Surfing the web, this writer came across an article written by Matt Walsh that was posted in The Blaze at http://www.theblaze.com/contributions/no-serious-christians-arent-worried-about-the-stupid-starbucks-cups/ about the supposed Starbucks Christmas cup controversy. Seriously? It is hard to believe that any Christian(s) would be upset about such a thing. Then there is the backlash happening on the web as well as the major news outlets picking up the story, and so this guy, Joshua Feuerstein, has been making the rounds on Facebook trying to stir up a controversy. If Christians should get upset about anything that Starbucks puts on their cups, it would be their iconic twin-tailed mermaid siren or Norse goddess. According to Starbucks:
Suddenly, there she was: a 16th century Norse woodcut of a twin-tailed mermaid, or Siren. There was something about her – a seductive mystery mixed with a nautical theme that was exactly what the founders were looking for…http://www.starbucks.com/blog/so-who-is-the-siren
Then this writer found this blurb:
One of Astarte’s symbols was actually a star within a circle, which was used to symbolize the planet Venus. Interestingly, two stars are found within the green circle surrounding the logo character of the former Starbucks logo, which was used to separate ‘Starbucks’ and ‘Coffee.’ Artistic depictions of the goddess often show her naked, so why was such a figure with a steamy background chosen to represent the popular coffee chain? Astarte was a goddess that was worshiped in the Eastern Mediterranean countries dating back to the bronze age and into classical times, according to http://www.unexplainable.net
As some commentators have responded: Go feed the hungry, etc. etc. which is a reference to:
Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: For I was an hungred, and ye gave me meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: I was in prison, and ye came unto me. Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink? When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee? Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.
So what should shock Christians the more? No snowflakes on the red cups or the fact that Starbucks has chosen a snake-like goddess that has been represented as a twin-tailed Norse goddess, and which has also represented Astarte, a pagan goddess?
For Christians, the first of the Ten Commandments states very clearly:
And God spake all these words, saying, I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other gods before me. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.
Since we have been looking closely at the various Scriptures that pertain to the laws of God and as we are finally going to wrap this series up, let us look at Galatians, which is a book that is consistently cited in that total grace-ites state that this book definitively declares that the laws of God have ended. Really? Did they? Let’s see. First of all, before we go into the book of Galatians, let’s establish our ground work first; of course, these articles have already covered these Scriptures, but we will list them again.
Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
If ye love me, keep my commandments.
He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.
Now the diehard grace-ite will be the first to argue and say that this was written to Israel and not to the church. Really? Using that same logic, then Jesus Christ himself said that He had come to the lost sheep of Israel. Oh-Oh! Houston…we have a problem! That doesn’t include the Gentiles if one has to be fair at this point. Now what? Okay, one more Scripture so that we can all know that everyone can get a ticket and get on board the GodShip Gospel Line.
And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert grafted in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree; Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee.
Paul writes that the Gentiles have been grafted into the root stock of Israel. Why? So that we can receive all of the promises and requirements and that they are made available to us as well. This writer finds it very interesting that those who deny that we have to obey God’s commandments are more than willing to claim the goodness of the Abrahamic and Davidic covenants as well as the new covenant written with the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ, but those same people want nothing to do with the laws of God. We offer our condolences to you at this point…simply because you cannot have your cake and eat it too, my friends. You either take the whole Word of God or please don’t take any of it; we are not allowed to pick and choose which Scriptures we would like to have and throw out the ones that make us squirm. But unfortunately, this is exactly what has happened. Many pastors and teachers have taught the populace that the Scriptures should be viewed as something akin to a Smorgasbord or items on an À la carte menu. All of the Scriptures make up a whole body of evidence and you simply cannot dissect the Word of God, no matter how badly you may wish to do so.
Let us now define some terms that often cause confusion. These terms were not clear to this writer either growing spiritually mature in the church; this writer simply didn’t know what they meant. If the question was asked of those who were supposed to be more learned, the answer generally given was doing the laws of God. Exactly, what does that mean? Who knew…probably no one understood it, nor could define it when asked to do so. This is why this writer walked around in a fog for most of the years waiting to grow up.
What are they and what do they mean?
There are two terms that are the same thing, but they use two different words and they are:
works of the law…and…deeds of the law
simply pertain to the sacrificial portion of the law. Every Israelite male was to continually offer up the Passover sacrifice; the Yom Kippur sacrifice; they were to make peace offerings, heave offerings, free-will offerings, etc. etc. By doing so they would attain to righteousness and have their sins, transgressions and iniquities covered up by the blood of the animal offered. But too many people have been taught that this pertains to the entire Law of God and not to just one portion, thereby ‘ending’ the Law of God because we are told that we cannot be justified by the ‘deeds or the works of the Law.” This is true if applied to the sacrificial portion of the Law. These works or deeds were Israel “working out their own salvation” if you will in an attempt to make themselves righteous, even though it was available to be made righteous through faith, but they couldn’t receive it and so they focused on the works and therefore they were never justified. Christians however, accept the “atoning works of the Lord Jesus Christ” and we accept by faith that His perfect blood has made us righteous through Him and therefore we are made justified.
This is going to shock a lot of people….but oh, well. But hold on, this writer will explain. The sacrificial portion of the law didn’t end either. WHAT? No, it did not. It TRANSFERRED from the tribe of Levi to the Tribe of Judah, and the Ha Mashiach, Yeshua Adonai (or Christ Jesus) on the appointed Passover, at the time of sacrifice, did not offer up an animal but offered up Himself, and His own perfect blood seeing that He also became our High Priest. He is also our eternal High Priest because the Scriptures plainly state Yeshua was after the priestly order of Melchisedec.
Hebrews 3:1, 5:1, 5:6
Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus; For every high priest taken from among men is ordained for men in things pertaining to God, that he may offer both gifts and sacrifices for sins: As he saith also in another place, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.
Now that that particular truth is established…here is one more for those that may not know these things: there were three parts of God’s laws. First, there was the Ten Commandments (or the moral laws); Second, there were the food laws, which were established to teach Israel on how to choose between the holy and the unholy, or the clean and the unclean, plus, it was also in place to keep Israel healthy in their physical bodies; and the Third, there was the sacrificial laws pertaining to the forgiveness of the sins of Israel. The Ten Commandments have never ended; the food laws have been modified, at least for the Gentiles coming into the church, but still having to keep some of them for the sake of their Jewish brothers and sisters, which we find in Acts 15. The third portion did not end but merely transferred to Yeshua Adonai who became the High Priest and the sacrifice that year. His office of High Priest has still not ended even to this day, for He acts on our behalf and when we humble ourselves and confess our sins, He goes before the Heavenly Father and presents His perfect blood on the altar so that we may obtain forgiveness.
There is still so much more to cover and we did not even get to the book of Galatians as hoped for and therefore this will have to be continued in Part 17. God Bless.
This letter is to you, Bruce. I watched your latest interview with Diane Sawyer on Friday, April 24, 2015, in the which you continually spoke of how you had spent almost your entire life living with confusion as to who you are, and what you want to become for the remainder of your life. I marvelled when you spoke of the Lord God and how you yourself acknowledged that God had placed the “soul of a woman” inside of you, with God saying, “now let’s see what you do with that.” You are right! God did place those emotions within you, however, it is not truly the “soul of a woman” inside of you. God did give you tender emotions…maybe more so than He has given to other men…however, they are the roots of a larger-than-life emotion called compassion.
However, Bruce, God would absolutely never break His own laws and put a “woman’s soul” inside of you, a man. But you are not the only man who has ever had more tender emotions; I think of the Jewish king, King David….just read the Book of Psalms…jam-packed with David’s emotions written down for everyone to read for the last four thousand years approximately.
Depart from me, all ye workers of iniquity; for the Lord hath heard the voice of my weeping.
David was not ashamed of his tenderness and his compassionate heart for God and for others as well. David could have killed Saul several times, however, because of his love for God and the fact that Saul had been anointed king by God Himself, he refused to lay his hands upon him to take his life. Yet, David was a man’s man even though he had a tender heart.
I think next of the Lord Jesus Christ, Himself. He wept over Jerusalem and stated:
O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!
In this passage, the Lord Jesus Christ does take on the attributes of a feminine quality by aligning Himself with a mother hen who gathers her chickens under her wings in order to protect them. Yet, the Lord Jesus Christ was most definitely a man’s man. It took enormous strength to withstand those cruel beatings and the torture that He endured for our sakes. It took a great compassionate heart and a merciful soul to lay His life down and hang on that cross so that we could receive forgiveness for our sins, transgressions and iniquities.
Bruce, we have an enemy who wants nothing more than to “steal, kill, and destroy” us….US…God’s creation. When the enemy saw God placing within you the tenderness and the compassion, he began a campaign of lies against you, to distort, pervert and warp the truth of what God had given to you; by telling lies into your ears that you really had a “woman’s soul” trapped within you so that you would be uncomfortable in your own skin. His design has been to lead you down roads of confusion to the end that you now find yourself facing…an end of your own choosing, of ending or changing the athletic body….the body of a man’s man….that God Himself gave to you. For what? So that you can form on the outside what you have always thought you were feeling on the inside?
Even back when I was ten years old, my uncle who was an alcoholic, jumped out of his chair as if he was going to hit my mother; I also jumped up and stood between him and my mother and told him that he would have to go through me first. I was also a single mother and on two distinct occasions, I had to act very aggressively in order to protect my daughter. First, I had to stand toe-to-toe against a drunken and enraged man and the next one, a few years later, I had to jump into the fray against a girl gang who was beating up my daughter. You can better believe that I got very aggressive….just like a man. Yet, I could have believed the lies the enemy might have told me…that really, I had the “soul of a man” inside….after all, look how aggressive I became. Wow, just like a man…. Thankfully, I am very much a woman of God.
For where envying and strife is, there is confusion and every evil work.
Bruce, as you yourself have said during your interview last Friday, you mentioned your confusion and that is simply because you have always felt internal strife….this has produced the confusion…and now finally you will begin to experience every evil work. The evil work is the fruit of the seeds of the many lies that the enemy began telling you when you were a young boy.
I’m pretty sure that you have always wondered why God seems to have put all of these gentle emotions within you, yet formed a man’s body to house them. As I see it, God did this perhaps to make you to be as a sign and a symbol to other men that it’s perfectly okay to feel tenderness and/or compassion.
1 Corinthians 14:33
For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.
After all, here is Bruce Jenner, winner of the decathlon….no mean feat to win such a title…and then to be called the “greatest athlete ever”…and this is what you want to change?
Our culture tries to dictate what makes a man a man, and a woman a woman. Sometimes, however, God sees things totally different and He calls those things that be not as though they are.
Bruce, you need to seek the face of the Lord God and His Son, the Lord Jesus…you know the man’s man…the one who had such tender compassion for you that He died for you. The Lord Jesus knows what it is like to have these emotions and He alone can cause you to finally feel comfortable in your skin, which is that of a man’s skin.
1 Chronicles 16:11
Seek the Lord and his strength, seek his face continually.
Seek ye the Lord while he may be found, call ye upon him while he is near.
Bruce, please re-think what you are about to do.
Is complementarianism truly biblical? As far as this writer’s personal studies have led, it is not. When a true student of the Word of God, or the Bible, reads such articles as that written by Owen Strachan, the President of the Council of Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, who has laid out some of the pillars of his beliefs regarding complementarianism, and then lists supposed Scriptural accounts to back his assertions up, it simply does not bear out. In the first part of his article he covers the controversy regarding Gavin Peacock, a pastor located in Calgary, Alberta, Canada who also believes in complementarianism and who also wrote his own article regarding this subject. However, what will be covered in this article are the points Strachan lists in his article concerning complementarian viewpoints.
In the Bible, God makes the cosmos in Genesis 1, and then he makes man and woman, husband and wife, in Genesis 2. He gives this relationship structure and form. Adam is the head of his wife; his wife is his helper. Eve is created from Adam. Her body depends on his for existence. This is a signal from the very start of Scripture: the position of marital headship given to men is one of responsibility and sacrifice, not ease and self-indulgence (Strachan).
Strachan quotes Genesis 1 and 2, so let us read these Scriptures to see if this is what they say. Verses 1-25 tell of God speaking creation into existence. It is in v26-27 that we first find the beginnings of mankind.
And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
The only thing in these two verses that Strachan is correct about is that God created man…male and female created He them. No sign of order…no headship…just a simple statement of fact. Plus, He unequivocally states, “Let THEM have dominion…” So, God is the Creator. Exactly what did God create? He created the male and female spirits. How do we know this? The Word that God spoke about His creation: He was going to make mankind in His image. What is God’s image? It is Spirit, as we find in John 4:24, “God is Spirit.” If the age-old argument is to be proffered that the word ‘male’ is first and then ‘female;’ well in the order of things…something has to be first and something must be last when dealing with a list of words. It still gives no authority of placement in these verses. To say so is eisegesis of the worst kind; and what exactly is ‘eisegesis’?
Eisegesis (/ˌaɪsəˈdʒiːsəs/; from the Greek preposition εἰς “into” and the ending from the English word exegesis, which in turn is derived from ἐξηγεῖσθαι “to lead out”) is the process of interpreting a text or portion of text in such a way that the process introduces one’s own presuppositions, agendas, or biases into and onto the text. This is commonly referred to as reading into the text. The act is often used to “prove” a pre-held point of concern to the reader and to provide him or her with confirmation bias in accordance with his or her pre-held agenda (Wikipedia).
The next chapter of the Bible that Strachan refers to is Genesis 2 and the verses, though not listed, are these:
And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him. And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him. And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which the Lord God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.
God first created their spirits, but then He put them in ONE body (a foreshadowing of the ONE body of Christ, His church), and then God looked at Adam (meaning, ‘red earth’), and said “I will make him an help meet (Hbw= ezer, a strong help)”; so God took woman’s spirit out of Adam and gave the female spirit her own fleshly body. Adam then said “…she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.” As we read this biblical text in Genesis 2, there still isn’t any command of God for man to have ‘headship’ over his wife. It simply is just not there! In verse 24 we read:
Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.
This verse sounds more like commentary from Moses who wrote the Pentateuch, especially since at this juncture there was no father or mother to leave. There would be in the future, but not at this scene in the Garden of Eden. Furthermore, Moses lived in the midst of a patriarchal society and so it would behoove one to believe that as the writer of Genesis, that this would have been the perfect time to have instituted patriarchalism or complementarianism if this truly was the will of God. But as we have just seen, Moses did not institute either biblical worldview when he wrote the very words of God.
So for those who hold the complementarian view and for them to say that the book of Genesis supports ‘headship’ and ‘wifely submission’ are errant in their views because the record of the creation of man by God shows no such thing. Furthermore, there isn’t any commands uttered by God to Adam (who was both male and female at the same time) to engage in any such practice. Neither did God command the now separated man and woman to engage in any such lifestyle.
The first we read about any such possibility is in Genesis 3:16 and yet God is not cursing the woman, but merely tells her that since sin has now entered into their existence, the resulting skewing of their equality will now be that the male Adam will begin to rule over the female Adam. We should now see that this ‘headship’ if you will and forced ‘submission’ leads into the patriarchal system, but it was only introduced after sin entered the Garden of Eden and not before when they were in God’s paradise. So how is this God’s perfect will?
This writer will continue in additional articles to cover this large topic. So stay tuned.
The newest Biblically based Hollywood movie to come to the silver screen is the account of Moses, who led the children of Israel out of the 400 year bondage to Egypt and its Pharaohs to freedom. Some of the other critics have lambasted director, Ridley Scott, for failing to have Jewish or Egyptian actors play these parts; but he has had his come-back, so to speak, by replying that Egypt would have been a very multi-national cosmopolitan country at that time. Other critics writing about this movie have declared that they wouldn’t “pay to see the movie.” Hmmm. Then how were they able to critique the movie?
This writer did pay to see the movie on the big screen and it was a bit disappointing that the writers did not remain faithful to the Scriptural accounts of this particular event. For example, the Scriptures make the account in which God turned the Nile into blood; however the writers depicted this event utilizing monster-sized crocodiles that attack an Egyptian boat, thus killing all of the inhabitants, and so their blood contaminates the Nile. Though the writers show about 5-6 men being graphically torn apart, realistically, their bodies do not contain enough blood to contaminate the entire Nile River, nor even just the area where the Pharaoh is living either. Then we must deal with the idea that these crocodiles are the writer’s fantasy, because there was no such plague. Regarding the plague of blood, the writer has attempted to normalize and reduce the enormity of it as well as give a natural cause for its existence, thus highlighting the writer’s own faithlessness in an awesome and totally all-consuming God, better known as the Great I am.
However, the cinematic rendering of the other plagues, was very well done. This writer especially liked the plague of darkness and then the final plague in which every firstborn child died, if they had not been covered by the blood of the lamb. It was shown as being a great shadow that fell over the land and as it passed over the houses, the first-born children simply stopped breathing. The 1957 version depicted it as a green phantasm in the shape of a bony hand of death.
Then there is a particular character that shows up in this movie, i.e. is it God? is it Jesus? or perhaps a messenger angel? The writer failed egregiously with this, in that, if this is the Great I Am, why the image of a child? If this is supposed to be a pre-incarnate Jesus, with the hinting around of Isaiah 11:6 “….and a little child shall lead them,” then we have some major issues that abound here, especially, since Moses lived thousands of years before Isaiah prophesied about the child. It leaves the viewer totally confused and even more so when Moses blatantly tells this ‘child’ he didn’t want to deal with a messenger.
The Scriptures also do not recount that Moses tried to carry out the overthrow of the Pharaoh with his own methods; with the (God) child finally telling him, almost as if he was about to say, ‘tsk, tsk, tsk…okay….just stand back and watch this!’ Seriously? This whole scene fell flat.
The writer has also attempted to downplay other major events contained within the whole scope of the story, such as: very little coverage concerning the making of the golden calf; or the reception of the stone tablets with God’s very own laws thusly written upon them; Miriam is left back in Egypt when clearly she sang and danced with her timbrels when Pharaoh’s chariots were cast into the sea.
Finally, other critics have mentioned that the Red Sea crossing was done all wrong. It was if you were expecting another Cecil B. DeMille rendition. Let’s face it shall we? Charlton Heston raising his arms along with his special staff over the waters and the wind picking up and dividing the sea with the very breath of God is one movie scene that would be hard to outdo. But here is the point that this writer would like to make; is there anyone living or ever lived that wrote down the exact way in which God divided the waters? We know the answer to that one, don’t we? Since this writer attended seminary, and has entertained many schools of religious streams of thought; it would appear that what the writer was attempting to do was to lay the groundwork for a liberal theologian’s ideas, in which Moses really crossed the Red Sea at a point where the deepest part was approximately ten inches. But here is the biblically conservative come-back to that idea: how did Pharaoh’s army drown in ten inches of water? So the writer has attempted to give credence to the idea that the children of Israel crossed in shallow water; however, this idea totally leaves God out of the picture. Plus, as they are crossing the Red Sea, the writer attempts to blend in the traditional view and pretty soon they are crossing on almost dry land. The cinematography of the water sweeping back, plus the giant waterspouts forming, which presumably has been the force to draw the water back, still has an incredible realism that doesn’t displease the viewer.
Overall, it still rates 4/5 stars from this critic, even with the writer not remaining faithful to the Scriptures. This writer definitely says: Go see it for yourself. It is good that Hollywood has finally decided to make Biblically based movies at long last. This writer has heard many complaints about the fact that there is nothing ‘decent’ to see at the movie houses, and this writer has made plenty of complaints also. Should Christians just not rather rejoice that at the very least, we are being given movies to see and enjoy? Plus, opportunities to speak the truth about the real Scriptural events and how our God deserves all the glory is laid out like a red carpet before us.
We were last studying in the books of Galatians and the Gospel of John to define the issue of what happened to the Laws of God once the Lord Jesus Christ became the final and perfect sacrifice; who took our place and received unto Himself the total judgment and wrath of God Almighty for us, subsequently dying in our place. As we saw in Part 14 and more importantly in the Scriptures, that the Laws of God did not actually end, as some have erroneously taught, but rather that they migrated from an external place to a permanent internal place, that is, within our born again spirits. Let us read in
Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord: But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
So we read in the foregoing Scriptures that even in the days of Jeremiah, that God had prophesied through His prophet that one day He would institute a new covenant. He would not make it like the old one, namely, that His people would have to sacrifice daily to atone for the sins of Israel in whole and individuals would have to come to a priest to make atonement and peace offerings continually, but that He would send His only begotten Son who would become the final sacrifice for all eternity. So the Lord Jesus Christ became for us our High Priest, not to make continual sacrifices as we read in the book of Hebrews, but just the one, final sacrifice. Why? The animals that they slaughtered for sacrificial purposes, though they might be without spot or blemish on the outside, their blood lines were still corruptible and so rotted. This is why the priests had to apply fresh blood upon the horns of the altar each and every day. However, the blood of the true Lamb of God, His blood is and was incorruptible, and it is still fresh upon the mercy seat in Heaven; which is why the Christian “pleads the blood of Jesus Christ,” when we are asking for forgiveness for our transgressions against our Holy Father in Heaven.
The passage in Jeremiah 31 goes on to say that Israel could not keep these laws; they couldn’t keep them because they were based upon THEIR works. However, when you accept the WORKS of the Lord Jesus Christ and accept the pure blood of the True Lamb of God to be your atonement, it is no longer centered upon your works, but HIS WORKS. Furthermore, God was going to WRITE HIS LAW in our inward parts, i.e. our spirits. Therefore, how can God’s law be ended or over? If we say that God’s law ended with the arrival of the New Covenant, we stand in complete opposition to what His Scriptures declare and basically, you are spitting in God’s face and calling Him a liar. Are you sure you wish to do that?
Now some will say (trying to get out of this requirement, or so they think) that I follow the Apostle Paul or I really like the Apostle John and what he had to say, etc. Really? Then someone please explain why the Apostle John cogently stated in 1 John that God’s commandments were not grievous, but rather were rather easy to keep? Then why did the Apostle Paul teach the church in Ephesus nine of the Ten Commandments? The only one that he did not cite was the first commandment; which is really a no-brainer, since you have chosen to follow Christ; it really is quite axiomatic that you must already have a love for God and His only begotten Son. Therefore, the Christians in Ephesus must not have needed to be reminded to keep the first commandment. They must already have mastered that particular commandment.
Stay tuned for the next part. See you there.
Another year come and gone and here it is Mother’s Day again. You are probably thinking about what to buy for your Mom on HER day. Like most Mothers, we have enough perfume, we have all the plates and glassware we need, we have all of the small appliances, etc. Please don’t buy her a vacuum cleaner unless she has requested one. You can however buy her a dishwasher if you don’t already have one in your home and that would be quite a blessing. If by some odd chance she is still using a washboard, DO buy her a washing machine and dryer.
So…Dad…what you can get for the Mother of your children is to treat her to a series of gifts all designed to bless her on this day set to honor her. Here are some suggestions of different gifts that you can utilize if you wish:
- Get that family photo taken that is overdue
- Take her and your family on a horse-drawn carriage ride through your city
- Eat at her favorite fancy restaurant
- Buy her a heart-shaped gold locket with that new family photo inside
- Have your family lunch catered at your favorite park with servers in tuxedos
These are just some of the ideas that this writer proffers for those of my readers who might be struggling to think of some new things to get for Mom on her day. While the Bible does not obviously have any verses set aside for a special Mother’s day event, yet we see that God the Father did provide words upon this subject. You can find it in the Ten Commandments, it is
Honour thy father and thy MOTHER: that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee (emphasis mine).
We also find Jesus Christ honoring His mother on a daily basis. How do we know it is most likely on a daily basis? In the first place, it was a commandment of God and the Lord Jesus kept all of God’s commandments perfectly. Then we find an instance written in the Bible where most definitely He honored His Mother by obeying her even when it wasn’t the most convenient for Him.
John 2:1-8. 12
And the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and the mother of Jesus was there: And both Jesus was called, and his disciples, to the marriage. And when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine. Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come. His mother saith unto the servants, Whatsoever he saith unto you, do it. And there were set there six waterpots of stone, after the manner of the purifying of the Jews, containing two or three firkins apiece. Jesus saith unto them, Fill the waterpots with water. And they filled them up to the brim. And he saith unto them, Draw out now, and bear unto the governor of the feast. And they bare it. After this he went down to Capernaum, he, and his mother, and his brethren, and his disciples: and they continued there not many days.
Jesus knew that it was not yet time for Him to begin His ministry, yet because His mother took the lead and set Him upon His path, He obeyed her and performed His first miracle in His ministry. We don’t see Him arguing endlessly about the fact that it wasn’t time yet; what we do read is that He does make mention of this, yet He honors His Mother and does it anyway. By the cultural rules of the society in which He was living, He could have simply informed His Mother to be quiet and refused to do anything. Yet He honored her and obeyed her. This is a good clue for all children to do so in imitation of the Holy One of God. Amen.
So this Mother’s day, give honor unto whom honor is due. Above all, children love your Mother, honor her and obey her and as the commandments of God states: “that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee.” Have a blessed Mother’s day!