"THE FIRST EPISTLE OF PETER" Peter's Perplexing Passage (3:18-20) INTRODUCTION 1. In 2Pe 3:15-16, Peter mentions that Paul wrote some things that were hard to understand 2. The same could be said about some of Peter's own writings, especially the passage in 1Pe 3:18-20 3. Considered by some to be one of the most difficult passages in the Bible, various and sometimes fanciful interpretations have been given 4. In a lesson designed to inform rather than exhort... a. We shall examine several of the interpretations that have been offered b. And suggest which one seems to be the right one (to me, at least) [We shall examine five interpretations, in the chronological sequence in which they have been offered...] I. THE VIEW OF CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA (200 A.D.) A. BASIC ELEMENTS... 1. That Christ went to Hades in His spirit between His death and His resurrection 2. That He proclaimed the message of salvation to the souls of sinners imprisoned there since the flood B. MAJOR DIFFICULTIES... 1. This view would suggest that for some reason these souls were given a "second chance" 2. Whereas the Bible consistently teaches against such an idea... a. "it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment" - He 9:27 b. Peter himself later wrote that the wicked souls before the flood were being "reserved... under punishment for the day of judgment" - 2Pe 2:4-5,9 3. Why would people before the flood be given a second chance when those after the flood are not? II. THE VIEW OF AUGUSTINE (400 A.D.) A. BASIC ELEMENTS... 1. That the "pre-existent" Christ in His spirit proclaimed salvation through Noah to the people who lived before the flood a. We know that Noah was "a preacher of righteousness" in his day - 2Pe 2:5 b. We know that the Spirit of Christ was at work in O.T. prophets - 1Pe 1:10-11 2. This view is held by many brethren today B. MAJOR DIFFICULTIES... 1. The wording of Peter would more naturally suggest that he is speaking of... a. The Christ who was "put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit" b. I.e., the "crucified & resurrected" Christ, not the "pre-incarnate" Christ 2. Also, the wording would more naturally suggest the preaching occurred... a. To the spirits "in prison", not before they were imprisoned b. When they "formerly were disobedient", not during their disobedience [Augustine's view dominated the theological scene for centuries, but then other views were presented...] III. THE VIEW OF CARDINAL BELLARMINE (1600 A.D.) A. BASIC ELEMENTS... 1. That in His spirit Christ went to release the souls of the RIGHTEOUS who repented before the flood and had been kept in "LIMBO" 2. In Catholic theology, "limbo" is the place between heaven and hell, where the souls of the O.T. saints were kept B. MAJOR DIFFICULTIES... 1. The Bible is silent about a place such as "limbo" 2. The "spirits" under discussion by Peter were "disobedient" in "the days of Noah"... a. According to Ge 6:5-13; 7:1, only Noah and his family were righteous b. If others had repented, would they not also have been on the ark? 3. I.e., there were no righteous before the flood save Noah and his family! IV. THE VIEW OF FRIEDRICH SPITTA (1900 A.D.) A. BASIC ELEMENTS... 1. After His death and BEFORE His resurrection, Christ preached to "fallen angels", also known as "sons of God", who during Noah's time had married "daughters of men" 2. This view is based upon a particular interpretation of Ge 6:1-4... a. Job 1:6; 2:1 is offered as evidence that angels are sometimes referred to as "sons of God" b. Jude 6, also, is offered as referring to "fallen angels" in the days of Noah 1) Because it sounds very similar to references in a book called I Enoch 2) Which expounds in detail the idea that the "sons of God" in Ge 6 were "fallen angels" 3) And Jude seems to quote directly from this book in Ju 14,15 c. Josephus, a Jewish historian born in 37 A.D., took a similar view of Ge 6 3. This view is held by many Protestant scholars B. MAJOR DIFFICULTIES... 1. In responding to the Sadducees, Jesus taught that angels of God do not marry - Mt 22:30 2. Of course, Jesus may have been referring to angels who "keep their proper domain", and do not leave "their own habitation" a. If righteous angels could temporarily take on human form to deliver God's message (as in the case described in Ge 18: 1-8; 19:1-3) where they ate food... b. It might have been possible for "fallen angels" to take on human form and cohabitate as some believe Ge 6 suggests 3. But it just as feasible to understand Ge 6 differently... a. That the "sons of God" were the descendants of Seth (i.e., godly people), and the "daughters of men" were descendants of Cain (ungodly people) b. This view stays clear of speculation which can easily take on mythological proportions! [We come to a fifth interpretation, one that I think has much to commend for it...] V. THE VIEW OF SOME CONTEMPORARY COMMENTATORS (PRESENT) A. BASIC ELEMENTS... 1. That the resurrected Christ, WHEN HE ASCENDED INTO HEAVEN, proclaimed to imprisoned spirits his victory over death 2. That the exalted Christ passed through the realm where the fallen angels are kept and proclaimed His triumph over them (Ep 6:12; Col 2:15 is offered as support for this view) 3. This interpretation has met favorable response in both Protestant and Roman Catholic circles 4. More importantly, this view is in beautiful harmony with Peter's wording and context... B. MAJOR DISTINCTIONS... 1. The preaching was made by Jesus Himself (not through Noah) 2. The preaching was made by Jesus AFTER "being put to death in the flesh" (not in His pre-incarnate form) 3. The preaching was made by Jesus AFTER He was "made alive by the Spirit" (i.e., after His resurrection, not during the three day period between death and resurrection) 4. The preaching was made to "THE SPIRITS" a. Not to "the spirits of men" (which is how the souls or spirits of men are commonly referred to, notice He 12:23; Re 6:9; 20:4) b. But rather to "angelic spirits" 5. The preaching was made to them "IN PRISON" (that there are angels so bound is clearly taught in 2Pe 2 and Jude) 6. The preaching was made to them who were "FORMERLY DISOBEDIENT ...IN THE DAYS OF NOAH" a. This view does not require that the rebellious angels were the "sons of God" in Ge 6 b. But simply were somehow disobedient at that time (as some were later during Christ's time) 7. The preaching was a proclamation of victory over death, not an offer of a second chance to a select few! CONCLUSION 1. As suggested, this last view is not only in harmony with the very words and grammatical constructions used by Peter, but it is harmony with the CONTEXT... a. Peter had been teaching us to be willing to suffer, if necessary, for doing good - 1Pe 3:17 b. He appeals to the example of Christ - 1Pe 3:18a c. Who despite His suffering and death, was made alive, proclaimed victory to those spirits who had not been willing to submit to God in Noah's day, ascending to the right hand of God, over all angels and authorities! - 1Pe 3:18b-20, note especially v. 22 d. In view of Jesus' triumph over suffering, we should be willing to do the same! - 1Pe 4:1 2. Admittedly, this passage is difficult, so one needs to be careful and not dogmatic in one's treatment of it 3. I hope that by presenting this survey of the various views it may serve helpful in drawing your own conclusions about "Peter's Perplexing Passage" But one thing Peter mentions in this passage that is not perplexing is his reference to baptism, and it's necessity for salvation (1Pe 3:21)...
6/7/19
"THE FIRST EPISTLE OF PETER" Peter's Perplexing Passage (3:18-20) by Mark Copeland
Shrewbot’s Synthetic Whiskers Detect God by Kyle Butt, M.Div.
http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=12&article=4210
Shrewbot’s Synthetic Whiskers Detect God
by | Kyle Butt, M.Div. |
Tiny shrews use their whiskers to locate prey and navigate. |
The Etruscan pygmy shrew is a contender for the smallest mammal in the world. But its diminutive size does not detract from its amazing design. Since this little critter is blind, it must rely on its whiskers to navigate and find food. The whiskers of this tiny shrew are highly sensitive and extremely efficient. In fact, the shrew’s whiskers work so well that researchers have been studying them in an attempt to equip robots with similar technology.
Robotics experts from the Bristol Robotics Laboratory in England have been working on a new machine they call Shrewbot. Shrewbot is a small robot fitted with synthetic whiskers that mimic those of the Etruscan shew (Moon, 2012). The primary advantage of this “touchy” technology is that the bot does not rely on vision. Researchers suggest that the sense of touch will enable the bot to explore “dark, dangerous or smoke filled environments” (2012).
When scientists copy designs in nature, it is called biomimicry. At Apologetics Press, we have written several articles about this field of research (see Biomimicry). Each new instance of this practice underscores the intelligent design within the natural world. The implication is simple. If brilliant scientists find complex, proficient designs in nature that are more efficient than any man-made designs, then the Designer of the natural world must be more intelligent than any human designer. It is ironic that one of the world’s smallest mammals provides such a “big” piece of evidence for the existence of God—the Intelligent Designer.
REFERENCES
Biomimicry, /APContent.aspx?category=12&topic=66.
Moon, Mariella (2012), “How the Etruscan Pygmy Shrew Inspired a Bewhiskered Disaster Relief Robot,” http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/technology-blog/etruscan-pygmy-shrew-inspired-bewhiskered-disaster-relief-robot-154004920.html.
Seeing the Designer in Shrimp Vision by Kyle Butt, M.Div.
http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=12&article=5015
Seeing the Designer in Shrimp Vision
by | Kyle Butt, M.Div. |
Humans have amazing eyesight. In fact, many camera companies have looked to the eye in an effort to glean useful information in developing better photographic and video technology. As effective as the human eye is, however, there are certain things it cannot do. One of those is to detect ultraviolet light. But researchers have recently discovered a creature with the amazing ability to detect ultraviolet light—the mantis shrimp.
Mantis shrimp are some of the most interesting creatures in the water. They have extremely powerful claws and lightening fast reflexes. But their ability to see ultraviolet light makes their eyesight one of the most remarkable abilities in the animal kingdom. Michael Bok, one of the researchers studying mantis shrimp vision stated: “The overall construction of the mantis shrimp’s visual system is just so unbelievably ridiculous, so this is just another piece of that tapestry” (Pappas, 2014). What makes their vision “unbelievably ridiculous” is that they have 12 photoreceptors in their eyes, while humans only have three (2014). Another interesting element to their vision is that the shrimp uses amino acids that act as sunscreen in their eyes to help them see ultraviolet light.
The design behind mantis shrimp vision, according to those doing the work on it, is “unbelievably ridiculous,” meaning of course that it is so advanced that it takes a team of researchers just to try to understand it, much less figure out a way to copy the technology. Those who contend that the mantis shrimp is a product of evolutionary changes that have taken place over millions of years cannot explain how such advanced capabilities could reside in the shrimp. No amount of mindless tinkering could produce such highly sensitive instruments as mantis shrimp eyes.
The most reasonable explanation for mantis shrimp vision is that an intelligent Creator, Who sees all things (including ultraviolet light), designed the shrimp and its complex eye. When brilliant human researchers come away from such “technology” in awe of the abilities of mantis shrimp vision, the obvious conclusion to draw is that the Designer of such vision possesses an intelligence far superior to that of the humans involved in the research. When the Proverbs writer stated: “The hearing ear and the seeing eye, the Lord has made both of them” (Proverbs 20:12), that would certainly include a “seeing eye” that uses amino acids as sunscreen and 12 photoreceptors to see light that humans cannot.
REFERENCE
Pappas, Stephanie (2014), “Natural Sunscreen Explains Mantis Shrimp’s Amazing UV Vision,” LiveScience, http://news.yahoo.com/natural-sunscreen-explains-mantis-shrimps-amazing-uv-vision-200152964.html.
Seeing is Believing: The Design of the Human Eye by Taylor Richardson
http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=12&article=1412
Seeing is Believing: The Design of the Human Eye
by | Taylor Richardson |
If one of your friends asked you, “How do you know God exists?,” what would you say? There are many different ways to prove God’s existence, because God has given us so much evidence. Sometimes we find that evidence in things we see in the Universe, for example, the Sun. The Sun is like a giant nuclear engine. It gives off more energy in a single second than mankind has produced since the Creation. It converts 8 million tons of matter into energy every single second, and has an interior temperature of more than 20 million degrees Celsius (see Lawton, 1981). Sometimes we find evidence in the animal kingdom. Take the golden orb spider for instance. Pound for pound, the dragline silk of this spider is five times stronger than steel, and is twice as strong as the material that currently makes up SWAT teams’ bulletproof vests. In fact, due to its amazing strength and elasticity, it has been said that you could trap a jumbo jet with spider silk that is the thickness of a pencil.
And sometimes the evidence for God’s existence can even be found within our own bodies. The writer of the book of Hebrews spoke about this evidence when he said: “For every house is built by someone, but he who built all things is God” (3:4).
One of the best examples of design within the human body is the eye. Even Charles Darwin struggled with the problem of how to explain how such a complex organ as the eye could have “evolved” through naturalistic processes. In The Origin of Species he wrote:
To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest sense (1859, p. 170, emp. added).
But even though Darwin acknowledged that the eye could not have evolved, he went on to argue that it had, in fact, been produced by natural selection through an evolutionary process. It seems almost as though Darwin could not seem to make up his mind on the matter. But he is not the only one who has struggled to explain, from a naturalistic viewpoint, the intricacy of the eye. Evolutionist Robert Jastrow once wrote:
The eye is a marvelous instrument, resembling a telescope of the highest quality, with a lens, an adjustable focus, a variable diaphragm for controlling the amount of light, and optical corrections for spherical and chromatic aberration. The eye appears to have been designed; no designer of telescopes could have done better. How could this marvelous instrument have evolved by chance, through a succession of random events? (1981, pp. 96-97, emp. added).
How indeed? Though Dr. Jastrow argued that “the fact of evolution is not in doubt,” he confessed that “…there seems to be no direct proof that evolution can work these miracles.… It is hard to accept the evolution of the eye as a product of chance” (1981, pp. 101,97,98, emp. added). Considering the extreme complexity of the eye, it is easy to understand why Jastrow would make such a comment. In his book, Does God Believe in Atheists?, John Blanchard described just how complex the eye really is.
The human eye is a truly amazing phenomenon. Although accounting for just one fourth-thousandth of an adult’s weight, it is the medium which processes some 80% of the information received by its owner from the outside world. The tiny retina contains about 130 million rod-shaped cells, which detect light intensity and transmit impulses to the visual cortex of the brain by means of some one million nerve fibres, while nearly six million cone-shaped cells do the same job, but respond specifically to colour variation. The eyes can handle 500,00 messages simultaneously, and are kept clear by ducts producing just the right amount of fluid with which the lids clean both eyes simultaneously in one five-thousandth of a second (2000, p. 313).
Statements like this proves that the eye was so well designed, and so complicated, that it could not have happened by accident, as evolution teaches.
THE EYE’S DESIGN
The anatomy of the eye was first examined and recorded at Alexandria, Egypt, in the first century A.D. An anatomist, Rufus of Ephesus, described the main parts of the eye, which included the dome-like cornea at the front, the colored iris, the lens, and the vitreous humor (which gives the eye its shiny look). Today, thanks to microscopes, we now know that these, along with many other parts of the eye, work in harmony to produce the gift of sight.
The outer white layer of the eye is called the sclera, more commonly known as the “white of the eye.” This layer is an extremely durable, fibrous tissue that extends from the cornea (the clear front section of the eye) to the optic nerve (at the back of the eye). Six tiny muscles (known as the extraocular muscles, or EOMs) connect to the sclera around the eye and control the eye’s movements. Four of the muscles (known as the rectus muscles) control the horizontal and vertical movement, while two (the oblique muscles) control the rotation. All six muscles work together so that the eye moves smoothly.
The inside of the eye can be divided functionally into two distinct parts. The first is the physical “dioptric” mechanism (from the Greek word dioptra, meaning something through which one looks), which handles incoming light. This includes the cornea, iris, and lens. The cornea is the transparent, dome-shaped window (about eleven millimeters in diameter) that covers the front of the eye. Its most important function is to protect the delicate components of the eye against damage by foreign bodies. Thus, the cornea acts like a watch face, in that it lets us look through the “window” of our eye while protecting the internal components from debris and harmful chemicals. The cornea also takes care of most of the refraction (the ability of the eye to change the direction of light in order to focus it on the retina) and works with the lens to help focus items seen at varying distances as it changes its curvature. The iris and the pupil work together to let in just the right amount of light. There are two opposing sets of muscles that regulate the size of the aperture (the opening, or the pupil) according to the brightness or dimness of the incoming light. If the light is bright, the iris constricts, allowing little light to pass; but if it is dark, the iris dilates or expands, allowing more light to pass through. The light (or image) then moves through a lens that has the ability to adjust its shape to help it clarify the image by changing the focal length of the lens between 40.4 and 69.9 millimeters where it is then focused (in an inverted form) on to the retina.
Between the lens and the retina is a transparent substance (the vitreous fluid) that fills the center of the eye. This substance is important because it not only gives the eye its spherical shape, but also provides nutrition for the retinal vessels inside the eye. In children, the vitreous feels like a gel, but as we age, it gradually thins and becomes more of a liquid.
The second is the receptor area of the retina where the light triggers processes in the nerve cells. The retina plays a key role in visual perception. In his book, The Wonder of Man, Werner Gitt explains how the retina is a masterpiece of engineering design.
One single square millimetre of the retina contains approximately 400,000 optical sensors. To get some idea of such a large number, imagine a sphere, on the surface of which circles are drawn, the size of tennis balls. These circles are separated from each other by the same distance as their diameter. In order to accommodate 400,000 such circles, the sphere must have a diameter of 52 metres... (1999, p. 15).
Alan L. Gillen also praised the design of the retina in his book, Body by Design.
The most amazing component of the eye is the “film,” which is the retina. This light-sensitive layer at the back of the eyeball is thinner than a sheet of plastic wrap and is more sensitive to light than any man-made film. The best camera film can handle a ratio of 1000-to-1 photons in terms of light intensity. By comparison, human retinal cells can handle a ratio of 10 billion-to-1 over the dynamic range of light wavelengths of 380 to 750 nanometers. The human eye can sense as little as a single photon of light in the dark! In bright daylight, the retina can bleach out, turning its “volume control” way down so as not to overload. The light-sensitive cells of the retina are like an extremely complex high-gain amplifier that is able to magnify sounds more than one million times (2001, pp. 97-98, emp. added).
Without a doubt, this thin (only 0.2 mm) layer of nerve tissue is a marvel of engineering. It contains photoreceptor (light-sensitive) cells and four types of nerve cells, as well as structural cells and epithelial pigment cells. The two kinds of photoreceptor cells are referred to as rods and cones because of their shape. Each eye has about 130 million rods and 7 million cones. The rods are very sensitive to light (whether it is bright or dim), and allow the eye to see in black and white. Cones, on the other hand, are not as sensitive as rods, and function only optimally in daylight. There are three different types of cones—red light, green light, and blue light—each of which is sensitive to its respective color of light, and which allow the eye to see in full color. The rods and cones convert the different lights into chemical signals, which then travel along the optic nerve to the brain.
Not only are the images produced by the dioptric mechanism miniaturized and upside-down, but it turns out that they also are left-right inverted. The optic nerves from both eyes split up and cross each other in such a way that the left halves of the images of both eyes are received by the right hemisphere of the brain, while the right halves are received by the left. Each half of the observer’s brain receives information from only one half of the image. As Gitt went on to explain, “Note that, although the brain processes the different parts of the image in various remote locations, the two halves of the field of vision are seamlessly reunited, without any trace of a joint—amazing! This process is still far from being fully understood” (p. 17). It is hard to believe that this inverted system of sight could have been produced through evolution.
Since the eyes are one of the most important organs in the body, they must be taken care of constantly. And God designed just such a built-in cleaning system, consisting of the eyelashes, eyelids, and lacrimal glands. The lacrimal glands produce a steady flow of tears that flush away dust and other foreign materials. The tears also contain a potent anti-microbial agent known as lysozyme that destroys bacteria, viruses, etc. The eyelids and eyelashes work together to keep dirt and other debris from entering the eye. The eyelids act like windshield wipers, blinking 3-6 times a minute to moisten and clean the eye.
For many years, scientists have compared the eye to the modern manmade camera (see Miller, 1960, p. 315; Nourse, 1964, p. 154; Gardener, 1994, p. 105). True, the eye and camera do have many things in common, if the function of the camera demands that it was “made,” does it not stand to reason that the more complex human camera, the eye, also must have had a Maker? Alan Gillen explained it best when he wrote: “No human camera, artificial device, nor computer-enhanced light-sensitive device can match the contrivance of the human eye. Only a master engineer with superior intelligence could manufacture a series of interdependent light sensitive parts and reactions” (p. 99, emp. added). That master engineer was God. The writer of Proverbs knew this when he wrote, “The hearing ear and the seeing eye, the Lord has made them both” (20:12).
REFERENCES
Blanchard, John (2000), Does God Believe in Atheists? (Auburn, MA: Evangelical Press).
Darwin, Charles (1859), On the Origin of Species (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; a facsimile of the first edition).
Gardner, Lynn (1994), Christianity Stands True (Joplin, MO: College Press).
Gillen, Alan L. (2001), Body by Design (Green Forest, AR: Master Books).
Gitt, Werner (1999), The Wonder of Man (Bielefeld, Germany: Christliche Literatur-Verbreitung E.V.).
Jastrow, Robert (1981), The Enchanted Loom: Mind in the Universe (New York: Simon and Schuster).
Lawton, April (1981), “From Here to Infinity,” Science Digest, 89[1]:98-105, January/February.
Miller, Benjamin and Goode, Ruth (1960), Man and His Body (New York: Simon and Schuster).
Nourse, Alan E., ed. (1964), The Body (New York: Time, Inc.).
Teachings of Jesus from the Gospel of Luke (Part 3 When Jesus called Levi) by Ben Fronczek
http://granvillenychurchofchrist.org/?p=1750
Teachings of Jesus from the Gospel of Luke (Part 3 When Jesus called Levi)
After Jesus left His home town of Nazareth and after being rejected there we read about Him continuing on with His ministry of preaching and healing in the 2nd half of Luke 4 and 5.
We also read that He began to call certain disciples to follow Him. He tells some fisherman including Simon Peter that they now become fishers of men in 5:10.
I’m sure many in the religious community of His time were surprised and even frowned on His choice of companions as well as the company He kept. These guys probably had at best the basic religious education one would receive as a child yet Jesus chose them over the religious elite of His time.
And then in Luke 5:27 and following the Jews were probably even more shocked at His next choice.
Read 5:27-32 “ Jesus went out and saw a tax collector by the name of Levi sitting at his tax booth. “Follow me,” Jesus said to him, 28 and Levi got up, left everything and followed him.
29 Then Levi held a great banquet for Jesus at his house, and a large crowd of tax collectors and others were eating with them. 30 But the Pharisees and the teachers of the law who belonged to their sect complained to his disciples, “Why do you eat and drink with tax collectors and sinners?”
31 Jesus answered them, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. 32 I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.”
Tax collectors were NOT well liked back then. Their job was to collect taxes for Rome, the hated conquering occupiers of their homeland.
These collectors of the Roman tax made their living by taking a little extra off the top for themselves. And if they thought you could give a “little” extra – well, so much the better. There was not court of appeals. Whatever these men said you had to pay – you paid – you had no choice. The Jews therefore hated these tax collectors and viewed them not much better than prostitutes. Even the Romans really didn’t like them. Nobody seem to like these guys.
And, I suspect, when Jesus found him, Levi was tired of it all. Tired of being rejected and turned away. Tired of being hated and spat upon. I can picture him being a sad and lonely man who just wanted out – but he didn’t know how. He didn’t know how to change WHO he was and WHAT he was. And even if he did, nobody would let him forget what he had been, and how he’d made his living.
But Jesus didn’t care what Levi had BEEN. He only cared about what Levi had the potential to BE. Jesus not only has the audacity to associate with this man, He even goes as far as to call him to become one of his disciples and follow Him.
The grammatical tense of Jesus request indicates that He wanted Levi to come and follow Him not just for a moment but rather constantly, even permanently. And Levi responds by getting up and following Him.
The next thing we see in the text is that Levi throws a party and a feast at His home in home in honor of Jesus. Rather than feeling sorry about what he was leaving behind, the good paying job for a life of sacrificial, Levi wanted to party because he was obviously very happy. And Jesus and His disciple stayed and enjoyed the festivities.
.And, of course, Levi invites a number of his friends – and of course his friends were other tax collectors. They too were also despised by the community. There were probably other socially undesirables present as well base on comments made by the Pharisees and teachers in the following verses. The probably wondered, ‘How could this teacher, this Rabbi, possibly associate with such despicable people?’
And so Jesus responds by telling them, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. 32 I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.”
A medical doctor is not much of a doctor if he only sees healthy fit people. If a Doctor wants to be a true healer he needs to work with sick people like these Jews… And I guess a savior would not be much of a savior if he only spent time with people who already thought they were righteous church people.
I can see a couple of lesson here from this text so far. #1. We are to be careful not to write off anyone when it comes to turning to Jesus. We don’t know where people really are and what’s going on in their life. They may have been scoundrels and they may have done some bad things in their past but they also may be ready for a change, a new and improved life lie Levi. Some of us have pretty shoddy backgrounds as well. We also need to see people for what they can become and not always for who they were and what they did in the past.
Verse 27 says that Jesus saw Levi, a better translation for the Greek word saw is observed, or look attentively at him. Maybe after taking some time to really observe and study this guy maybe Jesus saw how unhappy he really was. Maybe he took the time to see how much he was ready for a change. And maybe we need to do the same and open our eyes and really look at what going on in another person’s life before we make judgments about them.
#2. Jesus was no stick in the mud. He apparently liked to have a good time and party and have fun and probably have a few laughs. The Pharisees and teacher seem to be appalled at His behavior.
Look at what the Pharisees ask Jesus in Verse 33ff
“They said to him, “John’s disciples1 often fast and pray, and so do the disciples of the Pharisees, but yours go on eating and drinking.”
And so Jesus answered by saying, “Can you make the guests of the bridegroom2 fast while he is with them? But the time will come when the bridegroom will be taken from them;3 in those days they will fast.”
All that those Pharisees could do was find something wrong to complain about. They did not even really know who was standing before them..
Isn’t it sad that so many people are like that. They could be standing in the presence of God Himself or be surrounded by all kinds of blessing in their life, but all they can do is complain about this or that and even look down on others and find something to complain about them.
Those men even ignored the fact that it was quite possible that some of those tax collectors and other sinners enjoying that party may have made a decision to change from their life of sin.
#3. A lot of us seem to have forgotten how to enjoy our Christian life. We work and go to church, work and go to church. What do we do to enjoy our self. And what about having fun with our brothers and sisters, having dinner parties or picnics, having a few laughs together. It is so rare today. No wonder so many churches are losing young people and can’t attract new people if all we do is act holy and stoic like those Pharisees and never have any fun. I think we need to loosen up a bit, find ways to enjoy life and have a few laughs together, and maybe then we will attract more outsiders like Jesus did that day.
Maybe we all have it backwards. The big thing we try to do is invite someone to Bible Study, Church service or may even a pot-luck meal after they have to sit thru a service and we wonder why people don’t come flocking in and come back for more each week. Levi called his friends and said come on over for a feast and a party at my home and people came. They had some good food, and wine, they probably had a few laughs and I sure Jesus probably made a few more friends that day. There might be a lesson in this for us today.
But as we’ve read, there Pharisees didn’t like the way Jesus did things.
Jesus goes on and tells them two similar parables in verse 36-39 saying, “No one tears a patch from a new garment and sews it on an old one. If he does, he will have torn the new garment, and the patch from the new will not match the old.”
Can you just imagine tearing a piece of material out a new shirt to patch a hole in the elbow of an old worn out shirt? He continues on by saying…
37 “And no one pours new wine into old wineskins. If he does, the new wine will burst the skins, the wine will run out and the wineskins will be ruined. No, new wine must be poured into new wineskins.
I believe what Jesus was telling them was sometime you have to get rid of that which is old and worn out and replace it with that which is new. Some things are just not worth fixing. Like the way those legalistic Jews had been doing things had run it course and Jesus was ushering in something completely new. People hence forth would be saved by the grace of God, by their faith and trusting in Him as their Savior, not by adhering to their rules and regulations of the Pharisees and then pretending to be holy.
He concludes by saying, 39 “And no one after drinking old wine wants the new, for he says, ‘The old is better.’ “
Back then old wine turned sour, it began to turn to vinegar. He was saying that despite the fact that it was turning sour some simply choose not to partake of the tasty sweet new wine because the old wine is what they were use to. And as a matter of fact they felt that it was better because that’s what they are use to.
Some say that there was a touch of humor there in Jesus’ illustration. It would be like saying, ‘I like using a washboard to wash my clothes on instead of one of those fancy new washer machines. I like my washboard, it’s better than a washing machine because that’s what I’m use to.’
Jesus was letting these critical Jews know that they were the one’s who were drinking the old sour wine and probably smiling as He told them that they prefer it because that’s what they were use to.
They couldn’t seem to accept anything that the Lord Himself was doing because it was different than what they were doing. They were in that much of a rut; keeping that law and all those rules and regulation for the sake of religion, and unfortunately overlooking the need to show love and mercy and the need to reach out to others with that love lie Jesus did to Levi.
And here lies our final lesson for this text today. #4. We have to be careful not to get in that same rut where we are more concerned about keeping rules and regulations and what we do at church rather that observing people and really paying attention to where they are. It should be more about at being willing to show them love and mercy as Jesus did that day rather that shaking a finger that folks because they aren’t doing what we are doing.
For more lessons click on the following link: http://granvillenychurchofchrist.org/?page_id=566
All comments can be emailed to: bfronzek@gmail.com
Is God’s word written on your heart? by Roy Davison
http://www.oldpaths.com/Archive/Davison/Roy/Allen/1940/written.html
What does it mean to have God’s word in your heart?
Old Covenant people were to have God’s word in their heart.
Few under the Old Covenant had God’s law in their heart.
New Covenant people have God’s law in their heart.
How can we have God’s law in our heart?
Bad things may not be written on our heart.
Time is required to write God’s word on our heart.
“Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly” (Colossians 3:16).
Is God’s word written on your heart?
Because God’s laws are for our good (Deuteronomy 10:13) we need to write them on our heart. A Bible on our bookshelf is not enough, or even in the memory of our phone. To guide us spiritually, God’s word must be in our heart.
What does it mean to have God’s word in your heart?
God’s word dwells within you and is the guiding force of your life: you know it, understand it, respect it, love it and practice it willingly.
Old Covenant people were to have God’s word in their heart.
“You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your might. And these words which I command you today shall be in your heart; you shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, when you walk by the way, when you lie down, and when you rise up” (Deuteronomy 6:5-7). To do this we must know God’s word.
“You shall lay up these words of mine in your heart and in your soul” (Deuteronomy 11:18). We store valuable data carefully. Do we store God’s word in our heart and soul?
“For this commandment which I command you today, it is not too mysterious for you, nor is it far off. It is not in heaven, that you should say, ‘Who will ascend into heaven for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’ Nor is it beyond the sea, that you should say, ‘Who will go over the sea for us and bring it to us, that we may hear it and do it?’ But the word is very near you, in your mouth and in your heart, that you may do it” (Deuteronomy 30:11-14). If God’s word is in our heart, it will also be in our mouth. What does a football fan talk about? Football! Someone with God’s word in his heart, speaks about God’s word.
“The mouth of the righteous speaks wisdom, and his tongue talks of justice. The law of his God is in his heart” (Psalm 37:30, 31).
“Your word I have hidden in my heart, that I might not sin against You” (Psalm 119:11). When God’s word is in our heart, we know what pleases and displeases Him, and we want to please Him.
“My son, keep my words, and treasure my commands within you. Keep my commands and live, and my law as the apple of your eye. Bind them on your fingers; write them on the tablet of your heart” (Proverbs 7:1-3).
God’s people were told repeatedly to write His word on their heart, but most did not do so.
Few under the Old Covenant had God’s law in their heart.
Although God sent prophets to call them to repentance, although the faithful encouraged their unfaithful brethren to know the Lord, few of the physical descendants of Jacob had God’s law in their hearts.
Thus God proclaimed: “‘Behold, the days are coming,’ says the LORD, ‘when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, though I was a husband to them,’ says the LORD. ‘But this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel: After those days, says the LORD, I will put My law in their minds, and write it on their hearts; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. No more shall every man teach his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, “Know the LORD,” for they all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them,’ says the LORD. ‘For I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more’” (Jeremiah 31:31-34).
New Covenant people have God’s law in their heart.
This prophesy was fulfilled by Jesus Christ who came to bring God’s New Covenant for the whole world, founded on personal faith rather than physical descent, and to be the true sacrifice for sin: “For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified. And the Holy Spirit also witnesses to us; for after He had said before, ‘This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, says the Lord: I will put My laws into their hearts, and in their minds I will write them,’ then He adds, ‘Their sins and their lawless deeds I will remember no more’” (Hebrews 10:14-17). [See also Hebrews 8:10-12.]
Christ had God’s law in His heart: “Then I said, ‘Behold, I come; In the scroll of the Book it is written of me. I delight to do Your will, O my God, and Your law is within my heart’” (Psalm 40:7, 8).
Because Jesus was sinless, He was qualified to bear the punishment for our sins, and to replace the Old Covenant with the New: “For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him” (2 Corinthians 5:21).
Under the New Covenant, by definition, God’s people consist of those who have God’s law in their heart: “For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes. For Moses writes about the righteousness which is of the law, ‘The man who does those things shall live by them.’ But the righteousness of faith speaks in this way, ‘Do not say in your heart, “Who will ascend into heaven?”’ (that is, to bring Christ down from above) or, ‘“Who will descend into the abyss?”’ (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead). But what does it say? ‘The word is near you, even in your mouth and in your heart’ (that is, the word of faith which we preach)” (Romans 10:4-8).
How can we have God’s law in our heart?
We must prepare our hearts to receive the word. In the parable of the sower, God’s word bears fruit only in good and noble hearts (Luke 8:15).
Of King Rehoboam it is said: “And he did evil, because he did not prepare his heart to seek the LORD” (2 Chronicles 12:14).
Ezra, on the other hand, “had prepared his heart to seek the Law of the LORD, and to do it” (Ezra 7:10).
Our hearts must be receptive. God told Ezekiel: “Son of man, receive into your heart all My words that I speak to you, and hear with your ears” (Ezekiel 3:10).
The word of God must be received: “Therefore lay aside all filthiness and overflow of wickedness, and receive with meekness the implanted word, which is able to save your souls” (James 1:21).
It is not enough to attend religious services each Sunday. The law of God must be written on our hearts. Paul told the believers at Corinth that they were a letter of Christ, “written not with ink but by the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of flesh, that is, of the heart” (2 Corinthians 3:2, 3).
When God’s law is written on our hearts, it permeates our whole being: it influences our thoughts, words and actions.
Bad things may not be written on our heart.
Our degenerate society is always ready to write its godless opinions and materialistic principles on our hearts. How is this done? Mainly through the media, schools and social contacts.
To have God’s law written on our hearts, bad influences must be avoided and resisted. We must be careful what we read, what we watch, what we listen to. We must be careful who our friends are: “Do not be deceived: ‘Bad company ruins good morals’” (1 Corinthians 15:33 ESV).
We must also be careful who our virtual friends are. People in films can easily influence the way we think and feel. Even the “good guys” are often rather bad. Much of this evil influence is insidious. Immorality, for example, is presented on television, in films and at school as normal, acceptable behavior, and is falsely portrayed as having no bad consequences. This is inspired by the devil.
What if someone rang your doorbell each evening, came in and spent the whole evening in your home using worldly language and showing indecent pictures to your children?
As a Christian, would you not show him the door and tell him he was not welcome? Yet, many Christians welcome such a visitor into their home each day. His initials are T.V.
The Internet is also an enticing source of evil influence.
“Can a man take fire to his bosom, and his clothes not be burned?” (Proverbs 6:27). If we eat garbage, we get sick. If we fill our mind with garbage, we will have a sick mind. If we look at pornography, we will develop a pornographic mind. If we fill our heart with vanity, our life will be in vain.
On the other hand, if we fill our hearts with the word of God, we will be healthy and strong spiritually. Let us rededicate our hearts to God.
Time is required to write God’s word on our heart.
If God’s word is in our heart it will also be at the heart of our day. We must redeem the time because the days are evil (Ephesians 5:16; Colossians 4:5). This means that we must spend our time profitably.
Most of our day is unavoidably occupied with routine chores. Only a small part can be spent any way we wish. How do we use this prime time? Absorbing God’s word? Or do we waste it in self-indulgence?
To allow God to write His word on our hearts we must attend services and Bible studies regularly. We need to read the Bible or listen to Bible recordings each day. If our daily schedule does not allow this, maybe we ought to rearrange our schedule. We might also dedicate larger blocks of time on certain days to taking God’s word into our hearts.
“Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly” (Colossians 3:16).
May the word of God permeate our hearts to provide spiritual guidance for our lives. May God’s word be in our conversation. Let us teach His word to our children, talk of it when we are at home, when we ride in the car, when we lie down, and when we rise up. Let us write the commands of God on the tablet of our heart. Only then may we call ourselves the people of God. Amen.
Roy Davison
The Scripture quotations in this article are from
The New King James Version. ©1979,1980,1982, Thomas Nelson Inc., Publishers unless indicated otherwise.
Permission for reference use has been granted.
The New King James Version. ©1979,1980,1982, Thomas Nelson Inc., Publishers unless indicated otherwise.
Permission for reference use has been granted.
Published in The Old Paths Archive
http://www.oldpaths.com
http://www.oldpaths.com
Against the heavens blue by Gary Rose
Two
towers in New York City, New York. Marvels of glass and steel against
a partly cloudy sky. Monuments to the ability of human beings to
dream and make that dream come alive. Amazing, truly amazing!
And
yet, as I view these shining wonders, I think of the city in which
they dwell, a place of congestion and crime. Existing in a state that
has one of the most horrible abortion laws in the country which is
nothing less than infanticide. Where fraud and welfare are simply a
way of life and the rest of the state pays and pays and pays again
for THE CITY’s indolence and corruption. As I continued to look, it
reminded me of something from the book of Genesis…
Genesis
11 ( World English
Bible )
Gen 11:1, The whole earth was of one language and of one speech.
Gen 11:2, It happened, as they traveled east, that they found a plain
in the land of Shinar, and they lived there.
Gen 11:3, They said one to another, “Come, let’s make bricks,
and burn them thoroughly.” They had brick for stone, and they used
tar for mortar.
Gen 11:4, They said, “Come, let’s build ourselves a city,
and a tower whose top reaches to the sky, and let’s make ourselves
a name, lest we be scattered abroad on the surface of the whole
earth.”
Gen 11:5, Yahweh came down to see the city and the tower, which the
children of men built.
Gen 11:6, Yahweh said, “Behold, they are one people, and they have
all one language, and this is what they begin to do. Now nothing will
be withheld from them, which they intend to do.
Gen 11:7, Come, let’s go down, and there confuse their language,
that they may not understand one another’s speech.”
Gen 11:8, So Yahweh scattered them abroad from there on the surface
of all the earth. They stopped building the city.
Gen 11:9, Therefore its name was called Babel, because there Yahweh
confused the language of all the earth. From there, Yahweh scattered
them abroad on the surface of all the earth.
To
some, I imagine this is just a story, but to Bible believing
Christians, it is but history. In that history is the story of
arrogance and pride, rebellion and foolishness, for to try to build
to heaven is just another way of making oneself equal to (or perhaps
even greater) than the creator of all the universe.
The
truth is: I no nothing of the designers of builders of those two
buildings in N.Y.C., but the nature of the city and its decadence is
legendary throughout the whole state of New York. Babel came to
nothing, but it left an example not to follow – one of arrogance
and pride; which in the end will be dealt with, just as GOD always does.
May
the Lord God of Heaven be merciful to our country and bring about the
greatest restoration of true Christianity the world has ever seen.
Now, that will be something to be proud of (in the best possible
sense)!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)