “soul” is used to refer to an immortal soul that one day will inhabit heaven or hell, then no, animals may not be said to possess a soul. This is the only conclusion that can be drawn, respecting the instruction on the subject found within the Word of God.

REFERENCES

Anderson, Gary L. (1989), “The Lord...Formeth the Spirit of Man within Him,” In Hope of Eternal Life, ed. Bobby Liddell (Pensacola, FL: Bellview Church of Christ), pp. 70-81.
Brown, Francis, S.R. Driver, and Charles Briggs (1907), A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament (London: Oxford University Press).
Fox, Michael (1978), “Man and Nature: Biological Perspectives,” On the Fifth Day, ed. Richard K. Morris and Michael Fox (Washington, D.C.: Acropolis Books).
Hoffman, Frank (1998), “Of Life and Soul,” All Creatures Here Below [Online], URL: http://www.all-creatures.org/book/book-alcr3.html.
Hughes, Philip Edgecumbe (1989), The True Image (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans).
Keil, C.F. and F. Delitzsch (1982 reprint), Commentary on the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans).
McCord, Hugo (1995), “What is the Soul,” Vigil, 23[11]:87-88, November.
McCord, Hugo (1999), “Do Animals Have Souls?,” personal correspondence.
Pryor, Neale (1974), “Abortion: Soul and Spirit in the Hebrew Language,” Spiritual Sword, 5[3]:33-35, April.
Regan, Tom (1987), The Case for Animal Rights (Clarks Summit, PA: International Society for Animal Rights).
Walker, T. Stuart (1991), “Animal Rights and the Image of God—Part II,” Journal of Biblical Ethics in Medicine, 5[2]:21-27, Spring.

Different Views of Death by Wayne Jackson, M.A.


http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=237

Different Views of Death

by  Wayne Jackson, M.A.

None of us enjoys contemplating the prospect of losing a loved one to death. It is a horrible experience. Yet, if the deceased is a child of God, the pain is lessened considerably. This is why the apostle Paul could say, in his letter to the saints at Thessalonica, that we “sorrow not, even as the rest [non-Christians], who have no hope” (1 Thessalonians 4:13). When a dear one in Christ leaves this life, we sorrow—not for the one who has gone to be with the Lord (2 Corinthians 5:8), but for our own temporal loss. And it is temporal, because eventually there will be happy reunions (Genesis 25:8; Matthew 8:11).
I recently read of a case that illustrates the bleakness faced by the unbeliever when he is forced to face the prospect of death’s separations.
Marie Curie was undoubtedly the most prominent woman scientist of all time. She was twice awarded the Nobel Prize. She was married to Pierre Curie, a prominent scientist in his own right. On April 19, 1906, Pierre was run over by a galloping team of horses pulling a heavy wagon. His head was crushed by one of the wheels and he died instantly.
In a biography about her mother, Eve Curie describes how Marie was devastated by the accident. She clung to Pierre’s corpse as he was dressed for the funeral. She kissed him repeatedly. From that day, Eve says, she became “a pitiful and incurably lonely woman” (p. 247). For a long time she wrote notes to him each day in her diary. Here is one of those notations: “Your coffin was closed and I could see you no more.... We saw you go down into the deep, big hole.... They filled the grave and put sheaves of flowers on it, everything is over. Pierre is sleeping his last sleep beneath the earth; it is the end of everything, everything, everything” (p. 249).
Obviously Madame Curie had utterly no hope of ever seeing her beloved husband again. Years before, Marie had abandoned whatever faith she had. Eve writes that her mother “gave her [daughters] no sort of pious education. She felt herself incapable of teaching them dogmas in which she no longer believed: above all she feared for them the distress she had known when she lost her faith” (p. 268).
How very sad. Death is not the end of everything. Rather, it is the beginning. It is the beginning of eternity. May we so bind our families together in service to God that when our parting comes, it will be a “sweet sorrow.”

REFERENCES

Curie, Eve (1937), Madame Curie: A Biography (Garden City, NY: Doubleday).

Different Names, Same Person by Eric Lyons, M.Min.


http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=786

Different Names, Same Person

by  Eric Lyons, M.Min.

Names can be rather confusing at times. A teacher might become puzzled on the first day of school when she finds out that half of her students do not immediately respond when she calls roll. The reason: they normally are called by another name than that which appears on the school records. A coach may not immediately recognize a certain player’s identity, because his team speaks of this player (on the opposing team) only by using a nickname. After some investigation, however, the coach soon learns who the player actually is. Millions of individuals through the millennia have worn more than one name. Even at Apologetics Press, nearly half of my co-workers wear derivatives of their full, official name. Our Production Administrator's name is James Monroe, but he prefers to be called Jim. David Lee, our Executive Director, is just Dave to those who know him. Most people in the twenty-first century understand that this is simply the way it is; people often go by more than one name.
When reading the Bible, we need also to remember that people in ancient times frequently had more than one name as well. Keeping this in mind will help clarify various passages that may seem somewhat ambiguous. When studying the book of Genesis, it is helpful to bear in mind that Abram’s name was changed to Abraham (Genesis 17:5), and Jacob’s to Israel (Genesis 32:28). Later, while living in Egypt, “Pharaoh called Joseph’s name Zaphnath-Paaneah” (Genesis 41:45). Numerous other individuals mentioned in the Bible also were known by more than one name.
  • Moses’ father-in-law was known both as Reuel and Jethro (Exodus 2:18; 3:1).
  • Gideon acquired the name Jerubbaal because he destroyed the altar of Baal at Ophrah (Judges 6:32; 7:1; 8:29,35).
  • Pharaoh Necho changed the name of King Josiah’s oldest son, Eliakim, to Jehoiakim (2 Kings 23:34).
  • The apostle Peter is sometimes called Peter, Simon Peter, Simon, and Cephas (Matthew 14:28; 16:16; 17:25; John 1:42; 1 Corinthians 1:12).
  • And Saul is called Paul (Acts 13:9).
Attention needs to be given to how the Bible writers frequently used different names when referring to the same person, because recognition of such name usage may help clarify certain alleged contradictions. Take, for instance, Matthew 1:9. Someone might wonder why Matthew mentioned Uzziah as being the father of Jotham, while 2 Kings 15:1-7 and 1 Chronicles 3:12 call Jotham’s father Azariah. The answer lies in the fact that that both names apply to the same person. Within the same chapter (2 Kings 15), Jotham’s father is called both Azariah (15:7) and Uzziah (15:32). The names are different, but they refer to the same person (cf. 2 Chronicles 26:1-23; Isaiah 1:1).
Countless Bible questions can be answered logically just by acknowledging that the ancients often were just as flexible in their giving of names as people are in the twenty-first century.

ANEMIC CHURCH GROWTH BY STEVE FINNELL

http://steve-finnell.blogspot.com/2017/04/anemic-church-growth-by-steve-finnell.html

ANEMIC CHURCH GROWTH   BY STEVE FINNELL

 

Why are churches of Christ losing members or at best seeing anemic growth? Could it be because the world looks at Christians and see no discernible difference between the world and Christians?

Could anemic growth be attributed to the fact that churches do not teach against the Masonic Lodge, but instead call Masons to preach or place them in other leadership positions in the church?

Mackey's Encyclopedia of Freemasonry-B
BIBLE....Therefore, whatever to any people express that will may be used as a substitute for the Bible in a Masonic Lodge. Thus, in a Lodge consisting entirely of Jews, the Old Testament alone  may be placed upon the altar, and Turkish Freemasons make use of the Koran. Whether it be the Gospels to the Christian, the Pentateuch to the Israelite, the Koran to the Mussulman, or the Vedas to the Brahman, it everywhere Masonically conveys the same idea-that of the symbolism of the Divine Will revealed to man.

Galatians 1:8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached, he is to be accursed!

Paul said let them be accursed. The modern church says welcome them with open arms and ordained them to leadership positions in the church.

The contemporary church says do not preach or teach against sinful practices in the church, because it might offend some members.

1 Corinthians 5:11 But actually, I wrote to you not to associate with any so-called brother if he is an immoral person, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or a swindler---not even to eat with such a one.

Contrary to what the apostle Paul wrote, our churches today say, do not point out the sins of church members. The mantra is we just need to love them. Not only are we told to just love them,  we ordain or tolerate homosexuals, adulterers, and other fornicators in leadership positions in the church.  Yes, drunkards as well.

Is it possible that the reason for anemic or no church growth is the lack of repentance among church members and no expectations of seeing a difference between Christians and those outside of Christ?

Jesus called them sons of thunder by Roy Davison





http://www.oldpaths.com/Archive/Davison/Roy/Allen/1940/024-sonsofthunder.html
 
Jesus called them sons of thunder
 
What would you expect from two brothers who were called ‘sons of thunder’?

“Then He appointed twelve, that they might be with Him and that He might send them out to preach, and to have power to heal sicknesses and to cast out demons: Simon, to whom He gave the name Peter; James the son of Zebedee and John the brother of James, to whom He gave the name Boanerges, that is, ‘Sons of Thunder’” (Mark 3:14-17).

The following incident might indicate why Jesus called them sons of thunder. “When the days were approaching for His ascension, He was determined to go to Jerusalem; and He sent messengers on ahead of Him, and they went and entered a village of the Samaritans to make arrangements for Him. But they did not receive Him, because He was traveling toward Jerusalem. When His disciples James and John saw this, they said, ‘Lord, do You want us to command fire to come down from heaven and consume them?’ But He turned and rebuked them, and said, ‘You do not know what kind of spirit you are of; for the Son of Man did not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them.’ And they went on to another village” (Luke 9:51-56 NASV).

These sons of thunder, James and John, wanted to call down fire from heaven to destroy those people who had refused hospitality to Jesus.

Through the ages many have destroyed others in the name of religion. During the crusades people who falsely claimed to be Christians murdered thousands of Moslems. In the middle ages the Catholic church murdered Protestants who dared to reject the authority of the Pope. Some Protestants murdered other Protestants they considered to be heretics.

Much grief is caused in the world today by this same godless attitude. Deceived, warped souls blow themselves up along with innocent men, women and children in the name of their religion.

Followers of Christ are of a different spirit, “For the Son of Man did not come to destroy men’s lives but to save them.” Jesus rebuked James and John. They still had much to learn.

They also showed that they did not yet understand the spirit of the Messianic reign when they wanted to rule at the right and left hand of Jesus.

“Then James and John, the sons of Zebedee, came to Him, saying, ‘Teacher, we want You to do for us whatever we ask.’ And He said to them, ‘What do you want Me to do for you?’ They said to Him, ‘Grant us that we may sit, one on Your right hand and the other on Your left, in Your glory.’ But Jesus said to them, ‘You do not know what you ask. Are you able to drink the cup that I drink, and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with?’ They said to Him, ‘We are able.’ So Jesus said to them, ‘You will indeed drink the cup that I drink, and with the baptism I am baptized with you will be baptized; but to sit on My right hand and on My left is not Mine to give, but it is for those for whom it is prepared.’ And when the ten heard it, they began to be greatly displeased with James and John. But Jesus called them to Himself and said to them, ‘You know that those who are considered rulers over the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. Yet it shall not be so among you; but whoever desires to become great among you shall be your servant. And whoever of you desires to be first shall be slave of all. For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many’” (Mark 10:35-45).

What do we know about James and John? With their father, Zebedee, they were fishermen who worked together with Peter and Andrew (Matthew 4:18, 21; Luke 5:10). Their mother, Salome, was a witness of the crucifixion and visited the tomb (Mark 15:40; Matthew 27:56; Mark 16:1).

James and John, along with Peter, were with Jesus when He raised the daughter of Jairus from the dead (Mark 5:37) and also when He was transfigured on the mountain (Mark 9:2). Peter, James, John and Andrew asked Jesus privately for clarification about the destruction of the temple (Mark 13:3, 4). In Gethsemane Jesus took Peter, James and John with him when He went farther into the garden to pray (Mark 14:32, 33). After Jesus was arrested, John went with Him into the courtyard of the high priest (John 18:15).

No details are known about the activities of James in the early church, but he must have served prominently since he was the first martyr among the apostles. He was killed with the sword by Herod Agrippa I (Acts 12:2). This was probably about ten years after the church was established.

John and Peter are often mentioned together in the early days of the church (Acts 3:1, 3, 4, 11; 4:13, 19; 8:14; Galatians 2:9).

John lived to an old age. According to tradition he was the only apostle who was not martyred. He served churches in Asia Minor (currently Turkey) and for a time was exiled to the island of Patmos (Revelation 1:9)

John penned the Gospel of John, the three Letters of John and the Revelation, which are the later books of the New Testament. He wrote the most New Testament books other than Paul.

This ‘son of thunder’ who at one time wanted to call fire down from heaven to destroy people, is now known as the apostle of love because He emphasizes love in his writings. “For this is the message that you heard from the beginning, that we should love one another” (1 John 3:11). He calls himself “the disciple whom Jesus loved” (John 13:23; 20:2; 21:7, 20) and he admonishes his fellow believers, “Beloved, if God so loved us, we also ought to love one another” (1 John 4:11).

Are we improving as followers of Christ? Are we becoming more like Him? Are we growing up in all things unto Him? (Ephesians 4:15). Are we growing up to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ? (Ephesians 4:13). Are we farther along than we were a year ago?

Do we know what kind of spirit we have?

Through the influence of Christ, two sons of thunder learned to have a different spirit: a “spirit of faith” (2 Corinthians 4:13), “a spirit of gentleness” (Galatians 6:1), a “spirit of wisdom” (Ephesians 1:17), “a gentle and quiet spirit” (1 Peter 3:4).

Following their example, let us learn to have “the mind of Christ” (1 Corinthians 2:16): a spirit of faith, gentleness, wisdom and love. Amen.

Roy Davison


The Scripture quotations in this article are from
The New King James Version. ©1979,1980,1982, Thomas Nelson Inc., Publishers.
Permission for reference use has been granted.
Published in The Old Paths Archive
(http://www.oldpaths.com)

What to believe... by Gary Rose




I was watching the news today and during a commercial break Franklin Graham tried to “convert” people by encouraging them to repeat a prayer that he gave. No where in the Bible is this done; it is man-made. That this is true is borne out by the chart which gives examples of how people are saved. Now, I understand, that there may be people out there who would argue against this, but that would be an argument of futility, for the Scriptures are very plain. Peter, in the very first sermon says:

Acts 2 ( World English Bible )
But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice and spoke out to them, “You men of Judea and all you who dwell at Jerusalem, let this be known to you, and listen to my words. [15] For these aren’t drunken, as you suppose, seeing it is only the third hour of the day. [16] But this is what has been spoken through the prophet Joel:
  
[17]  It will be in the last days, says God,
that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh.
Your sons and your daughters will prophesy. Your young men will see visions.
Your old men will dream dreams.
  
[18] Yes, and on my servants and on my handmaidens in those days,
I will pour out my Spirit, and they will prophesy.
  
[19] I will show wonders in the sky above,
and signs on the earth beneath:
blood, and fire, and billows of smoke.
  
[20] The sun will be turned into darkness,
and the moon into blood,
before the great and glorious day of the Lord comes.
  
[21] It will be that whoever will call on the name of the Lord will be saved.’
  
[22] Men of Israel, hear these words! Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved by God to you by mighty works and wonders and signs which God did by him among you, even as you yourselves know, [23] him, being delivered up by the determined counsel and foreknowledge of God, you have taken by the hand of lawless men, crucified and killed;  [24] whom God raised up, having freed him from the agony of death, because it was not possible that he should be held by it.  [25] For David says concerning him, ‘I saw the Lord always before my face, for he is on my right hand, that I should not be moved.
[26] Therefore my heart was glad, and my tongue rejoiced.
Moreover my flesh also will dwell in hope,
[27] because you will not leave my soul in Hades,
neither will you allow your Holy One to see decay.
[28] You made known to me the ways of life.
You will make me full of gladness with your presence.’
[29] Brothers, I may tell you freely of the patriarch David, that he both died and was buried, and his tomb is with us to this day.  [30] Therefore, being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that of the fruit of his body, according to the flesh, he would raise up the Christ to sit on his throne,  [31] he foreseeing this, spoke about the resurrection of the Christ, that his soul wasn’t left in Hades, and his flesh didn’t see decay.  [32] This Jesus God raised up, to which we all are witnesses.  [33] Being therefore exalted by the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has poured out this which you now see and hear.  [34] For David didn’t ascend into the heavens, but he says himself, ‘The Lord said to my Lord, “Sit by my right hand   [35] until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet.”’   [36] Let all the house of Israel therefore know certainly that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified.”
  
[37] Now when they heard this, they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?” 
  
[38] Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.  [39] For the promise is to you and to your children, and to all who are far off, even as many as the Lord our God will call to himself.”  [40] With many other words he testified and exhorted them, saying, “Save yourselves from this crooked generation!”
  
[41] Then those who gladly received his word were baptized. There were added that day about three thousand souls.

Samuel L. Jackson is correct; this is happening. People can and do make up ways to get to heaven. Look at the chart, read the sermon. Look for the “sinners prayer” in the Bible – you won’t find it. I trust Jesus, his apostles and what the Scriptures say about the subject and I hope you will as well.