6/11/13

From Jim McGuiggan... Heaven's Warfare

Heaven's Warfare

Do you remember the poem that starts with "I'd rather see a sermon than hear one any day"? It was another one of those attacks on doctrine that said, "What really counts is what you do and not what you think." Like so many other reactions it's a miserable half-truth. Take that fellow Paul who worked so hard and so consistently that he was able to say without bragging (as if he was simply stating the facts), "I worked harder than them all" (1 Corinthians 15:10). He saw his life for God as a non-stop war and what is it he fought against without giving an inch? Well, listen to him for yourself (2 Corinthians 10:3-5), "For though we live in the world, we do not wage war as the world does. The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds. We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ."

What do you make of that? What does he war against with divine weapons? "Arguments...every pretension...against the knowledge of God...every thought..." There it is, arguments, thoughts and anything that interferes with the knowledge of God. If you had asked Paul if he was opposed to evil deeds he would have glared at you--of course! What a silly question. But he believed what he learned from his Master: truth frees and error enslaves. To say it doesn't matter what one believes is nonsense for when people act, they act on what they believe. The gifts God gave to the world when Jesus ascended on high leading captivity captive included ministers of the word who saw to it that the believers were stabilised by truth. By God's grace they saw to it that the church was carried about by every wind and wave of doctrine, of error. God is diametrically opposed to error and every false argument. To reduce life under God to nothing but correct views is more nonsense but life is shaped by the size and nature of the truths we pay homage to. And because that's true not only would Paul not apologise for his ceaseless pursuit of truth he sees a central part of his warfare as tearing down false arguments and destructive errors. We would do well to remember that it was in the middle of a doctrinal discussion about the resurrection of the dead that he gave this warning (1 Corinthians 15:33), "Do not be misled: Bad company corrupts good character." False teachers, false views corrupt the mind and consequently corrupt the conduct.

It becomes those who profess to be called to minister God's word to spend prayerful time and energy listening to that word and to set themselves to rescue sinners by tearing down forts of error.

Many thanks to brother Ed Healy, for allowing me to post from his website, the abiding word.com.

From Mark Copeland... The Olivet Discourse - II (Mk 13:24-37)

                          "THE GOSPEL OF MARK"

                  The Olivet Discourse - II (13:24-37)

INTRODUCTION

1. In our previous lesson, we covered the first half of Mark 13...
   a. Commonly called "The Olivet Discourse", delivered by Jesus on the
      Mount of Olives
   b. A challenging passage of scripture, believed to discussing
      either...
      1) The destruction of Jerusalem, which occurred in 70 A.D.
      2) The second coming of Christ, which is yet to occur
      3) Or both events, described either in turn or intertwined

2. I’ve proposed that the discourse foretells the destruction of
   Jerusalem, based first upon the setting...
   a. Jesus’ words spoken previously in the temple
      1) His parables about Israel’s rejection of Him - cf.

         Mt 21:28-32,33-46; 22:1-14
      2) His condemnation of the scribes and Pharisees - cf. Mt 23:27-36
      3) His lamentation over Jerusalem - cf. Mt 23:37-39
   b. Jesus’ prophecy regarding about the temple - Mk 13:1-2
   c. The disciples’ questions, which when Mark and Luke’s account is
      considered, appear to be:
      1) "When will these things be?"
      2) "What will be the sign when all these things will be
         fulfilled?"
      -- Cf. Mt 24:3; Mk 13:4; Lk 21:7

3. We then saw that in vs. 5-23, Jesus describes...
   a. What will not be the sign (other than the gospel preached to all
      nations) - Mk 13:5-13
   b. What will be the sign - Mk 13:14
      1) The abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel- Dan 9:26-27; 12:11
      2) Which Luke explains to be Jerusalem surrounded by armies - Lk 21:20
   c. What to do when they saw the sign - Mk 13:15-23
      1) Those in Judea were to flee to the mountains to avoid a great
         tribulation
      2) They were not to be misled by false christs or false prophets

[Up to vs. 24, Jesus described a local, escapable judgment to befall
Jerusalem.  He does not describe the worldwide, inescapable judgment
taught elsewhere in the Scriptures.  But with vs. 24, many believe Jesus
now addresses His second coming (cf. J. W. McGarvey’s Fourfold Gospel).
As we continue with our study, I propose that the destruction of
Jerusalem is still under consideration...]

II. THE OLIVET DISCOURSE (continued)

   D. WHAT WILL HAPPEN NEXT...
      1. Events to occur "after the tribulation of those days"...
         a. Cosmic disturbances - Mk 13:24-25
            1) The sun will be darkened
            2) The moon will not give its light
            3) The stars of heaven will fall
            4) The powers in the heavens will be shaken
         b. They will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven
            with power and great glory - Mk 13:26
            1) The sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven - cf. Mt 24:30
            2) All the tribes of the earth will mourn - cf. Mt 24:30
         c. The elect will be gathered - Mk 13:27
            1) For with a great sound of the trumpet, angels will be
               sent - cf. Mt 24:31
            2) They shall gather the elect from the four winds, from the
               farthest part of earth to the farthest part of heaven
      2. Such events certainly sound like the second coming of Christ,
         but consider two reasons why they may not be referring to Jesus’
         coming at the Last Day...
         a. The events were to occur "immediately after the tribulation
            of those days" ("in those days, after that tribulation")
            - Mt 24:29; Mk 13:24
            1) They are connected in time to the tribulation described
               in Mk 13:15-28
            2) This "coming" of Jesus was to occur at the conclusion of
               the siege of Jerusalem
         b. The events are similar to those used to foretell God’s
            judgment of other nations
            1) Babylon - Isa 13:1,6-13
            2) Egypt - Isa 19:1-2; cf. Eze 32:2,7-9
            2) Tyre - Isa 23:1; 24:21-23
            3) Edom - Isa 34:4-6
            4) Nineveh - Nah 1:1-5
            5) Israel - Am 8:9
            6) Judah - Jer 4:5-6,23-28
      3. Jewish prophets foretold God’s judgment upon such nations...
         a. Using figures of worldwide destruction, even though the
            judgment was local
         b. Perhaps because such judgments foreshadow God’s Final
            Judgment to come upon the entire world at the Last Day
      4. Like other Jewish prophets, Jesus used figurative language to
         depict:
         a. The judgment to befall the religious leaders of Israel (in
            terms of worldwide destruction)
         b. The provision made for faithful disciples of Christ (in
            terms of the gathering by angels)
      5. Therefore I suggest that even in Mk 13:24-27 Jesus refers to
         the destruction of Jerusalem

   E. ADMONITIONS TO BE PREPARED...
      1. The parable of the fig tree - Mk 13:28-29
         a. New branches and leaves indicate summer is near
         b. When you see these things (Jerusalem surrounded by armies),
            the time is near
      2. It would happen before "this generation" passed away - Mk 13:30
         a. Some define "generation" as a race of people (i.e., the
            Jews) - cf. McGarvey, B. W. Johnson
         b. But note its use by Jesus just prior to this discourse - cf.
            Mt 23:33-36 (esp. 36)
         c. The destruction of Jerusalem came to pass within forty
            years!
      3. The words of Jesus will come to pass - Mk 13:31
         a. Heaven and earth shall pass away one day - cf. 2Pe 3:7,10
         b. But Jesus’ words will by no means pass away
      4. Of that day and hour, only the Father knows - Mk 13:32
         a. Many believe at this point Jesus begins to talk about the
            second coming - e.g., France, NIGTC; Short, NIBC
         b. The disciples might discern the general timing with the
            advance of armies toward Jerusalem
         c. But the day and hour when the siege would begin, only the
            Father knew
      5. Therefore, take heed, watch and pray! - Mk 13:33-37
         a. You don’t know when the time is - e.g., Ac 1:7
         b. Don’t be caught off guard, like a servant caught sleeping
            when his master returns
         c. Be ready, for the Son of Man will come when you not expect
            Him
         d. The siege of Jerusalem might begin promptly, so flee Judea
            promptly when you see the armies surrounding Jerusalem!

CONCLUSION

1. Admittedly, there is much in "The Olivet Discourse" that alludes to
   our Lord’s second coming at the Last Day...
   a. But it no different than prophecies by other Jewish prophets who
      foretold God’s judgment upon nations and cities
   b. Such figurative language was a common motif used by Jewish
      prophets
   c. We should not be surprised to see Jesus using the same motif in
      this context
   -- And rightly so, for God’s judgments upon nations in the past are
      types and shadows of the Final Judgment to befall the entire world
      when Jesus comes again

2. In addition to the setting leading up to the discourse, there is the
   natural flow of the discourse itself that leads me to conclude it is
   entirely about the destruction of Jerusalem...
   a. Jesus’ disciples are told what will not be the sign - Mk 13:1-13
   b. They are told will be the sign that His coming is near - Mk 13:14
   c. They are told what to do when they see the sign - Mk 13:14-23
   d. His coming in judgment (the fall of Jerusalem) is described in
      terms reminiscent of other Jewish prophets who foretold of God’s
      judgments upon various nations - Mk 13:24-27
   e. Admonitions are given for them to be prepared and watchful, for
      all these things will happen before the current generation passed
      away, though the exact time was unknown - Mk 13:28-37

So I view "The Olivet Discourse" to describe a local, escapable judgment
which occurred as Jesus foretold in 70 A. D.

However, there is still the worldwide, inescapable judgment at the Last
Day.  Are you ready for that Day?  The admonitions to be prepared and
productive are very similar:

   "But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in
   which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the
   elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the
   works that are in it will be burned up."

   "Therefore, since all these things will be dissolved, what manner
   of persons ought you to be in holy conduct and godliness, looking
   for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which
   the heavens will be dissolved, being on fire, and the elements
   will melt with fervent heat?"

   "Nevertheless we, according to His promise, look for new heavens
   and a new earth in which righteousness dwells.  Therefore, beloved,
   looking forward to these things, be diligent to be found by Him in
   peace, without spot and blameless;"
                                                       - 2Pe 3:10-14

6/10/13

From Jim McGuiggan... Fickle Or Mosaic?

Fickle Or Mosaic?

Many have reminded us that Paul sees himself as a Moses figure. His life paralleled and contrasted with the life and commission of Moses in so many ways that are alluded to in the Corinthian literature. For example:

Both experienced a call and a commission

Both had to be overcome by God

Both claimed incompetence for the job

Both had leadership undermined

Both interceded for their people

Both reflected God's glory & covenant

Both spoke bitter words when provoked and suffered because of them

Both were invited up into God's presence and saw wondrous things

Both begged for something they were not granted

Both were accused of lording it over God's people

Both were accused of claiming authority they didn't have

Both talked of possible disqualification and one experienced it

Let me suggest that Numbers 16-17 is important background to 2 Corinthians 1-2 in particular and to 2 Corinthians in general.

Paul pictures himself led about in the God's triumphant procession (2:14). It's clear enough that Paul isn't the triumphant one but given the image of a Roman general's triumph he could have seen himself as one the serving troops or one of the captives. Since he includes himself as part of those being "led about" it's likely that he sees himself as one of the prizes won by God in the Lord Jesus Christ in his battle with the powers. Paul naturally sees his place in that procession as a matter of thanksgiving butit does mean he doesn't dictate the direction or the pace of the procession. He goes where the Lord leads him as Moses did in the wilderness.

But what provokes the image at this point? In the context, Paul is not only defending his change of plans he's defending his change of plans because it's being used against him. The claim is that he doesn't love them. If something more pleasing confronts him, he forgets the Corinthians and the promises he made to them. His critics would have no doubt said that that was why he took no money from the Corinthians. Take money from people and you owe them something and Paul didn't want to be under obligation to the Corinthians. So it could be understood.)

He assured them he didn't stick with his plans not because he didn't love them but precisely because he did love them (2:1-4). The reason he wouldn't come as promised, the reason he wrote the scathing letter were motivated by the same thing--he loved them. He takes that point up again in 2:12, explaining that that was why he went to Troa--to get assurance from Titus that his relationship with them was intact. He left Troas for the very same reason--he couldn't wait to hear how things were at Corinth. When he left Troas he headed for Macedonia. Again, for the very same reason! (In mentioning "Macedonia" he remembers that it was there the roof fell in on him--7:5.)

All this might look like dithering and devious changing of purposes but it wasn't. These aborted and unplanned moves might look more like (wilderness) "wanderings" but love for them was the motivating factor and the Lord of the Triumph (and the Wilderness) was in control. The hardships and the anxiety involved in them all.combining with the "on- -again-off-again" appearance makes it all look so haphazard, but Paul insists that in and through it all God was making known his own purposes and gaining his own glory (2:14).

Many thanks to brother Ed Healy, for allowing me to post from his website, the abiding word.com.

From Mark Copeland... The Olivet Discourse - I (13:1-23)

                          "THE GOSPEL OF MARK"

                   The Olivet Discourse - I (13:1-23)

INTRODUCTION

1. A challenging passage in the Bible is Jesus’ discourse on the Mount
   of Olives...
   a. Given shortly after He left the temple with His disciples
   b. Recorded in Mt 24, Mk 13, Lk 21
   c. Commonly referred to as "The Olivet Discourse"
   -- Our focus in this study will be primarily on Mark’s account

2. It’s difficulty becomes apparent as one considers the diversity of
   interpretations...
   a. Some maintain it is entirely about events preceding the Lord’s
      second and final coming
   b. Others that it is entirely about events related to the destruction
      of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.
   c. Yet others believe it contains reference to both events

3. Even those who say it refers to both events differ as to when a
   particular event is described...
   a. Some say that vs. 5-23 refer to the destruction of Jerusalem, and
      vs. 24 begins the discussion about the Lord’s second coming - cf.
      J.W. McGarvey
   b. Others contend that vs. 32 begins talking about the second coming
   c. Others say Jesus switches back and forth throughout the discourse

[At this time, I view "The Olivet Discourse" in Mk 13 as depicting the
destruction of Jerusalem which occurred in 70 A.D., though it
foreshadows His second coming.  To see why, let’s start with...]

I. THE SETTING OF THE OLIVET DISCOURSE

   A. THE WORDS OF JESUS IN THE TEMPLE...
      1. His parables depicting Israel’s rejection of Him, and its
         consequence
         a. The parable of the wicked vinedressers- Mk 12:1-12; cf. Mt 21:33-46
         b. Matthew includes the parable of two sons - cf. Mt 21:28-32
         c. Also the parable of the wedding feast - cf. Mt 22:1-14
      2. His condemnation of the scribes and Pharisees
         a. The warning against the pretentious scribes - Mk 12:38-40
         b. Matthew records a more elaborate condemnation - cf. Mt 23:1-28
         c. Who would fill up the measure of their fathers’ guilt - Mt 23:29-32
         d. Who kill, crucify, scourge, and persecute the prophets, wise
            men, and scribes He would send to them - Mt 23:33-34
         e. Upon whom the blood of all the righteous would come, upon
            that very generation - Mt 23:35-36
      3. His lamentation over Jerusalem, recorded by Matthew
         a. The city who kills the prophets and stones those sent to her
            - cf. Mt 23:37
         b. The city unwilling to accept the love shown to her - cf. Mt 23:37
         c. Whose house would be left desolate - Mt 23:38-39

   B. THE PROPHECY OF JESUS ABOUT THE TEMPLE...
      1. After his disciples were showing Him the buildings of temple
         - Mk 13:1
      2. Declaring that not one stone would be left upon another - Mk 13:2

   C. THE QUESTIONS OF THE DISCIPLES...
      1. In Mark’s gospel, two questions are asked - Mk 13:4
         a. "When will these things be?"
         b. "What will be the sign when all these things will be
            fulfilled?"
      2. In Luke’s gospel, the two questions are similar - Lk 21:7
         a. "When will these things be?"
         b. "What sign will there be when these things are about to take
            place?"
      3. In Matthew’s gospel, the second question is worded differently
         - Mt 24:3
         a. "When will these things be?"
         b. "What will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the
            age?"
      4. Observations regarding these questions:
         a. Only Matthew makes reference to a "coming" and "end of the
            age"
         a. Matthew wrote his gospel for a Jewish audience
            1) Who would likely view the destruction of temple as a
               judgment against Jerusalem and the complete end of the
               Jewish age (as evidently His disciples did)
            2) Re: the end of the Jewish age - the end began with the
               death of Jesus making the OT covenant obsolete (He 9:15-16); it ended in fullness with the destruction of
               the temple and cessation of its OT covenantal sacrifices
               (cf. He 8:13)
         b. Mark and Luke wrote their gospels to Gentiles
            1) To avoid misunderstanding by non-Jewish readers, the
               disciples’ questions are worded to reflect what the
               Olivet discourse is about
            2) I.e., the destruction of the temple (i.e., "these
               things") and the sign when its destruction would be
               imminent

[When the setting leading up to "The Olivet Discourse" is carefully
considered, the subject becomes clear.  The destruction of the temple is
under consideration, not the second coming of Christ.  Now let’s proceed
to examine more closely...]

II. THE OLIVET DISCOURSE

   A. WHAT WILL NOT BE THE SIGN...
      1. Be careful that none deceive you, claiming to be the Christ
         - Mk 13:5-6
      2. Don’t be troubled by wars, earthquakes, famines, pestilence
         - Mk 13:7-8
         a. Such things will come, but the end (destruction of the
            temple) is not yet
         b. They are only the beginning of sorrows (not the sign of the
            end)
      3. Anticipate persecution and hard times - Mk 13:9-13
         a. You will be killed and hated for His name’s sake
         b. Many will be offended, betray one another, and hate one
            another
         c. False prophets will deceive many
         d. The love of many will grow cold because of lawlessness
         e. But he who endures to "the end" will be saved -- "the end"
            refers here:
            1) Not to the second coming (implying one must live until
               Christ comes again)
            2) Nor to the destruction of Jerusalem (implying once one
               has survived that event, one’s salvation is secured)
            3) But to the end of one’s life - cf. Re 2:10
      4. The gospel of the kingdom will be preached to all nations - Mk 13:10
         a. As a witness to all the nations - cf. Mt 24:14
         b. Then the end (the destruction of the temple) will come - cf.
            Mt 24:14
            1) This would end the Jewish sacrifices, and other remnants
               of OT worship
            2) That which was nailed to the cross, abolished by Jesus’
               death, would pass away - cf. Col 2:14-17; Ep 2:14-16; He 8:13
         c. Was the gospel preached to all nations prior to the
            destruction of the temple?
            1) Note what Paul wrote prior to 70 A.D. - Ro 10:16-18; Col 1:23
            2) Whether we take Jesus’ and Paul’s words as literal or
               accommodative, according to Paul it had!

   B. WHAT WILL BE THE SIGN...
      1. The "abomination of desolation" - Mk 13:14
         a. Standing where it ought not (the holy city Jerusalem)
         b. As foretold by Daniel - cf. Dan 9:26-27
      2. When you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies - cf. Lk 21:20
         a. Luke therefore explains the "abomination of desolation"
         b. In 70 A.D., Roman armies surrounded Jerusalem prior to
            destroying it and the temple
      3. Thus Jesus answers the disciples’ question:  "What sign will
         there be when these things are about to take place?"

   C. WHAT TO DO WHEN YOU SEE THE SIGN...
      1. Those in Judea are to flee to the mountains - Mk 13:14-20
         a. Don’t delay by going to your homes and getting your clothes
         b. It will be a difficult time for pregnant and nursing mothers
         c. Pray that your flight be not in winter (when travel is
            difficult) or on the Sabbath (when city gates are closed to
            travel)
         d. For there will be "great tribulation", though shortened for
            the elect’s sake
            1) Luke specifies the nature of this tribulation - Lk 21:23b-24
            2) A Jewish general taking captive by the Romans just prior
               to the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 offered this
               summary:
               a) All the calamities which had befallen any nation from
                  the beginning of the world were but small in
                  comparison with those of the Jews
               b) In the siege of Jerusalem, no fewer than 1,100,000
                  perished (it was during the time of the Passover, when
                  more than 3,000,000 Jews were assembled)
               c) In surrounding provinces 250,000 were slain
               d) 97,000 were taken captive, some killed by beasts in
                  Roman theaters, some sent to work in Egypt, others
                  sold as slaves
               -- Flavius Josephus, Jewish Wars, quoted by Barnes on
                  Matthew
            3) The "elect" were Christians, spared by a shortened siege
               a) The Jews in the city engaged the Romans in battle
               b) Titus, the Roman general, being called to return to
                  Rome, proceeded to end the siege and stormed the city
                  - Barnes Commentary on Matthew
      2. Don’t be misled by false christs and false prophets - Mk 13:21-23
         a. Even those who show great signs and wonders to deceive
         b. For the coming (judgment) of the Son of Man will be like
            lightning across the sky
            1) Do not expect to find Him in the desert or in inner rooms
            2) When He comes in judgment, it will be swift - cf. Lk 17:22-24

CONCLUSION (Part One)

1. So far, all this depicts a local, escapable judgment...
   a. Where Jesus warned those in Judea of what is to come - Mk 13:23
   b. Where they are given a sign to let them know when to flee - Mk 13:14

2. It does not fit a worldwide, inescapable judgment...
   a. As will characterize the second coming of Christ - 2Pe 3:10-12
   b. As Paul taught the Christians in Thessalonica - cf. 1Th 5:2-3; 2Th 1:7-10

3. Our next study will continue to examine "The Olivet Discourse",
   starting with verse 24...
   a. Which certainly sounds like the second coming of Christ, but is
      it?
   b. Or was Jesus still describing events pertaining to the destruction
      of Jerusalem?

Eusebius (ca. 300 A.D.) in his "Ecclesiastical History" wrote that
Christians heeded the warnings of Jesus in Matthew 24, and fled
Jerusalem when it was surrounded by the Roman army.

May we likewise heed the words of Jesus:

   *  not be misled by false prophets and false christs
   *  not be troubled by wars, famines, pestilence, earthquakes, or even
      persecution
   *  enduring to the end by remaining faithful to Him

...looking forward to His final coming at the Last Day!

From Gary... Genuine?

Lately I have been interested in photography. Interested because of the creativity involved and the skill necessary to even take a good picture. Beyond that, there is finding the right "light" to snap a shot in the first place. Further, with today's computer programs, even a good picture can be made better by manipulation. So, sometimes when I look at a picture it is hard for me to tell if it is real or not. That is true of the rainbow-funnel cloud above. Honestly, I really don't know. I wish such things were restricted to the photographic realm, but they are not. Here is a real life instance where it was hard to know what was genuine...

Acts, Chapter 12

1 Now about that time, King Herod stretched out his hands to oppress some of the assembly. 2 He killed James, the brother of John, with the sword. 3 When he saw that it pleased the Jews, he proceeded to seize Peter also. This was during the days of unleavened bread. 4 When he had arrested him, he put him in prison, and delivered him to four squads of four soldiers each to guard him, intending to bring him out to the people after the Passover. 5 Peter therefore was kept in the prison, but constant prayer was made by the assembly to God for him. 6 The same night when Herod was about to bring him out, Peter was sleeping between two soldiers, bound with two chains. Guards in front of the door kept the prison.

7 And behold, an angel of the Lord stood by him, and a light shone in the cell. He struck Peter on the side, and woke him up, saying, “Stand up quickly!” His chains fell off from his hands. 8 The angel said to him, “Get dressed and put on your sandals.” He did so. He said to him, “Put on your cloak, and follow me.” 9 And he went out and followed him. He didn’t know that what was being done by the angel was real, but thought he saw a vision. 10 When they were past the first and the second guard, they came to the iron gate that leads into the city, which opened to them by itself. They went out, and went down one street, and immediately the angel departed from him.

11 When Peter had come to himself, he said, “Now I truly know that the Lord has sent out his angel and delivered me out of the hand of Herod, and from everything the Jewish people were expecting.” 12 Thinking about that, he came to the house of Mary, the mother of John who was called Mark, where many were gathered together and were praying. 13 When Peter knocked at the door of the gate, a maid named Rhoda came to answer. 14 When she recognized Peter’s voice, she didn’t open the gate for joy, but ran in, and reported that Peter was standing in front of the gate.

15 They said to her, “You are crazy!” But she insisted that it was so. They said, “It is his angel.” 16 But Peter continued knocking. When they had opened, they saw him, and were amazed. 17 But he, beckoning to them with his hand to be silent, declared to them how the Lord had brought him out of the prison. He said, “Tell these things to James, and to the brothers.” Then he departed, and went to another place.

Peter wasn't sure what was happening: was it a vision? Not this time!!! Rhoda was so shocked, she just left Peter at the door and told the others about him. They didn't believe it either and said she was "crazy". But, finally they opened the door and learned what was real. Some people will believe the truth when it stares them in the face- others will not. The things the Scriptures relate to us are true- believe them or not; its a matter of choice. Choose wisely!!!

PS. I think the photo at the top is manipulated; does anyone know for sure???????

6/9/13

From Mark Copeland... The Widow’s Mites (Mk 12:41-44)

The Widow’s Mites (Mk 12:41-44)

INTRODUCTION

1. Teaching in the Temple (on Tuesday of the Last Week), Jesus
addressed...
a. The doctrines of the religious leaders
b. The practices of the religious leaders

2. At the end of the day, with the last incident of His public ministry,
Jesus...
a. Observed people putting money into the treasury of the temple
b. Made an observation about the contribution of one poor widow

[Jesus had just warned against pretentious scribes who "devour widows’
houses" (Mk 12:40). In contrast, consider the remarkable example of one
poor widow...]

I. THE NARRATIVE

A. PUTTING MONEY IN THE TEMPLE TREASURY...
1. Jesus observed people placing money in the treasury - Mk 12:41
2. This may have been one of 13 receptacles, in the area known as
The Women’s Court
3. These receptacles were marked, indicating how the money would
be used (temple tribute, wood, sacrifices, incense, etc.)

B. THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF THE RICH...
1. Many who were rich gave large amounts - Mk 12:41
2. That in itself was commendable, reminiscent of the first
contributions for the tabernacle - cf. Exo 35:20-29; 36:2-7

C. THE CONTRIBUTION OF THE WIDOW...
1. One poor widow threw in two ‘mites’ (Grk., leptos) - Mk 12:42
2. Worth a ‘quadrans’ (Grk., kodrantes), which was 1/64th of a
‘denarius’ (a day’s wage)
3. If a day’s wage was $25, a ‘quadrans’ would be worth 75 cents,
a ‘mite’ 40 cents

D. THE OBSERVATION OF JESUS...
1. The widow gave more than all who had given to the treasury - Mk 12:43
2. They gave out of their abundance, she gave all she had, her
entire livelihood - Mk 12:44

[Jesus was so impressed, He called His disciples. He stressed the
importance of His observation by prefacing His remarks with "Assuredly,
I say to you". In the spirit of His observation, here are...]

II. SOME OBSERVATIONS

A. A LESSON FOR DISCIPLES...
1. Note that Jesus "called His disciples to Himself" - Mk 12:43
2. This indicates that the teaching was intended for them and for
all subsequent disciples - J.A. Brooks (NAC)
-- What can we learn from the example of the widow’s mites?

B. THE VALUE OF A GIFT...
1. It is well to remember that God measures giving, not by what we
give, but by what we keep for ourselves; - R.A. Cole (TNTC)
2. The value of a gift is not the amount given, but the cost to
the giver. - J.R. Edwards (PNTC)
3. God measures the gift by the sacrifice involved (cf. 2Sa 24:24). - A. Black (CPNIVC)
4. The Lord estimates giving by our motive, our means, and by how
much we have left. This is a great encouragement to those who
have few material possessions, but a great desire to give to
Him. - Believer’s Bible Commentary
-- We learn that the liberality of the poor is often greater than
that of the rich!

C. THE IMPORTANCE OF A PERSON...
1. What matters in God’s sight is not what a person has
2. But the devotion which causes one to give even at great
personal cost
3. Thus even the poorest of the poor can be "rich" (in faith)
- cf. Jm 2:5
-- We learn that people should be measured by their faith, not
their wealth!

D. THE APPROVAL OF VOLUNTARY POVERTY...
1. Many today would criticize the widow
a. For not providing for her future
b. For her lack of foresight and prudence
c. For becoming dependent upon Israel’s welfare system - cf.
Deut 24:19-21; 26:12-13
2. Yet her voluntary poverty is just one example found in the
Scriptures
a. Jesus chose a life of voluntary poverty - Lk 9:58
b. He counseled some to do the same in their service as a
disciple - Lk 18:22
c. Teaching His disciples to be trust God’s providential care
- Mt 6:31-33
-- We learn that voluntary poverty can be a viable option for some
disciples

E. JESUS IS STILL WATCHING HOW PEOPLE GIVE...
1. The ‘giving’ of Ananias and Sapphira did not go unnoticed - cf.
Ac 5:1-11
2. Those who give liberally and cheerfully will be noticed - e.g.,
2Co 8:1-5; 9:6-7
3. Just as all that we do is noticed by God - He 4:13
-- We learn that our giving does not escape the careful eye of our
Lord!

CONCLUSION

1. The story of the widow’s mites should prompt prayerful reflection...
a. Regarding our own giving to the Lord’s cause, to charity
b. We may think we excel at giving, but do we really?

2. The story of the widow’s mites also prepares us for what is to come
in Mark’s gospel...
a. She exemplified sacrificial giving in the service of the Lord
b. Soon we will read of the Lord who gave all in service to us!

"For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though He
was rich, yet for your sakes He became poor, that you through His
poverty might become rich." - 2Co 8:9

From Jim McGuiggan... Crisis of Confidence

Crisis of Confidence

For numerous reasons Paul's personality, experiences and his way of fulfilling his apostolic commission came under critical review. It seems clear his apostolic commission was called in question early in the game (1 Corinthians 9:1) and his character was maligned. Plummer summarizes the situation in light of 2 Corinthians, "His opponents attributed to him unspiritual and worldly motives and conduct; that he was capricious and shuffling, verbose and vain-glorious, at once a coward and a bully." No doubt things got worse as time went on but Paul was already under pressure before the second epistle. When he left after the first visit, some arrogant critics predicted he wouldn't have the nerve to come back (see 1 Corinthians 4:18-19).

The Corinthians thought Paul was gutless and wimpy

For example, they said he lacked authority because he didn't punch their lights out when they disagreed with him or misbehaved (see 2 Corinthians 1:24; 10:1). And this was why, some said, he kept changing his mind about returning to them. He was afraid to come! Of course he could write tough letters but his bodily presence was pathetic even when he did turn up (see 2 Corinthians 1:23).

The problem was made worse when (at some point) outsiders came in claiming to be apostles and exhibiting a triumphalist and overpowering approach to the assembly. An approach some (many?) preferred. See 2 Corinthians 11:20-21.

The Corinthians thought Paul cared little for them

This would be another reason he stayed away: he found other places more attractive. He said he cared and he couldn't wait to get back but other places beckoned and, 'out of sight out of mind'. He was the kind of preacher who'd cancel meetings when an engagement more prestigious or convenient or profitable was offered.

Then there was the support question. He refused to take support from them and this, so it was implied, showed he wanted no intimacy with them. It showed he wanted to remain independent of them and that he didn't love them (see 2 Corinthians 11:11 and 12:13). I've come across a few preachers who said they wouldn't take a salary from a church so they could maintain their independence. Their tone and attitude was bad. They didn't care for the brothers/sisters and wanted to feel free to walk away when it suited them.

The Corinthians thought Paul was devious, cunning and crafty

In 12:16 he quotes an accusation that he is cunning (same word as used in 11:3 of the serpent). Paul was a snake in the grass, some said. This probably explains why he uses the word phaneroo nine times in the letter and stresses his openness before God and them. He speaks of having renounced the hidden things of shame and craftiness (4:2) and having nothing to do with veils (3:18).

In this he is unlike the hero of his Jewish critics Moses. Moses (for one reason or another) was forced to veil his face to hide the fading glory of the covenantal law. Paul's ministry doesn't require that of him. The glory that Moses enjoyed and brought was found only in the presence of God and away from the eyes of people. The glory enjoyed and ministered by Paul was seen by every believer who saw the face of the Christ Paul proclaimed and reflected. See 2 Corinthians 3.

The Corinthians thought Paul, at best, was a 2nd rate apostle.

The Corinthians were keen to follow 'the big preachers'. This tendency says a lot about Corinthian pride and preoccupation with their reputation. 2 Corinthians 12:13 shows they were concerned about their image.

See the material on Paul and Antioch which might underscore their assessment of Paul as a second rater. And note the discussion about letters of recommendation and self-recommendation. See 2 Corinthians 3:1; 5:12; 10:12,18.

The crisis put the church in danger and undermined the gospel

To Paul, the outsiders who exacerbated the crisis offered another Jesus. See 2 Corinthians 11:4,13. A Jesus for whom the cross was finished and now should only be seen as glorious and exalted. This Jesus was to be paraded by triumphant messengersand Paul was far from triumphant.

What incensed Paul was not what they thought of him, but that what they thought of him was the result of the kind of gospel they offered, the kind of Jesus they proclaimed. Their kind of Jesus would not produce a career like Paul's. His was too filled with suffering, with failure, with reluctance to rip up and tear down he wasn't strong or successful enough. But Paul saw his gospel--the proclamation and embodiment of it--as intimately connected with Christ's suffering and glory, not as simply past, but as continued in Christ's Body as a whole and in his specially commissioned ambassador's.

Then too, this Pauline loss of confidence would affect the contribution to the poor saints at Jerusalem which in itself would be a tragedy and would hinder the unification of Jews and Gentiles throughout the world. This gift from the Gentile world to the Jews would have been seen by Paul as part proof of his gospel since Isaiah texts spoke of this kind of thing in eschatalogical times. See Isaiah 49:23; 60:5,10,14,16. It also fulfilled a commitment made to Peter and James which would ease any concern felt there since Paul had confronted Peter and agreed to a proposal by James that would establish Paul's love and respect for his people (see Galatians 2:1-10, 11; Acts 21:17ff).

Many thanks to brother Ed Healy, for allowing me to post from his website, the abiding word.com.