Going forward in chapter nine, we are exposed to an event that must have been wonderful and scary to see. In verse 28, Luke tells us that Jesus took Peter, James and John with Him to pray in the mountains. The apostles fell asleep and when they woke up, they saw Jesus standing with two men who were talking to Jesus about fulfilling God’s plan by dying in Jerusalem. All three were dazzling white and the face of Jesus had changed during the process. The apostles identified the two men as Moses and Elijah and after they left, Peter suggested the building of three tabernacles to honor the event. Luke then tells us that a dark cloud went over them and they were gripped in terror as they heard the voice of God declaring that Jesus was His Son and that He was proud of Him.
Again, I see myself doing the same thing that Peter did, shuffle around, make a lame suggestion and miss the point completely. The apostles spent a lot of their time in wonderment as they hung around with our Lord. Like us, the events that happen in our lives may not make sense when they happen but down the road we are able to absorb them and use them to our advantage.
I have again taken advantage of the website, Walking In Their Sandals, to give you more specific geographic and historical information regarding the transfiguration of Jesus Christ. You may go to http://www.ancientsandals.com/overviews/mount_meron.htm yourself, to obtain more information.
I believe that it is very important to understand that these events happened and they happened at specific places that you and I can visit today. We live in a world asking for specifics and getting none. That is not the case regarding God’s word. The following information came from the website:
A few miles northwest of the Sea of Galilee, the terrain begins to rise sharply to form the high rolling hills of Upper Galilee. Just beyond the ancient city of Safed, the highest city in Israel, stands the highest mountain in Israel, Mount Meron, at 3,926 feet above sea level.
Mount Meron is situated about ten miles northwest of the lake-side city of Tabgha. It is located on the upper reaches of the rugged Wadi Amud that flows down through a gorge to the Plain of Gennesaret into the Sea of Galilee.
From Mount Meron, one can view the Sea of Galilee below, especially, the shoreline that extends from Tiberias to Capernaum to the Decapolis. Mount Tabor, twenty miles to the south and Mount Hermon, some fifteen miles to the northeast, are clearly visible. The whole Upper Jordan Valley lies more than 4,000 feet below.
Historical and Biblical Significance
Several considerations commend Mount Meron as the site of the Transfiguration, rather than the other two traditional sites, Mount Hermon and Mount Tabor:
1. The Transfiguration occurred a week after the conversation at Caesarea Philippi near the base of Mount Hermon. Matthew and Mark refer to six days and Luke mentions "some eight days," the "some" indicating that this number was approximate (Matt 17:1-13; Mark 9:2-13; Luke 9:28-37). Although it is quite possible that Jesus and His men spent these days climbing up the slope of 9,200-foot Mount Hermon, this week could represent the travel time down the Upper Jordan Valley to Mount Meron, a distance of about fifteen miles.
2. If the Transfiguration took place on Mount Meron, Jesus and His disciples would have passed through Galilee from there to Capernaum (Mark 9:30-33). Mount Tabor, however, was located about a day’s journey south of Capernaum. It would have been unlikely that Jesus and His disciples would have traveled this distance beyond Capernaum and then retraced their steps back to that city on the north shore of the Sea of Galilee. If Jesus and His disciples were at Mount Hermon for the Transfiguration, the main part of their return journey to Capernaum would not have been through Galilee as Mark indicates, but more likely through the Tetrarchy of Philip.
3. Mount Tabor was located a considerable distance from Caesarea Philippi where Jesus had made His historic announcements to His disciples six days earlier. Higher mountains were available between Caesarea Philippi and their next destination, Capernaum, notably Mount Meron, the highest mountain in Galilee, Samaria, or Judea.
4. When He descended from the mountain the next day after the Transfiguration, Jesus found His nine disciples surrounded by a great crowd, including scribes (Mark 9:14). Mount Meron is located in an area where the scribes and the large Jewish crowd would have had ready access to challenge the nine disciples. It would be unlikely that these observant Jews would have followed Jesus into the largely Gentile territory of Caesarea Philippi and Mount Hermon or that such a crowd would have appeared there expecting His disciples to perform a miracle.
5. In the ruins of a second century synagogue near Mount Meron, the lintel over a doorway has been cracked. An idea persists in the area that the lintel will fall when Messiah comes. Although this prediction has no Scriptural or objective basis, it may reflect a tradition that it was nearby that Messiah appeared in His glory. Another tradition suggests that when Messiah comes, He will arrive first on Mount Meron and from there proceed to Jerusalem.
6. On a large stone near Mount Meron, a prediction is recorded that when Messiah appears, He will be accompanied by Elijah. Although this idea also lacks objective support, it could reflect a tradition that originated when Elijah joined Messiah on that mountain.
The Transfiguration took place during the last days of Jesus’ Galilean ministry. It followed immediately after His historic meeting with His disciples at Caesarea Philippi, where He announced to them His purpose to build His Church. This prediction was followed by His shocking announcement that He would now be going to Jerusalem to be crucified. His disciples, led by Peter, reacted with consternation and unbelief. The thought of His dying seemed totally incompatible with His preaching that "the kingdom is at hand." Further, they had been sent out two by two to call people to repentance in preparation for the establishment of that kingdom. What did this talk of a kingdom have to do with a new community of called-out people, an ekklesia? Or with His death on a cross? The disciples were, in fact, anticipating the reaction that a crowd in Jerusalem would soon express, "We have heard out of the Law that the Christ is to remain forever; and how can you say, ‘the Son of Man must be lifted up?’" (John 12:34)
It was the Transfiguration that provided the answer to this apparent paradox. Jesus of Nazareth would indeed die on a cross, but He would be resurrected and one day would appear in all His glory as Messiah to rule in His kingdom. He was giving Peter, James and John a preview of His messiahship, confirmation of the fact that the Jesus who would die would be the King who would reign. These three men needed this even more than the other disciples because of the special assignments Jesus would give them. Peter would be the first leader of the Church, the human agent through whom the Holy Spirit would be introduced to the Jews, the Samaritans, and the Gentiles; John would be Peter’s companion and later become the pastor of the church at Ephesus and the writer of five books in the New Testament, including the last one that would be a final "revelation of Jesus Christ" ; James would become the first disciple to die for his testimony to Jesus.
Bibliography
1. Liefeld, Walter L. "Theological Motifs in the Transfiguration Narrative." New Dimensions in New Testament Study. Longenecker, Richard N. and Merrill C. Tenney, eds. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1974. 162-179.
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Money, Fame and Living for God
Moving on in the 9th chapter of the book of Luke, verse 23, the author records the three things we are to do when we follow Jesus. Those three foundational things, are as follows:
1. Put aside selfish ambitions and deny yourselves the glory related to this world. If you do something nice for someone, do it because you love God and avoid trying to get earthly credit.
2. Take up your cross daily and follow Him. Represent Jesus on this earth and in our daily lives. Spend less time telling about Jesus and more of showing Him and His example in your life. If Christ is alive in our lives, those that we interact with will recognize Him.
3. Live your life for God and not for this world. When we focus on pleasing God, we please those around us. If I can be as loyal to God, as my two dogs are to me, God would be pleased with me.
We, as residents of a world that virtually thrives on selfish ambition, may wonder how we can live in such a world and still serve Christ? In the article that I reprinted above, pertaining to Oprah, one of the things she thinks Christianity preaches is poverty and that it is somehow impossible to be a good Christian and to be blessed financially.
The question isn’t if you make a lot of money, what do you do with it, the question is really, what do you do with whatever you earn? The best way to determine where you are in this area is to look at your checkbook or bank statement and determine where you spend your money. Do you support organizations that care for orphans or feed the hungry? Do you tithe 10% of your income to your church? Do you take a personal interest in the welfare of a person or family and help underwrite their life with a weekly or monthly stipend? When you are ready to buy a new car, do you look around in your community and determine who can use your old one? I hear people say what they would do if they were to win the lotto and how they would help their family and their church. The truth is that we can do wonderful work in our life and the the lives of others without winning a huge sum of money. The sad reality is that most people who win the lottery, don’t think of others and their pattern of giving to others does not change. If they were big givers before winning, they were big givers afterward. Charity grows in our hearts, not in a pile of money. Lastly, if we can’t be generous when we have little, why would God trust us to be generous with a lot?
I have featured an article that was featured on the ABC News website. The web address for this story is at http://abcnews.go.com/US/Story?id=431444&page=1. The article outlines the aftermath of people and their lives after winning the lottery.
How a Lottery Dream Can Turn to a Nightmare
Winning a Big Jackpot May Seem Like a Dream Come True, But Winners Are Faced With New Problems
By JONANN BRADY
Feb. 9, 2005
Margaret and James Jones, a couple in their 50s who live in a trailer outside the small, working-class community of Washington, Ga., got a stunning piece of news recently. They discovered they were the winners of $130 million in the Georgia Mega Millions drawing -- the second-largest prize in the state's history.
"Now our kids won't have to worry, and we won't have to worry," Margaret Jones told ABC News' "Good Morning America."
But will the Joneses have to contend with a whole new set of worries now?
The lottery seems to promise happiness with just a dollar and a dream, but past winners and experts say suddenly coming into big bucks can turn a person's life into a nightmare.
'I Wish I Would Have Torn the Ticket Up'
That's certainly been the case for Jack Whittaker. Ever since winning the largest single lottery jackpot in U.S. history on Christmas Day 2002 -- $314.9 million -- the West Virginia man has been plagued by troubles.
At first, his mishaps seemed almost comical: More than $500,000 in cash and cashier's checks was stolen from Whittaker's SUV, which was parked outside the Pink Pony strip club; later, another $100,000 was stolen from his car while it was parked outside his house.
Then the problems grew more disturbing. Whittaker was arrested a number of times on assault charges. The body of his granddaughter's friend -- the victim of a drug overdose --was found in Whittaker's home while he was away. After two drunken driving charges, a judge sentenced Whittaker to a 28-day alcohol-rehabilitation center.
Most recently, his troubles have taken a tragic turn. Nearly two years to the day of his big win, Whittaker's 17-year-old granddaughter, Brandi Bragg, was found dead of an apparent drug overdose near her boyfriend's father's home, wrapped in a sheet and plastic tarp.
Whittaker and his lawyer did not return calls for comment, but Whittaker's wife, Jewel, told The Charleston (W.Va.) Gazette: "I wish all of this never would have happened ... I wish I would have torn the ticket up."
How a Lottery Dream Can Turn to a Nightmare
Winning a Big Jackpot May Seem Like a Dream Come True, But Winners Are Faced With New Problems
Chasing the Dream, but Unprepared for the Reality
Psychologists and financial experts agree -- money doesn't buy happiness, but that doesn't keep us from chasing it.
In a 1978 study, psychologist Phil Brickman and his colleagues followed lottery winners over a number of years and found that after the initial elation wore off, they were no happier on a day-to-day basis than before the win. And, in fact, many winners find themselves unhappier.
"In American society, we tend to overvalue the role of money," said Stephen Goldbart, a psychologist and the co-founder of the Money, Meaning and Choices Institute, a San Francisco-based group that advises people who come into sudden wealth. "The American dream equals financial success. It's an empty drug, but most people buy it."
Goldbart, who mainly works with entrepreneurs and those who inherit their wealth, says few people are prepared to deal with sudden money, especially lottery winners who do nothing more than buy a ticket.
Many winners experience a shock to the system, and then reality sets in -- with higher but often unrealistic expectations, increased responsibilities, constant pressure from friends and family to share the wealth, and paranoia about whom they can trust.
Susan Bradley, the founder of the Sudden Money Institute, another group that counsels people who come into sudden wealth, said people who get rich very quickly experience "social anomie" -- life with seemingly no rules or boundaries.
"This loss of structure, as good as this sound on the surface, can be the source of deep confusion and eventually disappointment," said Bradley.
And there even seems to be a biological basis for the unhappiness of lottery winners. In a recent study, Dr. Gregory Berns, an associate professor of psychiatry and human behavior at Emory University, found that the brain is more aroused when people had to actively work for rewards.
"Working for your money is, in fact, more rewarding than getting it passively," said Berns. "From the brain's perspective, earning money is more meaningful and probably more satisfying." Not all lottery winners have disaster befall them, of course, but there are many cases of big winners having to cope with enormous problems, and coming away from the experience worse off than before they won.
Before striking it rich, William "Bud" Post worked with a traveling carnival and as a house painter and day laborer. In 1988, he won $16.2 million in the Pennsylvania lottery. Within months, his former girlfriend sued him successfully for a third of the prize, and his brother was arrested for allegedly hiring a hit man to try to kill him. Post now lives on $450 a month in Social Security benefits and food stamps.
Evelyn Adams won the New Jersey lottery twice -- once in 1985 and once in 1986 -- for a total of $5.4 million. After handing out money to friends and relatives and blowing a good share of it gambling, Adams declared bankruptcy and now lives in a trailer.
Billie Bob Harrell Jr., of Houston, who stocked shelves at a Home Depot, won $31 million in a Texas jackpot in 1997. Two years later, after copious spending and lending and a broken marriage, he killed himself with a shotgun.
And in November 2004, a Queens parking garage attendant named Juan Rodriguez, who had 78 cents to his name and was $44,000 in debt, won $149 million in the New York State Lotto. In a matter of days, his wife had filed for divorce. The most recent reports have him holed up with a relative in a posh Manhattan hotel, trying to avoid people looking for handouts.
Facing Envy and Ridicule
Lottery winners, more than any other sudden money recipients, are especially envied when they win and ridiculed when their difficulties hit the headlines.
"The general thinking that money is good and the more you have the better off you are leads many windfall recipients to see themselves as defective. It seems that enjoying a windfall should be a no-brainer. The recipient's failures are blamed on them -- their lack of character, discipline or sophistication," said Bradley. In fact, about one-third of lottery winners eventually declare bankruptcy, according to the Certified Financial Planners Board of Standards.
What big lottery winners need are privacy, safety and specialized financial help, said Bradley. Money itself is neither good nor bad, but how you use it that has negative or positive consequences.
"Receiving sudden money is a major life event," said Bradley. "Life as you know it is over, and it is up to you to assimilate the new money into your life in a way that is healthy and productive."
The Joneses hope they are among the lucky ones, who can deal with their newfound wealth in a positive way. The couple says they hope to help their family and their church, and maybe even keep their jobs -- Margaret is a postal worker and James runs an auto repair shop.
But they also are beginning to realize that nothing will ever be quite the same again.
"Everyone keeps saying it will change us," said James. "I hope not. But it probably will."
In 1978, social psychologist, Philip Brickman published a study that compared lottery winners to accident victims who had become quadriplegic or paraplegic as a result. The following is a quote from that report:
“Lottery winners and the accident victims experienced a sudden change in fortune, yet
they both adapted to their circumstances, finding themselves surprisingly close to where they had begun in terms of happiness. It was a startling discovery for it seemed to prove that happiness is relative, marked only by changes from the recent past. Happiness is therefore dependant on one's attitude toward specific circumstances, regardless of the nature of the circumstance.”
In Christ, we can focus on living our lives in fellowship with Him by following the outline set by Him in chapter nine. It is also important to read the warning that follows the outline as Jesus tells us that it does no good to obtain all the material things that the world offers if we lose our soul in the process.
Lastly, He tells us in verse 26 that, if we deny or are ashamed of Him or His message on this earth, He will be ashamed of us when He returns from heaven.
1. Put aside selfish ambitions and deny yourselves the glory related to this world. If you do something nice for someone, do it because you love God and avoid trying to get earthly credit.
2. Take up your cross daily and follow Him. Represent Jesus on this earth and in our daily lives. Spend less time telling about Jesus and more of showing Him and His example in your life. If Christ is alive in our lives, those that we interact with will recognize Him.
3. Live your life for God and not for this world. When we focus on pleasing God, we please those around us. If I can be as loyal to God, as my two dogs are to me, God would be pleased with me.
We, as residents of a world that virtually thrives on selfish ambition, may wonder how we can live in such a world and still serve Christ? In the article that I reprinted above, pertaining to Oprah, one of the things she thinks Christianity preaches is poverty and that it is somehow impossible to be a good Christian and to be blessed financially.
The question isn’t if you make a lot of money, what do you do with it, the question is really, what do you do with whatever you earn? The best way to determine where you are in this area is to look at your checkbook or bank statement and determine where you spend your money. Do you support organizations that care for orphans or feed the hungry? Do you tithe 10% of your income to your church? Do you take a personal interest in the welfare of a person or family and help underwrite their life with a weekly or monthly stipend? When you are ready to buy a new car, do you look around in your community and determine who can use your old one? I hear people say what they would do if they were to win the lotto and how they would help their family and their church. The truth is that we can do wonderful work in our life and the the lives of others without winning a huge sum of money. The sad reality is that most people who win the lottery, don’t think of others and their pattern of giving to others does not change. If they were big givers before winning, they were big givers afterward. Charity grows in our hearts, not in a pile of money. Lastly, if we can’t be generous when we have little, why would God trust us to be generous with a lot?
I have featured an article that was featured on the ABC News website. The web address for this story is at http://abcnews.go.com/US/Story?id=431444&page=1. The article outlines the aftermath of people and their lives after winning the lottery.
How a Lottery Dream Can Turn to a Nightmare
Winning a Big Jackpot May Seem Like a Dream Come True, But Winners Are Faced With New Problems
By JONANN BRADY
Feb. 9, 2005
Margaret and James Jones, a couple in their 50s who live in a trailer outside the small, working-class community of Washington, Ga., got a stunning piece of news recently. They discovered they were the winners of $130 million in the Georgia Mega Millions drawing -- the second-largest prize in the state's history.
"Now our kids won't have to worry, and we won't have to worry," Margaret Jones told ABC News' "Good Morning America."
But will the Joneses have to contend with a whole new set of worries now?
The lottery seems to promise happiness with just a dollar and a dream, but past winners and experts say suddenly coming into big bucks can turn a person's life into a nightmare.
'I Wish I Would Have Torn the Ticket Up'
That's certainly been the case for Jack Whittaker. Ever since winning the largest single lottery jackpot in U.S. history on Christmas Day 2002 -- $314.9 million -- the West Virginia man has been plagued by troubles.
At first, his mishaps seemed almost comical: More than $500,000 in cash and cashier's checks was stolen from Whittaker's SUV, which was parked outside the Pink Pony strip club; later, another $100,000 was stolen from his car while it was parked outside his house.
Then the problems grew more disturbing. Whittaker was arrested a number of times on assault charges. The body of his granddaughter's friend -- the victim of a drug overdose --was found in Whittaker's home while he was away. After two drunken driving charges, a judge sentenced Whittaker to a 28-day alcohol-rehabilitation center.
Most recently, his troubles have taken a tragic turn. Nearly two years to the day of his big win, Whittaker's 17-year-old granddaughter, Brandi Bragg, was found dead of an apparent drug overdose near her boyfriend's father's home, wrapped in a sheet and plastic tarp.
Whittaker and his lawyer did not return calls for comment, but Whittaker's wife, Jewel, told The Charleston (W.Va.) Gazette: "I wish all of this never would have happened ... I wish I would have torn the ticket up."
How a Lottery Dream Can Turn to a Nightmare
Winning a Big Jackpot May Seem Like a Dream Come True, But Winners Are Faced With New Problems
Chasing the Dream, but Unprepared for the Reality
Psychologists and financial experts agree -- money doesn't buy happiness, but that doesn't keep us from chasing it.
In a 1978 study, psychologist Phil Brickman and his colleagues followed lottery winners over a number of years and found that after the initial elation wore off, they were no happier on a day-to-day basis than before the win. And, in fact, many winners find themselves unhappier.
"In American society, we tend to overvalue the role of money," said Stephen Goldbart, a psychologist and the co-founder of the Money, Meaning and Choices Institute, a San Francisco-based group that advises people who come into sudden wealth. "The American dream equals financial success. It's an empty drug, but most people buy it."
Goldbart, who mainly works with entrepreneurs and those who inherit their wealth, says few people are prepared to deal with sudden money, especially lottery winners who do nothing more than buy a ticket.
Many winners experience a shock to the system, and then reality sets in -- with higher but often unrealistic expectations, increased responsibilities, constant pressure from friends and family to share the wealth, and paranoia about whom they can trust.
Susan Bradley, the founder of the Sudden Money Institute, another group that counsels people who come into sudden wealth, said people who get rich very quickly experience "social anomie" -- life with seemingly no rules or boundaries.
"This loss of structure, as good as this sound on the surface, can be the source of deep confusion and eventually disappointment," said Bradley.
And there even seems to be a biological basis for the unhappiness of lottery winners. In a recent study, Dr. Gregory Berns, an associate professor of psychiatry and human behavior at Emory University, found that the brain is more aroused when people had to actively work for rewards.
"Working for your money is, in fact, more rewarding than getting it passively," said Berns. "From the brain's perspective, earning money is more meaningful and probably more satisfying." Not all lottery winners have disaster befall them, of course, but there are many cases of big winners having to cope with enormous problems, and coming away from the experience worse off than before they won.
Before striking it rich, William "Bud" Post worked with a traveling carnival and as a house painter and day laborer. In 1988, he won $16.2 million in the Pennsylvania lottery. Within months, his former girlfriend sued him successfully for a third of the prize, and his brother was arrested for allegedly hiring a hit man to try to kill him. Post now lives on $450 a month in Social Security benefits and food stamps.
Evelyn Adams won the New Jersey lottery twice -- once in 1985 and once in 1986 -- for a total of $5.4 million. After handing out money to friends and relatives and blowing a good share of it gambling, Adams declared bankruptcy and now lives in a trailer.
Billie Bob Harrell Jr., of Houston, who stocked shelves at a Home Depot, won $31 million in a Texas jackpot in 1997. Two years later, after copious spending and lending and a broken marriage, he killed himself with a shotgun.
And in November 2004, a Queens parking garage attendant named Juan Rodriguez, who had 78 cents to his name and was $44,000 in debt, won $149 million in the New York State Lotto. In a matter of days, his wife had filed for divorce. The most recent reports have him holed up with a relative in a posh Manhattan hotel, trying to avoid people looking for handouts.
Facing Envy and Ridicule
Lottery winners, more than any other sudden money recipients, are especially envied when they win and ridiculed when their difficulties hit the headlines.
"The general thinking that money is good and the more you have the better off you are leads many windfall recipients to see themselves as defective. It seems that enjoying a windfall should be a no-brainer. The recipient's failures are blamed on them -- their lack of character, discipline or sophistication," said Bradley. In fact, about one-third of lottery winners eventually declare bankruptcy, according to the Certified Financial Planners Board of Standards.
What big lottery winners need are privacy, safety and specialized financial help, said Bradley. Money itself is neither good nor bad, but how you use it that has negative or positive consequences.
"Receiving sudden money is a major life event," said Bradley. "Life as you know it is over, and it is up to you to assimilate the new money into your life in a way that is healthy and productive."
The Joneses hope they are among the lucky ones, who can deal with their newfound wealth in a positive way. The couple says they hope to help their family and their church, and maybe even keep their jobs -- Margaret is a postal worker and James runs an auto repair shop.
But they also are beginning to realize that nothing will ever be quite the same again.
"Everyone keeps saying it will change us," said James. "I hope not. But it probably will."
In 1978, social psychologist, Philip Brickman published a study that compared lottery winners to accident victims who had become quadriplegic or paraplegic as a result. The following is a quote from that report:
“Lottery winners and the accident victims experienced a sudden change in fortune, yet
they both adapted to their circumstances, finding themselves surprisingly close to where they had begun in terms of happiness. It was a startling discovery for it seemed to prove that happiness is relative, marked only by changes from the recent past. Happiness is therefore dependant on one's attitude toward specific circumstances, regardless of the nature of the circumstance.”
In Christ, we can focus on living our lives in fellowship with Him by following the outline set by Him in chapter nine. It is also important to read the warning that follows the outline as Jesus tells us that it does no good to obtain all the material things that the world offers if we lose our soul in the process.
Lastly, He tells us in verse 26 that, if we deny or are ashamed of Him or His message on this earth, He will be ashamed of us when He returns from heaven.
Thursday, April 17, 2008
Who Jesus Is, Who He Isn't
Continuing in chapter nine, verse 21, Jesus warns His apostles to not repeat what He is about to say. He tells them that He, as the Son of Man, will suffer many terrible things that will include the rejection of religious leaders, teachers and priests and worst of all, He will be murdered. Jesus followed this grim news with the promise that He will be raised from the dead.
First off, try and put yourself in the place of His followers. They all just agreed with Peter that Jesus was the Messiah and now they hear that He was to be rejected by the religious authorities and killed. These folks must have wigged out because the messiah was supposed to be a great leader who rode into town on the white horse, full of wisdom, authority and leadership, recognized by all to be the “promised one” who had a destiny of restoring the kingdom of Israel. They were probably cleaning their ears and asking one another to repeat the part about what He said about being raised from the dead. The bible says that in addition to the disciples and immediate followers, there was a crowd of people present to hear what Jesus said. This being the case, there must have been many who separated themselves from His ministry because of these words.
The definition of who and what the messiah should be is still being changed and modified. When I hear modern day preachers and religious leaders constantly redefining who Jesus is, I am stunned that these folks think they can get away with it.
I have included a complete article from a blog written by Albert Mohler. I have also included personal information regarding Mr. Mohler so that you can understand where he is coming from.
Richard Albert Mohler, Jr. (born 1960) is a conservative Baptist evangelical. He presently serves as the ninth President of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky. He has been a member of the board of James Dobson's Focus on the Family since August, 2004. Dr Mohler is a frequent conference speaker and host of his own radio program. His blog focusses on cultural issues facing society today, and he brings a Christian perspective to current affairs.
To read more about Albert Mohler and possibly acquaint yourself with his previous writings, and to read this article for yourself, go to his website that is located at the following address.
http://www.albertmohler.com/commentary_read.php?cdate=2005-11-29
The Church of Oprah Winfrey--A New American Religion?
Tuesday, November 29, 2005
By any measure, Oprah Winfrey is one of the most successful women in America. Her net worth is now thought to exceed one billion dollars, and her expanding media empire is one of the great success stories of the modern entertainment industry. She recently celebrated the twentieth anniversary of "The Oprah Show," and is committed to a contract that will take the show through its twenty-fifth season. She regularly appears at the top of the "Most Admired Women" listings and has become a cultural icon, complete with her own magazine and product lines. But is there more to the meaning of Oprah Winfrey?
Marcia Z. Nelson sees Oprah as a major American religious leader. In The Gospel According to Oprah, Nelson presents her as the symbol and catalyst for a new American religion. "Oprah Winfrey, talk show host, film producer, and philanthropist, is not ordained. She is neither preacher nor religious professional. Yet her multimedia empire, built over two decades, has given her the scope and stature of an influential leader. Oprah has a prominent pulpit from which to preach," Nelson insists. Oprah's television audience of ten million (according to Nielsen ratings) and her magazine readership of 2.7 million together represent a massive media phenomenon. As Nelson explains, "Oprah's whole enterprise, which includes many media that provide platforms for her gospel as well as sources of income, is vast." Nelson's book represents an effort to understand Oprah Winfrey as an exemplar and prophetess of a new form of American religion. In reality, Oprah is probably best understood as a highly-talented representative of the religion of positive thinking that has shaped American culture for at least the last two centuries. In this role, Oprah continues and extends a line of religious thought that replaces the transcendent with the temporal and looks for fulfillment and success as the goods of a satisfying life.
Marcia Z. Nelson is a writer who covers religions and spirituality. In previous works, she has considered various aspects of modern American religion, including contemporary meditation movements. In Oprah Winfrey she has found a figure of such influence and reach that she may well represent the mainstreaming of her own life philosophy.
Of course, Oprah's primary audience is comprised of women. "Oprah is primarily the voice of women in the middle: middle-class middle Americans," Nelson explains. Through her television show, magazine, and book club, Oprah reaches out to these women with a message of self-improvement, empowerment, and self-actualization.
Watching "The Oprah Show" is, Nelson insists, something like attending a worship service. "Go to this house of worship and sit down for an inspiring hour that will engage you and give you a lift," Nelson encourages. "An hour-long show five days a week adds up to a lot more pulpit time per week than the average pastor enjoys, and Oprah commands a lot bigger congregation."
Nelson's book is genuinely interesting, offering credible and helpful insights into the Oprah phenomenon. At the same time, Nelson gushes over the meaning of Oprah and seems to celebrate Oprah's redefinition of religious experience. Indeed, she goes so far as to refer to Oprah as a symbol of spiritual renewal. "In other words, it is not just talk, but talk that's been tested in life's fires--talk is testimony," she asserts. "As Oprah would say, this is about getting real. This is the language of authenticity. A preference for the freshness and vividness of experience over what can seem like the dull dryness of institutional faith is hardly new, of course. Spiritual renewal has ever been thus."
Oprah Winfrey was born January 29, 1954 in Kosciusko, Mississippi. Originally, she lived there on a farm with her mother, Vernita, and her grandmother, Hattie Mae Lee. In later years, Vernita was unable to care for Oprah, and she went to live with her father, Vernon Winfrey, in Nashville. Interestingly, Oprah was supposed to have been named Orpah, after the daughter-in-law of Naomi as cited in Ruth 1:14. A misspelling of her name led to the name that has made her famous. She was raised in a Baptist church and developed her speaking ability in the context of the local congregation.
As an adolescent, Oprah was sexually abused by male relatives, became sexually promiscuous, and gave birth to a baby boy, who later died.
She got her big break in broadcasting at age 19 and left her college studies in order to become a TV newscaster. In 1984, she moved to WLS-TV in Chicago and began a local talk show. The show was so popular that it was eventually named for Oprah and then went into national syndication. From those roots, a vast media empire was born.
Nelson is candid in dealing with the way Oprah repackages spirituality. "She translates what religions would term transcendent into something that is inspiring but secular. She would call it a vision of possibilities. She has tried to develop her own unique language, which means talking about values in a secular and inclusive sense in a religiously pluralistic country."
The Oprah phenomenon is based in self-disclosure, confession, testimony, and talk--lots and lots of talk. Episodes of "The Oprah Show" often deal with abuse, frustration, and the search for fulfillment. Guests are routinely encouraged to confess their wrongdoing, claim their promise, and move into a new phase of their lives, empowered and encouraged by Oprah and the experience of sharing their inner lives with millions of television viewers. In this sense, Oprah's television show promises something like a secular catharsis--complete with Oprah's validation of their problems, their desires, and their self-analysis. Nelson suggests that Oprah's influence is based in her gift for listening and her knowledge that self-disclosure and personal testimony offer a means of liberation. Of course, this dependence upon disclosure and confession also makes for good ratings--and Oprah understands what interests a television audience. As Nelson explains: "On Oprah's show, abuse may be the subject of a show, followed the next day by an entertainer. However morally laudable or pressing, unrelieved focus on abuse or mistreatment of women or AIDS in Africa or any of the world's pressing needs doesn't make for good ratings, either. Without good ratings, the television platform Oprah needs to 'get people to think about things a little differently' would vanish."
In the course of her research, Nelson approached several scholars of American religion, asking them "whether they could think of Oprah as a teacher who advanced a kind of entry-level religion that included the same core values many religions promote." When Oprah was criticized for offering meaning without community, Nelson counters by suggesting that Oprah's television show and reading club offer one form of community, even as her expanding presence on the internet promises "virtual community."
Oprah Winfrey's approach to life centers in self-analysis and positive thinking. Of course, material abundance also plays a part. "Oprah believes in abundance, a concept not generally associated with religion," Nelson acknowledges. "A lot of people think of religion as requiring asceticism and poverty--giving up goods, denying personal desires. And for good reason." By offering a seemingly endless array of product recommendations and endorsements, and by filling her magazine with advertisements for expensive products and services, Oprah clearly associates the good life with material fulfillment.
In keeping with the theme of positive thinking, and with the ideology of spiritual movements of this kind, Oprah's secularized spirituality includes few rules or moral judgments. "Oprah is famously nonjudgmental and empathetic," Nelson explains. Even as she features programs on romance, dating, marriage, and parenting, Oprah remains unmarried. Her nonjudgmentalism extends to her own lifestyle, even as she has publicly acknowledged the fact that she lives with her longtime boyfriend, Stedman Graham.
When Oprah refers to God, she is clear to insist that this means no specific god and entails no particular theological commitments. Nelson refers to Oprah's treatment of religion on her program as "a non-sectarian picture" in which theological content "is present but not primary." In other words, "God is acknowledged as necessary, but the language doesn't insist on that. It's soft sell."
As Nelson understands the Oprah phenomenon, forgiveness is at the center of Oprah's message. Nevertheless, Oprah offers forgiveness without atonement. Confession of inadequacy is presented as a sufficient remedy for sin and wrongdoing. God is effectively out of the picture as lawgiver or judge, and there is no room for the cross of Christ as atonement for sin.
"Oprah's 'New Age' talk about spirit was part of her ongoing, ever evolving attempt to find the right words for teachings she learned through religion," Nelson suggests. "Her spiritually inclusive language is also intended to be unique--the language she alone speaks that makes her inspiring and distinctly herself. For marketing reasons as well as for her own sense of mission, she's putting her own stamp on the language, on the words she uses, on the culture, where the 'Oprah effect' and 'Oprahfication' and 'She Oprah'ed it out of me' are terms that have been coined to describe her pervasive influence and style."
Oprah's faith wears no labels, Nelson insists. Oprah "talks often enough about values that her audience can see she is value driven, even if the values and beliefs don't wear a specific denominational label," Nelson observes. As she explains, "Oprah's clothes may wear labels, but her faith does not."
New York University professor Paul Vitz once observed, "Contemporary psychology is a form of secular humanism based on the rejection of God and the worship of the self." In her substitution of psychology for theology, Oprah has become a high priestess and icon of the psychologization of American society. When she features prominent New Age figures on her television show, she helps to mainstream New Age influences and philosophies among millions of Americans. Her substitution of spirituality for biblical Christianity, her promotion of forgiveness without atonement, and her references to a god "without labels" puts her at the epicenter of a seismic cultural earthquake.
At the same time, Oprah cannot be ignored. Marcia Z. Nelson's new book is intended as a celebration of Oprah's significance as a harbinger of a new gospel. In the end, the importance of this book is grounded in the fact that it draws attention to Oprah's influence and cultural impact. Oprah's newly-packaged positive-thinking spirituality is tailor-made for the empty souls of our postmodern age. She promises meaning without truth, acceptance without judgment, and fulfillment without self-denial. Marcia Z. Nelson is certainly right about one thing--Oprah Winfrey's "congregation" cannot be ignored.
Back to the question posed by Jesus to the disciples (and us) that is still valid today. Who do we say that He is? We, as Christians, are to accept who He is God, and we are to share His good news. We are not to add our spin to it, use it’s premise to accumulate personal wealth, push the influence that comes with it to promote products or services or set our selves up to be exclusive in understanding of the message.
In every case, the counterfeit prophet, whether they mean to or not, seem to get the wealth, power and influence accumulation parts of leadership but always seems to fail to deliver when the chips are down. In the case of Jesus, He did not accumulate wealth or influence, was always on message despite who was listening and above all, when faced with the pain and torture that he knew awaited Him, He did not fail to complete His mission.
To finish this question of who Jesus is, I would like to also say that He is not the Jesus that Jeremiah Wright preaches about in his church in Chicago. The news recently was filled with quotations from sermons that this pastor shared with his congregation over the years. The reason that these quotes became important is that congregation included a presidential candidate who has listened to these tirades for twenty years and can’t seem to understand why people find a problem with them.
Just as people were critical with the Muslim community for not speaking out against the hateful talk of their clergy, we as Christians should let the world know that this representation of Christ and the misinterpretation of His word is also unacceptable.
If my pastor ever spoke outside of the word of God and preached a hate filled sermon against God’s people, I would get up and leave immediately and not absorb it for two decades.
First off, try and put yourself in the place of His followers. They all just agreed with Peter that Jesus was the Messiah and now they hear that He was to be rejected by the religious authorities and killed. These folks must have wigged out because the messiah was supposed to be a great leader who rode into town on the white horse, full of wisdom, authority and leadership, recognized by all to be the “promised one” who had a destiny of restoring the kingdom of Israel. They were probably cleaning their ears and asking one another to repeat the part about what He said about being raised from the dead. The bible says that in addition to the disciples and immediate followers, there was a crowd of people present to hear what Jesus said. This being the case, there must have been many who separated themselves from His ministry because of these words.
The definition of who and what the messiah should be is still being changed and modified. When I hear modern day preachers and religious leaders constantly redefining who Jesus is, I am stunned that these folks think they can get away with it.
I have included a complete article from a blog written by Albert Mohler. I have also included personal information regarding Mr. Mohler so that you can understand where he is coming from.
Richard Albert Mohler, Jr. (born 1960) is a conservative Baptist evangelical. He presently serves as the ninth President of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky. He has been a member of the board of James Dobson's Focus on the Family since August, 2004. Dr Mohler is a frequent conference speaker and host of his own radio program. His blog focusses on cultural issues facing society today, and he brings a Christian perspective to current affairs.
To read more about Albert Mohler and possibly acquaint yourself with his previous writings, and to read this article for yourself, go to his website that is located at the following address.
http://www.albertmohler.com/commentary_read.php?cdate=2005-11-29
The Church of Oprah Winfrey--A New American Religion?
Tuesday, November 29, 2005
By any measure, Oprah Winfrey is one of the most successful women in America. Her net worth is now thought to exceed one billion dollars, and her expanding media empire is one of the great success stories of the modern entertainment industry. She recently celebrated the twentieth anniversary of "The Oprah Show," and is committed to a contract that will take the show through its twenty-fifth season. She regularly appears at the top of the "Most Admired Women" listings and has become a cultural icon, complete with her own magazine and product lines. But is there more to the meaning of Oprah Winfrey?
Marcia Z. Nelson sees Oprah as a major American religious leader. In The Gospel According to Oprah, Nelson presents her as the symbol and catalyst for a new American religion. "Oprah Winfrey, talk show host, film producer, and philanthropist, is not ordained. She is neither preacher nor religious professional. Yet her multimedia empire, built over two decades, has given her the scope and stature of an influential leader. Oprah has a prominent pulpit from which to preach," Nelson insists. Oprah's television audience of ten million (according to Nielsen ratings) and her magazine readership of 2.7 million together represent a massive media phenomenon. As Nelson explains, "Oprah's whole enterprise, which includes many media that provide platforms for her gospel as well as sources of income, is vast." Nelson's book represents an effort to understand Oprah Winfrey as an exemplar and prophetess of a new form of American religion. In reality, Oprah is probably best understood as a highly-talented representative of the religion of positive thinking that has shaped American culture for at least the last two centuries. In this role, Oprah continues and extends a line of religious thought that replaces the transcendent with the temporal and looks for fulfillment and success as the goods of a satisfying life.
Marcia Z. Nelson is a writer who covers religions and spirituality. In previous works, she has considered various aspects of modern American religion, including contemporary meditation movements. In Oprah Winfrey she has found a figure of such influence and reach that she may well represent the mainstreaming of her own life philosophy.
Of course, Oprah's primary audience is comprised of women. "Oprah is primarily the voice of women in the middle: middle-class middle Americans," Nelson explains. Through her television show, magazine, and book club, Oprah reaches out to these women with a message of self-improvement, empowerment, and self-actualization.
Watching "The Oprah Show" is, Nelson insists, something like attending a worship service. "Go to this house of worship and sit down for an inspiring hour that will engage you and give you a lift," Nelson encourages. "An hour-long show five days a week adds up to a lot more pulpit time per week than the average pastor enjoys, and Oprah commands a lot bigger congregation."
Nelson's book is genuinely interesting, offering credible and helpful insights into the Oprah phenomenon. At the same time, Nelson gushes over the meaning of Oprah and seems to celebrate Oprah's redefinition of religious experience. Indeed, she goes so far as to refer to Oprah as a symbol of spiritual renewal. "In other words, it is not just talk, but talk that's been tested in life's fires--talk is testimony," she asserts. "As Oprah would say, this is about getting real. This is the language of authenticity. A preference for the freshness and vividness of experience over what can seem like the dull dryness of institutional faith is hardly new, of course. Spiritual renewal has ever been thus."
Oprah Winfrey was born January 29, 1954 in Kosciusko, Mississippi. Originally, she lived there on a farm with her mother, Vernita, and her grandmother, Hattie Mae Lee. In later years, Vernita was unable to care for Oprah, and she went to live with her father, Vernon Winfrey, in Nashville. Interestingly, Oprah was supposed to have been named Orpah, after the daughter-in-law of Naomi as cited in Ruth 1:14. A misspelling of her name led to the name that has made her famous. She was raised in a Baptist church and developed her speaking ability in the context of the local congregation.
As an adolescent, Oprah was sexually abused by male relatives, became sexually promiscuous, and gave birth to a baby boy, who later died.
She got her big break in broadcasting at age 19 and left her college studies in order to become a TV newscaster. In 1984, she moved to WLS-TV in Chicago and began a local talk show. The show was so popular that it was eventually named for Oprah and then went into national syndication. From those roots, a vast media empire was born.
Nelson is candid in dealing with the way Oprah repackages spirituality. "She translates what religions would term transcendent into something that is inspiring but secular. She would call it a vision of possibilities. She has tried to develop her own unique language, which means talking about values in a secular and inclusive sense in a religiously pluralistic country."
The Oprah phenomenon is based in self-disclosure, confession, testimony, and talk--lots and lots of talk. Episodes of "The Oprah Show" often deal with abuse, frustration, and the search for fulfillment. Guests are routinely encouraged to confess their wrongdoing, claim their promise, and move into a new phase of their lives, empowered and encouraged by Oprah and the experience of sharing their inner lives with millions of television viewers. In this sense, Oprah's television show promises something like a secular catharsis--complete with Oprah's validation of their problems, their desires, and their self-analysis. Nelson suggests that Oprah's influence is based in her gift for listening and her knowledge that self-disclosure and personal testimony offer a means of liberation. Of course, this dependence upon disclosure and confession also makes for good ratings--and Oprah understands what interests a television audience. As Nelson explains: "On Oprah's show, abuse may be the subject of a show, followed the next day by an entertainer. However morally laudable or pressing, unrelieved focus on abuse or mistreatment of women or AIDS in Africa or any of the world's pressing needs doesn't make for good ratings, either. Without good ratings, the television platform Oprah needs to 'get people to think about things a little differently' would vanish."
In the course of her research, Nelson approached several scholars of American religion, asking them "whether they could think of Oprah as a teacher who advanced a kind of entry-level religion that included the same core values many religions promote." When Oprah was criticized for offering meaning without community, Nelson counters by suggesting that Oprah's television show and reading club offer one form of community, even as her expanding presence on the internet promises "virtual community."
Oprah Winfrey's approach to life centers in self-analysis and positive thinking. Of course, material abundance also plays a part. "Oprah believes in abundance, a concept not generally associated with religion," Nelson acknowledges. "A lot of people think of religion as requiring asceticism and poverty--giving up goods, denying personal desires. And for good reason." By offering a seemingly endless array of product recommendations and endorsements, and by filling her magazine with advertisements for expensive products and services, Oprah clearly associates the good life with material fulfillment.
In keeping with the theme of positive thinking, and with the ideology of spiritual movements of this kind, Oprah's secularized spirituality includes few rules or moral judgments. "Oprah is famously nonjudgmental and empathetic," Nelson explains. Even as she features programs on romance, dating, marriage, and parenting, Oprah remains unmarried. Her nonjudgmentalism extends to her own lifestyle, even as she has publicly acknowledged the fact that she lives with her longtime boyfriend, Stedman Graham.
When Oprah refers to God, she is clear to insist that this means no specific god and entails no particular theological commitments. Nelson refers to Oprah's treatment of religion on her program as "a non-sectarian picture" in which theological content "is present but not primary." In other words, "God is acknowledged as necessary, but the language doesn't insist on that. It's soft sell."
As Nelson understands the Oprah phenomenon, forgiveness is at the center of Oprah's message. Nevertheless, Oprah offers forgiveness without atonement. Confession of inadequacy is presented as a sufficient remedy for sin and wrongdoing. God is effectively out of the picture as lawgiver or judge, and there is no room for the cross of Christ as atonement for sin.
"Oprah's 'New Age' talk about spirit was part of her ongoing, ever evolving attempt to find the right words for teachings she learned through religion," Nelson suggests. "Her spiritually inclusive language is also intended to be unique--the language she alone speaks that makes her inspiring and distinctly herself. For marketing reasons as well as for her own sense of mission, she's putting her own stamp on the language, on the words she uses, on the culture, where the 'Oprah effect' and 'Oprahfication' and 'She Oprah'ed it out of me' are terms that have been coined to describe her pervasive influence and style."
Oprah's faith wears no labels, Nelson insists. Oprah "talks often enough about values that her audience can see she is value driven, even if the values and beliefs don't wear a specific denominational label," Nelson observes. As she explains, "Oprah's clothes may wear labels, but her faith does not."
New York University professor Paul Vitz once observed, "Contemporary psychology is a form of secular humanism based on the rejection of God and the worship of the self." In her substitution of psychology for theology, Oprah has become a high priestess and icon of the psychologization of American society. When she features prominent New Age figures on her television show, she helps to mainstream New Age influences and philosophies among millions of Americans. Her substitution of spirituality for biblical Christianity, her promotion of forgiveness without atonement, and her references to a god "without labels" puts her at the epicenter of a seismic cultural earthquake.
At the same time, Oprah cannot be ignored. Marcia Z. Nelson's new book is intended as a celebration of Oprah's significance as a harbinger of a new gospel. In the end, the importance of this book is grounded in the fact that it draws attention to Oprah's influence and cultural impact. Oprah's newly-packaged positive-thinking spirituality is tailor-made for the empty souls of our postmodern age. She promises meaning without truth, acceptance without judgment, and fulfillment without self-denial. Marcia Z. Nelson is certainly right about one thing--Oprah Winfrey's "congregation" cannot be ignored.
Back to the question posed by Jesus to the disciples (and us) that is still valid today. Who do we say that He is? We, as Christians, are to accept who He is God, and we are to share His good news. We are not to add our spin to it, use it’s premise to accumulate personal wealth, push the influence that comes with it to promote products or services or set our selves up to be exclusive in understanding of the message.
In every case, the counterfeit prophet, whether they mean to or not, seem to get the wealth, power and influence accumulation parts of leadership but always seems to fail to deliver when the chips are down. In the case of Jesus, He did not accumulate wealth or influence, was always on message despite who was listening and above all, when faced with the pain and torture that he knew awaited Him, He did not fail to complete His mission.
To finish this question of who Jesus is, I would like to also say that He is not the Jesus that Jeremiah Wright preaches about in his church in Chicago. The news recently was filled with quotations from sermons that this pastor shared with his congregation over the years. The reason that these quotes became important is that congregation included a presidential candidate who has listened to these tirades for twenty years and can’t seem to understand why people find a problem with them.
Just as people were critical with the Muslim community for not speaking out against the hateful talk of their clergy, we as Christians should let the world know that this representation of Christ and the misinterpretation of His word is also unacceptable.
If my pastor ever spoke outside of the word of God and preached a hate filled sermon against God’s people, I would get up and leave immediately and not absorb it for two decades.
Monday, April 14, 2008
Peter - True Knucklehead
Luke now reintroduces us to Herod Antipas who would qualify as a sinner who faced no worldly retribution other than the self inflicted kind. If you will recall, this incestuous and dreadful leader had his ear to the ground to learn about all who might be a threat to his rule. He killed everyone around him, including his sons, who he thought might be considered rivals and was driven to distraction with the news of Jesus as the information traveled up and down the road to Damascus.
Herod Antipas, who Jesus compared to a fox, an animal that was ritually unclean, must have had spies on the lookout through out the kingdom. Between the religious leaders following His every movement and word and the state tracking Him with spies, those in power were well aware that Jesus represented a problem to the status quo. Since Herod considered himself to be both a Jewish religious leader as well as the ruling tetrarch, he had double the reason to track the activities of Jesus. Luke reports confusion experienced by Herod regarding just who Jesus was. He wondered openly if Jesus was actually John the Baptist whom Herod murdered previously.
Not to belabor this point but Herod had John’s head cut off and the unofficial narrative tells us that his head was placed on a tray at Herod’s insistence, so he knew without a doubt that John the Baptist was dead. How could he logically think that Jesus was John the Baptist, brought back to life? What a nut job.
According to the aforementioned “Walking in Their Sandals” bible history website located at, http://www.ancientsandals.com/overviews/bethsaida.htm ,the town known as Bethsaida could be found at one of two identified locations that we can visit today. This is an important fact because it is the location that Luke reports to be where Jesus fed over five thousand followers with five loaves of bread and two fish.
Josephus records that Philip the Tetrarch, (who ruled Gaulanitis from 4 B.C. to A.D. 34 and was the half brother of Harod Antipas) developed the village of Bethsaida, near the northeast shore of the Sea of Galilee. He states that in A.D. 30, Philip raised it to the status of a "city" (polis), strengthening its fortifications, increasing its population, and naming it "Julias" in honor of the Emperor Augustus’ daughter. Other historians hold that the city was named after Emperor Tiberius’ mother.
The website goes on to provide more information regarding Bethsaida and its relevance to bible history. An edited reference to that information is as follows:
A Bethsaida at the site of et-Tel, located a mile and a half inland from the lakeshore, would not likely have functioned as a fishing village. El-‘Araj, on the other hand, because it was located on a flood plain, would not have been a suitable site for a large fortified city. It should also be noted that the course of the Jordan River as it enters the lake has changed over the two millennia since Jesus’ ministry in the area.
An aqueduct and Roman road have been discovered which joined the two locations. A reasonable conclusion would be that et-Tel may have been the location of the important city referred to in the Gospels. El-‘Araj, then, would have served as the center of the fishing industry that gave the city its name, "house/place of fish." The Bethsaida of the Gospels, however, may have referred to either or both of these sites.
Historical and Biblical Significance
Bethsaida, Chorazin and Capernaum formed what has been called the "evangelical triangle," because most of Jesus’ miracles in Galilee were performed in these cities. In light of Jesus’ condemnation of them for their unbelief, the word "evangelical" would more accurately refer to the preaching of the gospel there, rather than the character of their inhabitants (Matt 11:20-30)!
Bethsaida was the home of three of Jesus’ disciples, Peter and his brother Andrew, and Philip (John 1:44). Apparently Peter later moved to Capernaum, where his mother-in-law (and wife) resided (Matt 8:14,15; Mark 1:30,31; Luke 4:38,39). Since fishing was the main industry in each of these towns, Peter’s move of some three miles would be unremarkable, except that Capernaum was to become the base of Jesus’ Galilean ministry.
The small plain that surrounds Bethsaida (el-‘Araj) may have been the location of Jesus’ "Sermon on the Mount," if this account recorded another occasion on which Jesus gave this message (Luke 6:17-49).
At the conclusion of the "Sermon on the Mount," Jesus illustrated the importance of basing one’s life on God’s truth, rather than on human teaching, by contrasting the foundations on which two builders constructed their homes (Luke 6:47-49). His reference may have been to the plain at el-‘Araj, where builders would need to dig through some five feet of alluvial soil to find bedrock. "Foolish builders" would build on the sandy overlay, to their sorrow when the spring floods came down from the hills; "wise builders" would have no problem since they had built their houses on the rock stratum below. (The three disciples who came from Bethsaida would have especially appreciated this illustration.)
Jesus performed a unique healing at Bethsaida, restoring a man’s sight in stages (Mark 8:22-26). Apparently He used this method to demonstrate to His disciples their imperfect understanding of His deity at that time. In this miracle, He sought to prepare their hearts for the next revelation of His person. From Bethsaida they proceeded up the Jordan Valley to Caesarea Philippi, where He would ask them, "Who do you say that I am?" (Matt 16:15;Mark 8:27; Luke 9:20)
Putting myself in the place of the apostles who heard Jesus tell them to feed to large crowd with essentially nothing, I am surprised that they didn’t walk away before the miracle and think Him crazy.
In the book of John, the author describes the blessing of the loaves and fishes and pointed out that after the crowd was fed, Jesus had to slip away because the people got so wound up seeing this miracle, they wanted to crown Him king. If they had gossip magazines like we do today, we can only imagine the reporting of this event and the headlines associated with it.
Luke picks up the storyline with an account of Jesus asking the apostles, “Who do the people say that I am?” They replied that people either thought Him to be Elijah, John the Baptist or one of the other prophets who were raised from the dead. Jesus then asked, “Who do you think that I am?” Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, sent from God!”
When Peter answered the question by saying that Jesus was the Messiah, he was referring to the expected king and deliverer of the Jews. The etymology of the word “Messiah” is as follows:
Middle English Messias, Messie, from Old French Messie, from Late Latin Messs, from Greek, from Aramaic mi, the anointed one (from ma, to anoint), or Hebrew m?a, anointed (from ma, to anoint); see m in Semitic roots. The Online Etymology Dictionary, located on the web, at (http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=messiah&searchmode=none) breaks down the word further,
c.1300, Messias, from L.L. Messias, from Gk. Messias, from Aramaic meshiha and Heb. mashiah "anointed" (of the Lord), from mashah "anoint." This is the word rendered in Septuagint as Gk. Khristos (see Christ). In O.T. prophetic writing, it was used of an expected deliverer of the Jewish nation. The modern Eng. form represents an attempt to make the word look more Heb., and dates from the Geneva Bible (1560). Transf. sense of "an expected liberator or savior of a captive people" is attested from 1666.
Now, who could this “deliverer” be? In Judaism, the expected king of the line of David who will deliver the Jews from foreign bondage and restore Israel's golden age. The term used for the messiah in the Greek New Testament, christos, was applied to Jesus, who is accepted by Christians as the promised redeemer. Messiah figures also appear in various other religions and cultures; Shiite Muslims, for example, look for a restorer of the faith known as the mahdi, and Maitreya is a redeeming figure in Buddhism.
In regards to Judaism, it is important to note that there have been several, so called messiah’s. The first one that I would like to tell you about is a fellow known as Shabbetai Tzvi. I have reprinted his story as well as the source website address where you can read more yourself if you wish, at
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/biography/Zvi.html .
Shabbetai Zvi was born in Smyrna in 1626, he showed early promise as a Talmudic scholar, and even more as a student and devotee of Kabbalah. More pronounced than his scholarship were his strange mystical speculations and religious ecstasies. He traveled to various cities, his strong personality and his alternately ascetic and self-indulgent behavior attracting and repelling rabbis and populace alike. He was expelled from Salonica by its rabbis for having staged a wedding service with himself as bridegroom and the Torah as bride. His erratic behavior continued. For long periods, he was a respected student and teacher of Kabbalah; at other times, he was given to messianic fantasies and bizarre acts. At one point, living in Jerusalem seeking "peace for his soul," he sought out a self-proclaimed "man of God," Nathan of Gaza, who declared Shabbetai Zvi to be the Messiah. Then Shabbetai Zvi began to act the part, as Gershom Scholem describes:
Riding around on horseback in majestic state [he] summoned a group of his followers, appointing them as apostles or representatives of the Twelve Tribes of Israel. The messianic news spread like wildfire to other communities in Palestine ... First reports about Shabbetai Zvi reached Europe early in October 16,65 ... detailed accounts, deeply involved with legendary material, arrived in Italy, Holland, Germany and Poland.
Messianic fervor took hold of communities that had no immediate experience of persecution and bloodshed as well as those which had.... Repentance alternating with public manifestations of joy and enthusiasm was the order of the day.
From many places delegations left bearing parchments signed by the leaders of the community which acknowledged him as the Messiah and king of Israel.
Not only did Shabbetai Zvi gain militant adherents in his native Turkey and in the Near East, but even in such cosmopolitan European cities as Venice, Livorno, and Amsterdam leading rabbis and sophisticated men of affairs were caught up in the messianic frenzy.
On September 15, 1666, Shabbetai Zvi, brought before the Sultan and given the choice of death or apostasy, prudently chose the latter, setting a turban on his head to signify his conversion to Islam, for which he was rewarded with the honorary title "Keeper of the Palace Gates" and a pension of 150 piasters a day.
The apostasy shocked the Jewish world. Leaders and followers alike refused to believe it. Many continued to anticipate a second coming, and faith in false messiahs continued through the eighteenth century. In the vast majority of believers, revulsion and remorse set in and there was an active endeavor to erase all evidence, even mention of the pseudo-Messiah. Pages were removed from communal registers, and documents were destroyed. Few copies of the books that celebrated Shabbetai Zvi survived, and those that did have become rarities much sought after by libraries and collectors.
According to Wikipedia, the following reference was made about David Alroi, another messianic figure during the twelfth century. It goes as follows:
According to the memoirs of Benjamin of Tudela and Pethahiah of Regensburg, there were about 100 Jewish settlements and substantial Jewish population in Kurdistan in 12th century A.D. Benjamin of Tuleda also gives the account of David Alroi, the messianic leader from central Kurdistan, who rebelled against the king of Persia and had plans to lead the Jews back to Jerusalem.
Going back to the answer that Peter gave, “You are the Messiah, sent from God!”, seems a little over the top, especially when we know that Peter denies to everyone later who Jesus really is and claims to not know Him. At the time of the answer, I am sure that Peter and the rest of the apostles present probably believed that He was the Messiah.
One of the problems that people have in accepting Jesus as the Messiah is His humility and gentleness that was punctuated by physical submissiveness. Jesus willingly subjected Himself to torture and went to the cross so that He could claim victory over death and free us. There are many who don’t see that act as fulfillment of messianic prophecy, instead are looking for a dynamic and strong leader to lead them in worldly battles to restore God’s kingdom. That is why the apostles were huddled in a room, waiting to be arrested, thinking that Jesus could not have been the messiah because He died on the cross. It wasn’t until He appeared to them, after His resurrection, did they understand that He was the true Messiah.
I would like to make a final note in regards to this subject. The devil was also fooled in regards to Jesus. If the devil had truly known what God was up to, he would have never allowed Jesus to die on the cross. No death, no resurrection.
Herod Antipas, who Jesus compared to a fox, an animal that was ritually unclean, must have had spies on the lookout through out the kingdom. Between the religious leaders following His every movement and word and the state tracking Him with spies, those in power were well aware that Jesus represented a problem to the status quo. Since Herod considered himself to be both a Jewish religious leader as well as the ruling tetrarch, he had double the reason to track the activities of Jesus. Luke reports confusion experienced by Herod regarding just who Jesus was. He wondered openly if Jesus was actually John the Baptist whom Herod murdered previously.
Not to belabor this point but Herod had John’s head cut off and the unofficial narrative tells us that his head was placed on a tray at Herod’s insistence, so he knew without a doubt that John the Baptist was dead. How could he logically think that Jesus was John the Baptist, brought back to life? What a nut job.
According to the aforementioned “Walking in Their Sandals” bible history website located at, http://www.ancientsandals.com/overviews/bethsaida.htm ,the town known as Bethsaida could be found at one of two identified locations that we can visit today. This is an important fact because it is the location that Luke reports to be where Jesus fed over five thousand followers with five loaves of bread and two fish.
Josephus records that Philip the Tetrarch, (who ruled Gaulanitis from 4 B.C. to A.D. 34 and was the half brother of Harod Antipas) developed the village of Bethsaida, near the northeast shore of the Sea of Galilee. He states that in A.D. 30, Philip raised it to the status of a "city" (polis), strengthening its fortifications, increasing its population, and naming it "Julias" in honor of the Emperor Augustus’ daughter. Other historians hold that the city was named after Emperor Tiberius’ mother.
The website goes on to provide more information regarding Bethsaida and its relevance to bible history. An edited reference to that information is as follows:
A Bethsaida at the site of et-Tel, located a mile and a half inland from the lakeshore, would not likely have functioned as a fishing village. El-‘Araj, on the other hand, because it was located on a flood plain, would not have been a suitable site for a large fortified city. It should also be noted that the course of the Jordan River as it enters the lake has changed over the two millennia since Jesus’ ministry in the area.
An aqueduct and Roman road have been discovered which joined the two locations. A reasonable conclusion would be that et-Tel may have been the location of the important city referred to in the Gospels. El-‘Araj, then, would have served as the center of the fishing industry that gave the city its name, "house/place of fish." The Bethsaida of the Gospels, however, may have referred to either or both of these sites.
Historical and Biblical Significance
Bethsaida, Chorazin and Capernaum formed what has been called the "evangelical triangle," because most of Jesus’ miracles in Galilee were performed in these cities. In light of Jesus’ condemnation of them for their unbelief, the word "evangelical" would more accurately refer to the preaching of the gospel there, rather than the character of their inhabitants (Matt 11:20-30)!
Bethsaida was the home of three of Jesus’ disciples, Peter and his brother Andrew, and Philip (John 1:44). Apparently Peter later moved to Capernaum, where his mother-in-law (and wife) resided (Matt 8:14,15; Mark 1:30,31; Luke 4:38,39). Since fishing was the main industry in each of these towns, Peter’s move of some three miles would be unremarkable, except that Capernaum was to become the base of Jesus’ Galilean ministry.
The small plain that surrounds Bethsaida (el-‘Araj) may have been the location of Jesus’ "Sermon on the Mount," if this account recorded another occasion on which Jesus gave this message (Luke 6:17-49).
At the conclusion of the "Sermon on the Mount," Jesus illustrated the importance of basing one’s life on God’s truth, rather than on human teaching, by contrasting the foundations on which two builders constructed their homes (Luke 6:47-49). His reference may have been to the plain at el-‘Araj, where builders would need to dig through some five feet of alluvial soil to find bedrock. "Foolish builders" would build on the sandy overlay, to their sorrow when the spring floods came down from the hills; "wise builders" would have no problem since they had built their houses on the rock stratum below. (The three disciples who came from Bethsaida would have especially appreciated this illustration.)
Jesus performed a unique healing at Bethsaida, restoring a man’s sight in stages (Mark 8:22-26). Apparently He used this method to demonstrate to His disciples their imperfect understanding of His deity at that time. In this miracle, He sought to prepare their hearts for the next revelation of His person. From Bethsaida they proceeded up the Jordan Valley to Caesarea Philippi, where He would ask them, "Who do you say that I am?" (Matt 16:15;Mark 8:27; Luke 9:20)
Putting myself in the place of the apostles who heard Jesus tell them to feed to large crowd with essentially nothing, I am surprised that they didn’t walk away before the miracle and think Him crazy.
In the book of John, the author describes the blessing of the loaves and fishes and pointed out that after the crowd was fed, Jesus had to slip away because the people got so wound up seeing this miracle, they wanted to crown Him king. If they had gossip magazines like we do today, we can only imagine the reporting of this event and the headlines associated with it.
Luke picks up the storyline with an account of Jesus asking the apostles, “Who do the people say that I am?” They replied that people either thought Him to be Elijah, John the Baptist or one of the other prophets who were raised from the dead. Jesus then asked, “Who do you think that I am?” Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, sent from God!”
When Peter answered the question by saying that Jesus was the Messiah, he was referring to the expected king and deliverer of the Jews. The etymology of the word “Messiah” is as follows:
Middle English Messias, Messie, from Old French Messie, from Late Latin Messs, from Greek, from Aramaic mi, the anointed one (from ma, to anoint), or Hebrew m?a, anointed (from ma, to anoint); see m in Semitic roots. The Online Etymology Dictionary, located on the web, at (http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=messiah&searchmode=none) breaks down the word further,
c.1300, Messias, from L.L. Messias, from Gk. Messias, from Aramaic meshiha and Heb. mashiah "anointed" (of the Lord), from mashah "anoint." This is the word rendered in Septuagint as Gk. Khristos (see Christ). In O.T. prophetic writing, it was used of an expected deliverer of the Jewish nation. The modern Eng. form represents an attempt to make the word look more Heb., and dates from the Geneva Bible (1560). Transf. sense of "an expected liberator or savior of a captive people" is attested from 1666.
Now, who could this “deliverer” be? In Judaism, the expected king of the line of David who will deliver the Jews from foreign bondage and restore Israel's golden age. The term used for the messiah in the Greek New Testament, christos, was applied to Jesus, who is accepted by Christians as the promised redeemer. Messiah figures also appear in various other religions and cultures; Shiite Muslims, for example, look for a restorer of the faith known as the mahdi, and Maitreya is a redeeming figure in Buddhism.
In regards to Judaism, it is important to note that there have been several, so called messiah’s. The first one that I would like to tell you about is a fellow known as Shabbetai Tzvi. I have reprinted his story as well as the source website address where you can read more yourself if you wish, at
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/biography/Zvi.html .
Shabbetai Zvi was born in Smyrna in 1626, he showed early promise as a Talmudic scholar, and even more as a student and devotee of Kabbalah. More pronounced than his scholarship were his strange mystical speculations and religious ecstasies. He traveled to various cities, his strong personality and his alternately ascetic and self-indulgent behavior attracting and repelling rabbis and populace alike. He was expelled from Salonica by its rabbis for having staged a wedding service with himself as bridegroom and the Torah as bride. His erratic behavior continued. For long periods, he was a respected student and teacher of Kabbalah; at other times, he was given to messianic fantasies and bizarre acts. At one point, living in Jerusalem seeking "peace for his soul," he sought out a self-proclaimed "man of God," Nathan of Gaza, who declared Shabbetai Zvi to be the Messiah. Then Shabbetai Zvi began to act the part, as Gershom Scholem describes:
Riding around on horseback in majestic state [he] summoned a group of his followers, appointing them as apostles or representatives of the Twelve Tribes of Israel. The messianic news spread like wildfire to other communities in Palestine ... First reports about Shabbetai Zvi reached Europe early in October 16,65 ... detailed accounts, deeply involved with legendary material, arrived in Italy, Holland, Germany and Poland.
Messianic fervor took hold of communities that had no immediate experience of persecution and bloodshed as well as those which had.... Repentance alternating with public manifestations of joy and enthusiasm was the order of the day.
From many places delegations left bearing parchments signed by the leaders of the community which acknowledged him as the Messiah and king of Israel.
Not only did Shabbetai Zvi gain militant adherents in his native Turkey and in the Near East, but even in such cosmopolitan European cities as Venice, Livorno, and Amsterdam leading rabbis and sophisticated men of affairs were caught up in the messianic frenzy.
On September 15, 1666, Shabbetai Zvi, brought before the Sultan and given the choice of death or apostasy, prudently chose the latter, setting a turban on his head to signify his conversion to Islam, for which he was rewarded with the honorary title "Keeper of the Palace Gates" and a pension of 150 piasters a day.
The apostasy shocked the Jewish world. Leaders and followers alike refused to believe it. Many continued to anticipate a second coming, and faith in false messiahs continued through the eighteenth century. In the vast majority of believers, revulsion and remorse set in and there was an active endeavor to erase all evidence, even mention of the pseudo-Messiah. Pages were removed from communal registers, and documents were destroyed. Few copies of the books that celebrated Shabbetai Zvi survived, and those that did have become rarities much sought after by libraries and collectors.
According to Wikipedia, the following reference was made about David Alroi, another messianic figure during the twelfth century. It goes as follows:
According to the memoirs of Benjamin of Tudela and Pethahiah of Regensburg, there were about 100 Jewish settlements and substantial Jewish population in Kurdistan in 12th century A.D. Benjamin of Tuleda also gives the account of David Alroi, the messianic leader from central Kurdistan, who rebelled against the king of Persia and had plans to lead the Jews back to Jerusalem.
Going back to the answer that Peter gave, “You are the Messiah, sent from God!”, seems a little over the top, especially when we know that Peter denies to everyone later who Jesus really is and claims to not know Him. At the time of the answer, I am sure that Peter and the rest of the apostles present probably believed that He was the Messiah.
One of the problems that people have in accepting Jesus as the Messiah is His humility and gentleness that was punctuated by physical submissiveness. Jesus willingly subjected Himself to torture and went to the cross so that He could claim victory over death and free us. There are many who don’t see that act as fulfillment of messianic prophecy, instead are looking for a dynamic and strong leader to lead them in worldly battles to restore God’s kingdom. That is why the apostles were huddled in a room, waiting to be arrested, thinking that Jesus could not have been the messiah because He died on the cross. It wasn’t until He appeared to them, after His resurrection, did they understand that He was the true Messiah.
I would like to make a final note in regards to this subject. The devil was also fooled in regards to Jesus. If the devil had truly known what God was up to, he would have never allowed Jesus to die on the cross. No death, no resurrection.
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
Chapter Nine
In the beginning of chapter nine, Jesus sends His disciples out into the world to tell everyone about the coming of the kingdom of God and to cast out demons and heal the sick. He tells them to bring nothing with them as they will be at the mercy of each village that they visit and will count on the hospitality of strangers. If the people won’t listen, Jesus tells them to shake the dust off of their feet and leave the village, an sign of abandonment of that village to its fate.
We notice that Jesus didn’t tell the apostles to call down fire and brimstone on the village as they left. In fact, the people of the village probably dismissed the apostles and didn’t think twice about rejecting them and their teachings. After all, there was no immediate retribution on the populace and further more, on the surface the apostles were homeless at that point without any resources and the villagers still had their homes, food, friends and community. Which of them had a better worldly situation as far as comfort and security?
If we look back in the book of Genesis, Cain murdered his brother, mouthed off to God and left His presence without any immediate retribution. Cain went on to be a rich man who founded cities and had children who invented ways to mass produce tools and weapons and made great contributions towards the arts by inventing musical instruments.
When we reject the Good News of Jesus and the accompanying salvation, we are emboldened somewhat because we seem to be able to go on with our life without immediate Godly correction. As followers of Jesus Christ, we share the message of salvation in Him with others that are close to us and are rejected all of the time. In fact, strangers who don’t know you all that well seem to be more apt to listen than those closest to us.
We notice that Jesus didn’t tell the apostles to call down fire and brimstone on the village as they left. In fact, the people of the village probably dismissed the apostles and didn’t think twice about rejecting them and their teachings. After all, there was no immediate retribution on the populace and further more, on the surface the apostles were homeless at that point without any resources and the villagers still had their homes, food, friends and community. Which of them had a better worldly situation as far as comfort and security?
If we look back in the book of Genesis, Cain murdered his brother, mouthed off to God and left His presence without any immediate retribution. Cain went on to be a rich man who founded cities and had children who invented ways to mass produce tools and weapons and made great contributions towards the arts by inventing musical instruments.
When we reject the Good News of Jesus and the accompanying salvation, we are emboldened somewhat because we seem to be able to go on with our life without immediate Godly correction. As followers of Jesus Christ, we share the message of salvation in Him with others that are close to us and are rejected all of the time. In fact, strangers who don’t know you all that well seem to be more apt to listen than those closest to us.
Monday, April 7, 2008
Finishing Chapter Eight
In regards to the account that Luke recorded, the man who had been demon possessed, begged to go with Jesus on the boat. Jesus told the man to go back to his people and tell them all of the good things that God had done for him. Undoubtably, there were some relatives who, at the mention of “God”, probably thought that they liked their kin better, when he was crazy and not Godly.
On the side of the lake where the miracle took place, there was great fear and the people wanted Jesus and His disciples to leave as soon as possible. On the other side of the lake, the crowds waited on the shore with open arms after hearing about the healing of the demon possessed man.
We are fickle creatures who can witness something great and fear it while the rest of us merely hear a rumor about that same incident and can’t wait to embrace it.
When Jesus and the apostles arrived back to Galilee from Gerasenes, there was a crowd of people waiting to greet Him. A man named Jairus, who was a leader of the local synagogue fell to the feet of Jesus and begged Him to come home so as to heal his only child, a twelve year old daughter.
As Jesus went with the man, they were surrounded by a huge crowd of people. In the crowd there was a woman who suffered from menstrual bleeding for twelve years. I would like to quote the actual verse from the King James regarding this incident and make comments next to each line in bold print.
8:43And a woman having an issue of blood twelve years, which had spent all her living upon physicians, neither could be healed of any, This poor woman was in a constant state of hemorrhaging for years and must have been in total misery. In addition to the infirmity, those around her probably judged her as being cursed because of her ailment.
8:44Came behind him, and touched the border of his garment: and immediately her issue of blood stanched. She was humble on how she approached Jesus. Probably hoping to not make a fuss, more or less a “get in and get out” strategy. I am impressed by the faith of this woman who was the lowest of the lowest (because of her infirmity) from a society standpoint, but would not give up.
8: 45And Jesus said, Who touched me? When all denied, Peter and they that were with him said, Master, the multitude throng thee and press thee, and sayest thou, Who touched me? I can picture Peter stammering just like any of us would do when the boss asks us a question and we don’t have an answer. Peter is probably thinking, “what is He talking about - who touched Him? Can’t anyone see that there are like a million people around us now?- they are all touching- boy, somebody else has got to be in charge of crowd control in the future”
8:46And Jesus said, Somebody hath touched me: for I perceive that virtue is gone out of me. This brings us back to the reality that all power came from the Father and Jesus was the vessel of that power and pointing up the reality that Jesus was, in every sense, human.
8:47And when the woman saw that she was not hid, she came trembling, and falling down before him, she declared unto him before all the people for what cause she had touched him, and how she was healed immediately. The woman acts like we all do when we have been healed and empowered in Christ, we recognize the miracle of that salvation and share our testimony with others.
8:48And he said unto her, Daughter, be of good comfort: thy faith hath made thee whole; go in peace. Again, a consistent message that all who are healed in Christ, should live by.
During this healing of the woman in the crowd, a messenger came and told Jesus that Jairus’s daughter had died and that it wasn’t necessary to come, after all. Jesus told the messenger to tell Jairus and his family, not to worry, but to trust Him as the girl would be all right. When He arrived at the house, Jesus and Peter went inside and upon hearing the weeping and wailing of the relatives told them all to stop weeping because the girl was not dead, only sleeping.
Now, just a side note. Imagine that you are at a funeral for a relative or friend and in walks a fellow who you have never seen before and he tells you not to worry, your friend wasn’t dead, only asleep. Exactly. We would act just as those people did in Luke’s account, laughing with disbelief, right up until the point that he told the dead person to get up and they did just that.
A recent article in the Associated Press, found on the internet tells the story of a young man who appeared dead after an accident, lay in a coma for almost two months and is walking today. The story goes as follows:
Four months after he was declared brain dead and doctors were about to remove his organs for transplant, Zach Dunlap says he feels "pretty good."
Dunlap was pronounced dead Nov. 19 at United Regional Healthcare System in Wichita Falls, Texas, after he was injured in an all-terrain vehicle accident. His family approved having his organs harvested.
As family members were paying their last respects, he moved his foot and hand. He reacted to a pocketknife scraped across his foot and to pressure applied under a fingernail. After 48 days in the hospital, he was allowed to return home, where he continues to work on his recovery.
On Monday, he and his family were in New York, appearing on NBC's "Today."
"I feel pretty good. but it's just hard ... just ain't got the patience," Dunlap told NBC.
Dunlap, 21, of Frederick, said he has no recollection of the crash.
"I remember a little bit that was about an hour before the accident happened. But then about six hours before that, I remember," he said.
Dunlap said one thing he does remember is hearing the doctors pronounce him dead.
"I'm glad I couldn't get up and do what I wanted to do," he said.
Asked if he would have wanted to get up and shake them and say he's alive, Dunlap responded: "Probably would have been a broken window that went out."
His father, Doug, said he saw the results of the brain scan.
"There was no activity at all, no blood flow at all."
Zach's mother, Pam, said that when she discovered he was still alive, "That was the most miraculous feeling."
"We had gone, like I said, from the lowest possible emotion that a parent could feel to the top of the mountains again," she said.
She said her son is doing "amazingly well," but still has problems with his memory as his brain heals from the traumatic injury.
"It may take a year or more ... before he completely recovers," she said. "But that's OK. It doesn't matter how long it takes. We're just all so thankful and blessed that we have him here."
Dunlap now has the pocketknife that was scraped across his foot, causing the first reaction.
"Just makes me thankful, makes me thankful that they didn't give up," he said. "Only the good die young, so I didn't go."
The very first thing that I would do, if I was this young man, would be to change my status regarding organ donation on my license. The second thing I would do, would be to thank God for the second chance to live.
It is evident that God is God and He can do what He wants, when He wants, in any of our lives. Sometimes, He may just want to remind us of that fact.
On the side of the lake where the miracle took place, there was great fear and the people wanted Jesus and His disciples to leave as soon as possible. On the other side of the lake, the crowds waited on the shore with open arms after hearing about the healing of the demon possessed man.
We are fickle creatures who can witness something great and fear it while the rest of us merely hear a rumor about that same incident and can’t wait to embrace it.
When Jesus and the apostles arrived back to Galilee from Gerasenes, there was a crowd of people waiting to greet Him. A man named Jairus, who was a leader of the local synagogue fell to the feet of Jesus and begged Him to come home so as to heal his only child, a twelve year old daughter.
As Jesus went with the man, they were surrounded by a huge crowd of people. In the crowd there was a woman who suffered from menstrual bleeding for twelve years. I would like to quote the actual verse from the King James regarding this incident and make comments next to each line in bold print.
8:43And a woman having an issue of blood twelve years, which had spent all her living upon physicians, neither could be healed of any, This poor woman was in a constant state of hemorrhaging for years and must have been in total misery. In addition to the infirmity, those around her probably judged her as being cursed because of her ailment.
8:44Came behind him, and touched the border of his garment: and immediately her issue of blood stanched. She was humble on how she approached Jesus. Probably hoping to not make a fuss, more or less a “get in and get out” strategy. I am impressed by the faith of this woman who was the lowest of the lowest (because of her infirmity) from a society standpoint, but would not give up.
8: 45And Jesus said, Who touched me? When all denied, Peter and they that were with him said, Master, the multitude throng thee and press thee, and sayest thou, Who touched me? I can picture Peter stammering just like any of us would do when the boss asks us a question and we don’t have an answer. Peter is probably thinking, “what is He talking about - who touched Him? Can’t anyone see that there are like a million people around us now?- they are all touching- boy, somebody else has got to be in charge of crowd control in the future”
8:46And Jesus said, Somebody hath touched me: for I perceive that virtue is gone out of me. This brings us back to the reality that all power came from the Father and Jesus was the vessel of that power and pointing up the reality that Jesus was, in every sense, human.
8:47And when the woman saw that she was not hid, she came trembling, and falling down before him, she declared unto him before all the people for what cause she had touched him, and how she was healed immediately. The woman acts like we all do when we have been healed and empowered in Christ, we recognize the miracle of that salvation and share our testimony with others.
8:48And he said unto her, Daughter, be of good comfort: thy faith hath made thee whole; go in peace. Again, a consistent message that all who are healed in Christ, should live by.
During this healing of the woman in the crowd, a messenger came and told Jesus that Jairus’s daughter had died and that it wasn’t necessary to come, after all. Jesus told the messenger to tell Jairus and his family, not to worry, but to trust Him as the girl would be all right. When He arrived at the house, Jesus and Peter went inside and upon hearing the weeping and wailing of the relatives told them all to stop weeping because the girl was not dead, only sleeping.
Now, just a side note. Imagine that you are at a funeral for a relative or friend and in walks a fellow who you have never seen before and he tells you not to worry, your friend wasn’t dead, only asleep. Exactly. We would act just as those people did in Luke’s account, laughing with disbelief, right up until the point that he told the dead person to get up and they did just that.
A recent article in the Associated Press, found on the internet tells the story of a young man who appeared dead after an accident, lay in a coma for almost two months and is walking today. The story goes as follows:
Four months after he was declared brain dead and doctors were about to remove his organs for transplant, Zach Dunlap says he feels "pretty good."
Dunlap was pronounced dead Nov. 19 at United Regional Healthcare System in Wichita Falls, Texas, after he was injured in an all-terrain vehicle accident. His family approved having his organs harvested.
As family members were paying their last respects, he moved his foot and hand. He reacted to a pocketknife scraped across his foot and to pressure applied under a fingernail. After 48 days in the hospital, he was allowed to return home, where he continues to work on his recovery.
On Monday, he and his family were in New York, appearing on NBC's "Today."
"I feel pretty good. but it's just hard ... just ain't got the patience," Dunlap told NBC.
Dunlap, 21, of Frederick, said he has no recollection of the crash.
"I remember a little bit that was about an hour before the accident happened. But then about six hours before that, I remember," he said.
Dunlap said one thing he does remember is hearing the doctors pronounce him dead.
"I'm glad I couldn't get up and do what I wanted to do," he said.
Asked if he would have wanted to get up and shake them and say he's alive, Dunlap responded: "Probably would have been a broken window that went out."
His father, Doug, said he saw the results of the brain scan.
"There was no activity at all, no blood flow at all."
Zach's mother, Pam, said that when she discovered he was still alive, "That was the most miraculous feeling."
"We had gone, like I said, from the lowest possible emotion that a parent could feel to the top of the mountains again," she said.
She said her son is doing "amazingly well," but still has problems with his memory as his brain heals from the traumatic injury.
"It may take a year or more ... before he completely recovers," she said. "But that's OK. It doesn't matter how long it takes. We're just all so thankful and blessed that we have him here."
Dunlap now has the pocketknife that was scraped across his foot, causing the first reaction.
"Just makes me thankful, makes me thankful that they didn't give up," he said. "Only the good die young, so I didn't go."
The very first thing that I would do, if I was this young man, would be to change my status regarding organ donation on my license. The second thing I would do, would be to thank God for the second chance to live.
It is evident that God is God and He can do what He wants, when He wants, in any of our lives. Sometimes, He may just want to remind us of that fact.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)