Appearance versus Reality

 "Judge not according to the appearance,
but judge righteous judgment." John 7:24

 

Luke 23 KJT
8 And when Herod saw Jesus, he was exceeding glad: for he was desirous to see him of a long season, because he had heard many things of him; and he hoped to have seen some miracle done by him.
9 Then he questioned with him in many words; but he answered him nothing...
11 And Herod with his men of war set him at nought, and mocked him, and arrayed him in a gorgeous robe, and sent him again to Pilate.
12 And the same day Pilate and Herod were made friends together: for before they were at enmity between themselves.

One moment Herod was exceedingly glad to see Jesus; he even engaged Jesus in conversation. However, some time later he showed his true self.

What happened in between?
What explains the change?

He did these despicable things:
"questioned": eperōtaō: interrogated
"set at nought": exoutheneō: to make of no account, despise utterly, to treat as worthless.
"mock": empaizō: to play with, trifle with, make fun of...

 

Hate not thy brother - Leviticus 19:17

Hate not thy brother;

but love him - i.e. make an effort to convert him from the error of his way.

Lev 19 KJT
17 ¶Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart: thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbour, and not suffer sin upon him.

James 5 KJT
19 ¶Brethren, if any of you do err from the truth, and one convert him;
20 Let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins.

These Scriptures have been completely perverted by some: an attempt to correct an error is now seen as HATEFUL and UNLOVING.

Love me by converting me from the error of my way. To leave me in my error without making a sincere effort to convert me is HATEFUL... "thou shalt not hate thy brother..." by leaving him in the error of his way, that is to "suffer sin upon him."

In a bible study, I referred to Hebrews 2:14 KJT — "Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil" - to make the point that the suffering of Jesus was as real as could be because He is the Word made flesh.

A student of the Hebrew language said that his Reverend instructor taught that the text reads as "blood and flesh" and not "flesh and blood" and that the blood and flesh refer to atonement by animal sacrifices in the OT and Jesus's incarnation respectively.

I said, "My KJT has the order of 'flesh and blood,' and the context speaks of the incarnation of the Word, John 1:1,14.

- It is lacking common sense, i.e. stupid, to say that "blood and flesh" refers to atonement by animal sacrifices in the OT and incarnation in the NT; this would necessarily make the children spoken of to be partakers of animal sacrifices and incarnation too.

The student went berserk because I corrected the bizarre idea of her revered instructor, a complete stranger to me; I haven't the slight idea who the instructor is.

She raved against me: "You do not love your brothers in Christ. So I am afraid that you are not an Elect. Because if you have loved your brothers in Christ, you would not have written to run them down with SO MUCH HATRED in your heart.

I replied: Thank you for your kind words...
May the Lord bless you in the days ahead. Amen.

 

The Seventy Weeks in Daniel's Prophecy

 

Some figures for us to wrap our minds on.

Daniel 9
24 “Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.

“Seventy weeks are determined" upon thy people and upon thy holy city for these specific events:
1. to finish the transgression, and
2. to make an end of sins, and
3. to make reconciliation for iniquity, and
4. to bring in everlasting righteousness, and
5. to seal up the vision and prophecy, and
6.. to anoint the most Holy.

NOTE carefully that the city's destruction is NOT within the seventy weeks determined upon city and people.

The command to restore and build Jerusalem was given by Cyrus the Persian in 456 B.C.

The 70 weeks is divided up into three parts: 7 weeks, 62 weeks, and 1 week.

The 7 weeks (49 years) of rebuilding Jerusalem by those who returned from exile are covered by Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Zechariah, Haggai, Malachi.

Then, it was followed by the 62 weeks (62x7=434years) of intertestamental silence and darkness. The appearance of John the Baptist broke the long dark silence; his appearance also signalled the imminent appearance of the promised Messiah, the Prince.

The 70th week commenced with the public appearance/ministry of the Messiah. In the midst of the week (30AD), the Messiah was cut off, having fulfilled all the six things stated in 9:24.

At the beginning of the 70th week, some spiritual-minded Jews, understood from Daniel's 70-week prophecy, were expecting the imminent appearance of the Messiah. See Luke 3:15.

456 BC (the years Cyrus issued the imperial edict) + 483 (69 x 7) = 27AD
The Messiah was sent into the world at His water baptism in 28AD (28 comes after 27).
Jesus's ministry lasted around 3.5 years; then He was cut off in the midst of the last week of 7 years.

 

it is impossible to renew them again unto repentance

Sir, how would you interpret this passage?
Hebrews 6
4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,
5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,
6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.
------------

Here are some observations:
Hebrews was written to Hebrew believers in Jesus Christ who were under the temptation of reverting back to their old covenant religion, that is, of falling away from their faith in Jesus Christ. Apostle Paul wrote to exhort them to hold fast.

Hebrews 10:23 KJT
"Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering; (for he is faithful that promised."

"For it is impossible... If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame."

The subjects of the passage are described as those
- that were enlightened
- that tasted of the heavenly gift
- that were partakers of the Holy Ghost
- that tasted the good word of God
- that tasted the powers of the world to come

1. Of whom are these statements describing?
- those still dead in trespasses and sins, or,
- those who are effectually called by God, AS WELL AS converted to Jesus Christ by the ministry of the word?
- another group?

2. "If they shall fall away..."
- those described in 1 above CAN fall away.
- fall away from what? (take careful note that falling away from their faith in Christ and falling away from the state of grace into which they have been effectually called are vastly different!)
- What does it mean to fall away?
- How does the passage describe the falling away?
("... they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh,
and put him to an open shame.)
- Do you see the heinousness of falling away?

3. Why is it impossible to renew them again to repentance IF they should fall away?
- What's the relationship between repentance and faith in Christ?
- How does this relationship explain the impossibility of renewing them, IF they fall away, unto repentance?

The above may help you to do your own interpretation.
After rightly dividing (interpretation) the word of truth,
make your own applications of the truths learned.

 

Q. 70. What is justification?

Q. 70. What is justification?
A. Justification is an act of God’s free grace unto sinners, in which he pardoneth all their sins, accepteth and accounteth their persons righteous in his sight; not for any thing wrought in them, or done by them, but only for the perfect obedience and full satisfaction of Christ, by God imputed to them, and received by faith alone.

Let me divide up the answer into smaller bits like this:

Justification is
a. (POSITIVELY, truth affirmed)
- an act of God’s free grace unto sinners,
- in which he pardoneth all their sins,
- accepteth and accounteth their persons righteous in his sight;

b. (NEGATIVELY, error repudiated)
- not for any thing wrought in them,
- or done by them,
(faith is saving grace wrought in them by the Spirit of adoption, Ga 5:22.)
(believing is a work done by them. John 6:29.)

c. (THE GROUND)
- but only for the perfect obedience and full satisfaction of Christ,
- by God imputed to them,
(the imputation of God's free grace is both logically and chronologically PRIOR to the reception of it by faith.)

d. (THE EVIDENCE)
- and received by faith alone.

(The justification by grace is received by faith alone, THAT IS, justification by the grace of God is logically and chronologically prior to the reception of it by faith in Jesus Christ.)

Consider the answer carefully.

Demonstrate how the answer plainly REPUDIATES  the popular fable of justification by faith alone.

Ask some questions, and/or draw out some statements from the answer.

Enjoy learning the gospel truths.

Martin Luther famously stated that the doctrine of justification is the "article upon which the church stands or falls" (in Latin, articulus stantis et cadentis ecclesiae). Many reformed people love quoting these words of Mr Luther.

On this idea of Luther, how many churches are standing?

Are you in one that stands?

Please take a look at following slowly and carefully

John Gill wrote a specific treatise titled "The Doctrine of Justification by the Righteousness of Christ, Stated and Maintained", which was published in 1730 - nearly 300 years ago

In that treatise, Dr Gill had to counter a popular fable already circulating in his days; he declared, "The reason why any are justified IS NOT because they have faith; but the reason why they have faith IS because they are justified."

The former is putting the cart before the horse; the latter horse before the cart.

Yes, just as the Scriptures repeatedly declare, "The just shall live by faith," i.e. they have faith because they have been freely justified by God.  Only the justified ones, freely by the grace of God, are capable of exercising faith in Jesus Christ.

John Gill was a prominent theologian and was highly respected by his contemporaries. Today, he is loathed by the Reformed people.

The opposite is ubiquitously popular today: "The unjustified is justified by faith alone."
- i.e. the unjustified is capable of exercising faith to believe to be justified. It is like saying, The dead are capable of breathing to be given life. See less