Farrell's Bible Notes
:Search Bible Notes:
| Search by Book
Day 31: Exodus 25-26; Matthew 28
Day 32: Exodus 27-28; Mark 1
Day 33: Exodus 29-30; Mark 2 (updated 2012)
Day 34: Exodus 31-33; Mark 3 (2011 incomplete)
Day 35: Exodus 34-35; Mark 4 (2011 incomplete)
Day 36: Exodus 36-38; Mark 5 (2011 incomplete)
Day 37: Exodus 39-40; Mark 6:1-29 (2011 incomplete)
Day 38: Leviticus 1-3; Mark 6:30-56 (2012 incomplete)
Day 39: Leviticus 4-5; Mark 7 (2012 incomplete)
Day 40: Leviticus 6-7; Mark 8 (2012 incomplete)
Day 41: Leviticus 8-10; Mark 9 (2012 incomplete)
Day 42: Leviticus 11-12; Mark 10 (2012 incomplete)
Day 43: Leviticus 13; Mark 11 (2012 incomplete)
Day 44: Leviticus 14; Mark 12 (2012 incomplete)
Day 45: Leviticus 15-16; Mark 13 (2012 incomplete)
Day 46: Leviticus 17-18; Mark 14:1-31 (2012 incomplete)
Day 47: Leviticus 19-20; Mark 14:32-72 (2012 incomplete)
Day 48: Leviticus 21-22; Mark 15 (2012 incomplete)
Day 49: Leviticus 23-24; Mark 16 (2012 incomplete)
Day 50: Leviticus 25; Luke 1:1-38 (2012 incomplete)
Day 51: Leviticus 26-27; Luke 1:39-80 (2012 incomplete)
Day 52: Numbers 1-2; Luke 2 (2012 incomplete)
Day 53: Numbers 3-4; Luke 3 (2012 incomplete)
Day 54: Numbers 5-6; Luke 4 (2012 incomplete)
Day 55: Numbers 7-8; Luke 5 (2012 incomplete)
Day 56: Numbers 9-11; Luke 6 (2012 incomplete)
Day 57: Numbers 12-14; Luke 7 (2012 incomplete)
Day 58: Numbers 15-16; Luke 8:1-25
Day 59: Numbers 17-19; Luke 8:26-56 (2012 incomplete)
Day 60: Numbers 20-22; Luke 9:1-27
Day 31: Exodus 25-26; Matthew 28
.Exodus 25:2 | This seems similar to what's asked in 2 Corinthians 9:7, except what's said here in the Old Testament is surrounded by a lot more conditions or commandments by God.
.Matthew 28:1 |
.Matthew 28:9,17 |
.Matthew 28:12-13 |
.Matthew 28:18 |
Day 32: Exodus 27-28; Mark 1
.Mark 1:1 | Notice that Mark calls Jesus Christ the Son of God, whereas Matthew called Him the Son of David. At least at introduction, it appears that
Matthew is focusing more on the humanity of Jesus Christ, seeing that the first thing Matthew proceeds to do is lay out the lineage that led to Jesus Christ. He's in the
lineage of David, yes, but if we're looking strictly at the male lineage, then He would be considered sort of an adopted son or married in, since Joseph is not His biological father.
Likewise, we, as the bride of Christ, become one with the Father, and the Holy Spirit, and therefore one with each other as well. (John 17:11,21)
.Mark 1:2 | "As it is written in the prophets..." Obviously if Mark was writing part of the Bible, then they didn't have the complete Bible at the time. Yet, we see over and over
that they referred to scripture. Instead of the full Bible as we have, they had the writings and prophesies of the prophets, which they went by. Apparently, as we call this that we have the "Bible,"
they called what they had "the prophets" or at least the portion of it that were written by the prophets. The other portion (or one of the portions) was apparently called "The Law" as mentioned in Matthew 5:17.
.Mark 1:3 | This is John the Baptist who prepares the way of the Lord.
.Mark 1:6 | (edited Oct.6.2013)John the Baptist wears animal skins. As I mentioned in my "In Dog We Trust" poem, if he were in our time he would probably have felt the wrath of PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals).
.Mark 1:8 | Matthew 3:11
.Mark 1:9 | Nazareth is in Galilee
.Mark 1:10 | Note that this says the Spirit descended "like" a dove. It does not say that a dove descended on Him. I just wanted to point that the Holy Spirit is not a dove, since I see doves being portrayed as religious symbols so often these days.
Perhaps it's due also to the Genesis 8:8 account, but I'm not sure what other mention there is of the dove that would cause people to hold it up as a religious symbol. I won't lie though, when I first read
Mark 1:10, it was kind of hard not to picture a dove flying down and landing on Jesus' head.
.Mark 1:12 | It was the Holy Spirit that drove Jesus into the wilderness. Perhaps I can get away with taking a shortcut and referring you to my Matthew 4:1 notes, which I may do from time to time since the
accounts from the four gospels often overlap.
.Mark 1:13 | Now, what Matthew doesn't mention here is that Jesus "was with the wild beasts" as Mark tells us. Interesting. I know it was a much different situation, but does anyone remember Tarzan? I know Jesus was doing much more praying
than swinging from vines, but it's an interesting thought. On a more serious note, we see that Mark cuts out a huge part of the story, and skips straight to the part where the angels ministered to Jesus. To see the rest of the story (temptation), read Matthew 4:1-11.
.Mark 1:15 | If we look at Matthew 4:17, we see that the terms "The Kingdom of God" and "The Kingdom of Heaven" are used interchangeably. Matthew 4:17 also says that this is when Jesus begins to preach. About this Kingdom of God, Luke quotes Jesus as saying that "The Kingdom of God is within you." Luke 17:20-21.
.Mark 1:17 | (edited Oct.6.2013) Matthew 4:19; The Lord told the prophet Jeremiah that He (God) will send for many fishers to hunt the children of Israel. And this is exactly what He does here. These that He calls fishers of men, are specifically assigned the task of fishing for the children of Israel. They were not
assigned with the task to go after the gentiles, as the apostle Paul is later. I remember reading a scripture that speaks of this, but I can't recall where it is at the moment. (If you find it, inform me please.)
.Mark 1:17 | Ephesians 5:13 says that a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined unto his wife (speaking of Christ and the church). And this is what they literally do here, although I wouldn't say it's only speaking literally.
.Mark 1:23-26 | (edited Oct.6.2013) We see from this account that unclean spirits did go into synagogues. And just like then, there's some unclean spirits that you may occasionally find in a church house, just as you'll find sick people in a hospital. In this case, the man with the unclean spirit was thankfully able to
receive the proper treatment.
.Mark 1:25-26 | (edited Apr.18.2014) Apparently, the unclean spirit was not capable of holding any peace, as he was told to do by Jesus.
.Mark 1:32,34 | (edited Oct.6.2013) "they brought unto him all that were diseased" .... "And he healed many that were sick of divers diseases..." I'm highlighting the words "all" and "many." At least in this case, it doesn't say He healed every single person that they
brought to Him, although I think I recall in another instance He does heal all, or perhaps the apostles do. Oh look, I found it!!! In Matthew 9:35 it says that "Jesus went about all the cities and villages, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing every sickness and every disease among the people."
Still, this may mean that He healed every manner of sickness and disease, but not necessarily everybody's sickness and disease. But let's keep our eyes open as we continue reading to see what else we learn about this.
.Mark 1:35 | (Apr.18.2014) I imaging some people read this and get the idea that praying in the early morning hours means one is more holy (aside from the fact that you're putting God first). However, Jesus probably went in the early morning before daybreak to avoid the mass of people that would be outside once daylight came. He was famous and in demand (for healings), and as we see in verse 41, He was often moved with compassion. Later in the day, people would have seen Him and He would have been healing people all day and never would be able to get away to Himself. It's not that He didn't want to help people, but He also had to stay focused on His mission. His primary
mission was to save the World. Healing people physically is great, and can be used to help Him save the world, but saving the world (affecting us eternally) is more important than affecting us temporarily (this life is temporary). If Jesus had any flaw, it would be that He had a hard time telling people "no," because He was compassionate. He tried to turn down the lady in Mark 7:24-30, but ended up giving in to her request anyway. But make no mistake, you're not going to talk your way out
of your judgement day.
.Mark 1:44 | (edited Oct.6.2013) This is interesting. Jesus tells him not to tell anybody, but to go show himself to the priest. Why would Jesus make such a request? At the end, it says "for a testimony unto them." It's very possible that (for that moment in time) Jesus was trying to avoid being seen as a threat to the priests' ministry. If the man had obeyed Christ
and first shown himself to the priests, then that would have allowed the priests to feel like they were a part of the whole process, and therefore unthreatened by Jesus' ministry. However, since the man didn't obey, the priests may have seen Jesus as some rival who was overstepping His bounds and reaching the Jews first, ministering to their needs better than they were.
I'm pretty sure this probably created some premature or unnecessary conflict and rebellion by the priests or certain Jews.
Day 33: Exodus 29-30; Mark 2
.Exodus 29:5 | as used here, the word "curious" means carefully, precisely, or skillfully woven. (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/curious 2/20/2010 / and Rainbow Study Bible, Rainbow Studies, Inc. 1996, p.1517)
.Exodus 29:6-9 | The only thing many of us have ever really heard about a bonnet is the girl wearing one on the Blue Bonnet Margarine logo. But a quick internet search reveals that men wear certain types of bonnets too, some which you've probably seen, but didn't know they were called bonnets. What type did Aaron's sons wear? I don't really know, but
I have a feeling that they didn't look like the little blue bonnet girl. Leviticus 8:9-13 is when Moses did this.
.Exodus 29:14 | (Jan.17.2012) Sin offering. I believe "bullock" is the word then used for "bull." The young bullock spoken of in 29:1.
.Exodus 29:18 | (Jan.17.2012) Burnt offering
.Exodus 29:20 | Putting blood on the tip of the ear is/was also a practice of the Maasai tribe in Kenya, Africa, yet I don't recall their reasoning for doing so. However, I believe they used the blood of cows, not rams.
.Exodus 29:24 | Yes, this is an example of a wave offering. Contrary to what's said during Sunday service these days ("give the Lord a wave offering" and everyone waves their hands in the air), a wave offering is not waving your hand back and forth in the air while the music plays. I'm not sure who came up with that, but if you ever meet them, please ask them be a little more respectful than to haphazardly redefine biblical offerings. I'm sure God would rather
not have us confused about this.
.Exodus 29:27 | (Jan.17.2012) Heave offering
.Exodus 29:28 | (Jan.17.2012) Peace offerings
.Exodus 29:30 | (Jan.17.2012) Was this "tabernacle of the congregation" even made yet? Exodus 40:1
.Exodus 29:33 | (Jan.17.2012) Likely similar significance to where the Bible later says in the New Testament to eat not unworthily, and let a man examine himself, in regard to communion.
.Exodus 29:40 | (Jan.17.2012) Matthew 27:48?
.Exodus 29:44-46 | (Jan.17.2012) (highlighted)
.Exodus 29:45 | (Jan.17.2012) Jesus?
.Exodus 30:10 | (Jan.17.2012) Exodus 29:14 | This yearly atonement is mentioned in Hebrews 9:7.
.Exodus 30:13-15 | They were told here to give an exact amount of money, regardless of how much money they had, for atonement of their soul. This was not a tithe, but another type of offering that they did at that time.
.Exodus 30:14 | Numbers 14:29 also mentions "From twenty years old and up." Apparently, twenty must have been their age of accountability when they considered people to be full grown adults. Prior to this in Genesis, we saw that most of the children were born to men who were at least around the age of 30 or older. (Genesis 11:10 Shem was 100 when he had his first son; 11:12 Arphaxad 35; 11:14 Salah 30; 11:16 Eber 34; 11:18 Peleg 30; 11:20 Reu 32; 11:22 Serug 30; 11:24 Nahor 29; 11:26 Terah 70; 16:16 Abram/Abraham 86; 25:26 Isaac 60).
And yes, although Abraham did live to be 175, remember that Sarah laughed at the idea of having a child at 100 because they were so old and stricken already. For her to laugh, there must have been a big difference to them between an 86 year old man (when he had Ishmael) and a 100 year old man. We also must remember that just because they were considered adults at age 20 doesn't mean they started having sex/kids at that age. They got married first.
.Exodus 30:15 | Regarding the half shekel that's mentioned here, we can look at Genesis 23:15-16 to get an idea for just how much (or how little) a half of a shekel is, assuming we're talking about shekels of silver.
We also must consider that the money's value probably changed between Abraham's time and Moses' time. In fact, a better example is probably Exodus 30:23-24. A half of shekel was worth next to nothing, so it must have really been about the act of giving it, not the amount.
(Jan.17.2012) Exodus 38:24-26 speaks of this also, saying "half a shekel" exactly. No more, no less.
Highlighted: "to make an atonement for your souls."
.Exodus 30:16 | (Jan.17.2012) "and shalt appoint it for the service of the tabernacle of the congregation" This is what 2010 people confuse with the tithe, but from verse 15, we see this is clearly not a tithe.
.Exodus 30:23 | (Jan.17.2012) "unto thee"
.Exodus 30:25 | (edited Oct.6.2013)According to A Bible Dictionary (http://www.abibleconcordance.com/T0000200.html#T0000268) and Merriam-Webster (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/apothecary), an apothecary was along the lines of either a perfumer or what we call now chemistry or pharmacology.
.Exodus 30:26 | Moses anoints a tabernacle in Leviticus 8:9-13, putting the mitre and bonnets on them like God told him to in 29:6-9.
.Exodus 30:29 | (Jan.17.2012) The hem of Jesus' garment. This may have something to do with the incident when the old lady touched the hem of His garment.
.Exodus 30:32,37 | (Jan.17.2012) God has patents
.Exodus 30:35 | (Jan.17.2012 | edited Oct.6.2013) A confection is said to mean "a spice" by an apothecary.
.Exodus 30:37 | (Jan.17.2012) God has patents. See also verse 32.
.Mark 2:1-2 | (Jan.17.2012) People flocked to Jesus so much that one must question what was so different about Him.
.Mark 2:4 | Yes, the press seemed to have acted then the same way they do today. I suppose they're talking about the same type of press, right?
.Mark 2:5 | Jesus regarded people's faith when deciding to heal. Remember that He didn't do many of these works in his own country because of their unbelief (Matthew 13:58).
(Jan.17.2012) He healed people, even though that was not His primary objective. Reading verse 5, "Jesus saw their faith," it seems He was a man very in tune with others.
We focus so much on identifying and seeking to fulfill our own needs that we sharpen our senses in this area and allow our senses of others' needs, thoughts and desires to grow dull.
We see from our own bodies that the more we exercise or practice a certain thing, the more proficient we become at doing that thing. He saw their faith. He spent such a considerable amount of time focused on others, that He was sensitive enough to see this, and know the difference between someone motivated by faith and someone motivated by something else like ill-intent, or desire to set Him up. And yes, I'm sure He received revelation from the Holy Spirit about some of these things, but even receiving revelation from the Holy Spirit comes from focusing outside of one's own self.
The difference between Him and us, is that we, at least in our fleshly nature, are prone to focus on doing what's best for us.
He does what's good for Him as a means to do what's good for others, but we, in our fleshly nature, do what's good for others as a means of doing what's good for us.
He takes care of Himself in order to benefit others, while we take care of others as a means to benefit ourselves. We give alms to appear noble or to get a tax write-off. We take care of others' health needs in order to get funding (by sending them a bill, or by getting paid by the Government the people's tax dollars). We even preach the Word of God to gain influence and collect "tithe" money. We go to work to gain. We go to school to set ourselves up to gain. We will even volunteer and do missions work so we can feel good about what we did or are doing. We lie, cheat, steal, deceive, and even kill. We terrorize, threaten, belittle, and boast. Almost all of what we do as humans is for the sake of our individual selves, and not for the sake of others. The parent disagrees and says that they want to genuinely benefit their child,
and would even lay down their life for their child. And this may be true for many, or most parents who care for their child; their child, who is an extension of themselves; their child, who is a reflection of them, and makes them look good or bad as a parent by their actions, failures and accomplishments; their child, who, when finding success, will hopefully give back and take care of their parents in due season.
.Mark 2:6-8 | (Jan.17.2012) Jesus is able to perceive in His spirit that which is going on outside of Himself, even how these men reasoned in their hearts.
.Mark 2:10 | (Jan.17.2012) The reason for healing is more important than the healing itself. Because of this reason, so that they may know the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, offers something eternal, instead of just something temporal (temporary).
.Mark 2:12 | (Jan.17.2012) The word used here is "immediately," not "eventually." His healing was immediate. I'm not saying it's wrong, but this is not one of those cases where someone prays and then hopes that God eventually heals them within the next year. Of a separate issue, this verse says "bed," not "mattress." Since nowadays when someone says "bed" they almost always mean "mattress," it's easy to picture this man picking up a King size mattress and trying to walk away, which would have been a miracle itself, but his bed was probably a couple of blankets, sheets or whatever they might have put together to sleep on, not a Sealy, Serta, or Sleep Number bed you see advertised on TV today. Now that I've written that, I wonder why those names all start with an "S?" Could it be that when you hear their name, they want you to think of Sleep?
.Mark 2:14 | (Jan.17.2012) I'm wondering if Levi is from the family line of Levi, and if that's why his parents named him Levi. Anyway, notice how Jesus just says "Follow me," and the guy got up and followed Him. Jesus knows how to speak to people, what state of mind they are in, and what they are willing to do and not do.
.Mark 2:18 | (Jan.17.2012) This may not be the best verse to tie this to, but since it does speak of fasting, I'd like to mention... Fasting is an act of denying one's self from seeking the benefit of one's own self, and should probably never be done for the ultimate benefit of oneself, but for the benefit of others.
.Mark 2:21-22 | The new piece will shrink, causing the old piece to tear even more. 2 Corinthians 5:17 says if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold all things are become new. From these scriptures, we realize that
we, in our old state, cannot handle Christ. It's no wonder that people, before they are born again in Christ, feel like living a life in Christ will be too overwhelming. For the state that they are in, it is. They'll burst like old wineskins trying to hold new wine, or in 2010 terms, putting mentos in coke! This is also covered in Matthew 9:17.
.Mark 2:22 | (Jan.17.2012) For this verse, The New International Version (NIV) Bible says "wineskins" instead of "bottles," evidence that it is not always simpler to read or up to date. It changes words sometimes to things harder to understand.
Day 34: Exodus 31-33; Mark 3
.Exodus 31:2-3 | (2011) Bezaleel was filled with the Holy Spirit. There were people in the Old Testament who were filled with God's Spirit, including Samson. In Exodus 35:30-31 Moses repeats what God teaches him here.
.Exodus 31:3 | (2011) The Lord God speaks about Himself in the 3rd person. "I have filled him with the Spirit of God..."
.Exodus 31:4-5 | 35:32-33 | (2011) It appears that working with ones hands like this may also be a gift of the Spirit.
.Exodus 31:13-15 | (2011) There is later a division among the people concerning Jesus keeping the Sabbath (John 9:16). To them, this is no small issue, but one of life or death. When Jesus did what He did, it was very significant and seen as extremely a risky thing to do being that He could (prematurely) get
the death penalty for it. Paul touches on this issue of judging this also in Romans 14:5-6. We have to remember also that this (v.13) says the Sabbath commandment was to the children of Israel, but with the work of Jesus you have the coming together of the children of Israel and the gentiles, who were not under
all of the same legal covenants as the children of Israel. Exodus 35:2 says this Sabbath is to be observed on the seventh day. There are other places in scripture
where the Sabbath was observed during other days or special occasions as well. I'll try to remember to point them out when I come across those scriptures. Matthew 12:1-14 is an instance where Jesus healed on the Sabbath and the Pharisees wanted to destroy Him because of it. I'm guessing by "destroy Him" they mean "kill Him."
.Exodus 31:16 | (2011) Again, it's specified that this is a covenant between God and the children of Israel.
.Exodus 31:17 | (2011) "On the seventh day He rested, and was refreshed." WHAT? Yep, sounds like God may get tired. I know we generally think of God as being incapable of even getting tired. I mean, He created the whole world in six days. But then let's also consider the idea that God is God, and He can still do what He wants. Meaning that
if He wants to allow Himself to be able to get tired, then He can do that. Why would He do that? So He could be refreshed, just like the scripture says here. Being refreshed is one of the best feelings in the world. Have you ever had a long day of work and finally you just get to plop down and relax. Doesn't it feel GOOD!!? So you think
that God just denied Himself of all types of pleasure huh? Like He's just some sort of industrial robot or something, who knew nothing about this feeling, yet was able to give it to you. Guess what, If I was God and the creator of pleasure, I would have a little bit of pleasure myself. I wouldn't just give it all to all the
selfish humans (no offense). Now, I don't know that God actually sleeps, or if He just sits down to rest, but it sounds kind of like Jeremiah 29:19 may be saying that God rose up early.
In Isaiah 1:14 God says He's weary. "Your new moons and your appointed feasts my soul hateth: they are a trouble unto me; I am weary to bear them." That's right, man can apparently make God weary, even to the point that He may stop listening to prayers of the wicked, as he says in the next verse. I've heard people say before that
they didn't think God heard their prayers or asked me to pray for them, and I didn't do this, but apparently He can be pushed to that point. Historically speaking though, He's a bit of a softy when it comes to us humans though. He's in love with us, and like anybody in love, if the one they love sincerely comes back begging, their heart is likely
going to be touched. There's many instances of this happening with God.
This brings up another question. We're told by Paul in Galatians 6:9 not to be weary in well doing. So does God Himself get weary in well doing? I wouldn't say so, but that He can get weary of us not doing well, and when He's absolutely pushed to the edge and sees that man is determined not to change, then getting rid of them can be the right and just thing for God to do.
He's not an unloving or unfair God, but sometimes He's got to put His foot down and keep things from getting too far out of hand. So the good thing for Him to do may be to take action. Read what He says in Genesis 6:3.
.Exodus 31:18 | (2011) Deut 5:6-21; Exodus 20;
Day 35: Exodus 34-35; Mark 4
.Exodus 34:1 | (Dec.30.2011) In Exodus 32:19 Moses broke the tables that God wrote His commandments on. Now that's what you call breaking God's commandments! This must have been extra embarrassing for Moses to have to do this again and for God to mention that He had to write it again because Moses broke His first set of stone tables. It's embarrassing, but I'm glad this part was included because it really shows God's patience and forgiveness;
and not only that with Moses, but also with the people. And since we see that God actually chooses to write the tables again (even though it was somebody else's fault, not God's), because we can see God showing us that He doesn't just forgive, but He also makes provision again for us to be able to accomplish His purpose. He doesn't tell Moses, "I forgive you, but you better get some glue and fix your own mistakes because I'm not writing those tables over again." God jumps in and
helps out, and doesn't take it personal.
.Exodus 34:2 | (Dec.30.2011) God says "be ready in the morning" showing that He understands that it takes us preparation time in the morning, as it does in other areas of life.
.Exodus 34:3 | (Dec.30.2011) Not even Joshua, I suppose.
.Exodus 34:4 | (Dec.30.2011) These stone tables may still be in existence.
.Exodus 34:7 | (Dec.30.2011) "and that will by no means clear the guilty;" I wonder if this is a reference to the unforgiven: those who turned against God and stayed against God.
.Exodus 34:10 | (Dec.30.2011) Notice how God has changed His position from what He said in 33:3. This is an example of how the prayer of the righteous influences God. James 5:16
.Exodus 34:12 | (Dec.30.2011) God gave His promise, but notice that man is able to override it, at least for his personal outcome.
.Exodus 34:14 | (Dec.30.2011) Exodus 20:3 God is serious about His commandments. He's not simply saying "don't do this" and still expecting us to do it. He means for us not to do it. It says here the Lord's name is Jealous.
.Exodus 34:15 | (Dec.30.2011) Do not make a covenant with the unrighteous.
.Exodus 34:18 |
.Exodus 34:19 |
.Exodus 34:20 |
.Exodus 34:24 | (Dec.30.2011) Where Jabez's prayer came from.
.Exodus 34:25 | (Dec.30.2011) Matthew 16:6 and 27:62
.Exodus 34:28 |
.Exodus 34:30 |
.Exodus 34:35 | (Dec.30.2011) God is not confined to operate within the laws of physics, as we call them.
Day 36: Exodus 36-38; Mark 5
.Exodus 36:1-7 | (Dec.31.2011) When these people were allowed to give what they wanted to, they ended up having too much. They were not threatened, coerced, or forced to do it. It says they were free offerings. It would be wise for us to learn from this, and that when they had too much, they said they had too much. They didn't get greedy and pocket it or change the building plans to try to build something bigger.
.Exodus 36:3 | (Dec.31.2011) It says here that they, the workers, received of Moses all of the offering which the children of Israel had brought. Moses didn't go and put it in a treasury or put the supplies in a surplus storage unit, or use it to make himself an extra house or boat. He gave it "ALL" to the workers. These offerings that the people brought were free offerings. They didn't have to bring it if they didn't want to. We also see that they brought every morning.
This doesn't necessarily mean that every one of them brought something every morning, but that Moses and the workers received offerings from someone every morning while they worked. It's a little different from Jesus' parable about counting the cost to make sure you can build before you start building. I could be seeing it wrong, but it looks like they were working on faith that the supplies would be there when they needed it. It wasn't "bring an offering
once a week on Sunday morning after you've give your tithes" or any of that type of thing we hear today. It was simply, "We need lmnop. If you have lmnop and would like to bring it on by, we'll be here, we'll take it (if we still need it)." Very simple. The project was not too big. Those who gave were not taken on guilt trips, and burdened to "give till it hurts," and then sent to the pawn shop and left for broke.
.Exodus 36:5 | (Dec.31.2011) This is honorable honesty here. I don't know if the people doing the work were actually getting paid or if their supplies were just being provided, but they had enough integrity to say it's too much for the amount of work the Lord told them to do. When is the last time you ever heard someone say, "Hey, I don't need to get paid this much money; I only need this much right here."? It happens, but it's pretty rare.
.Exodus 36:8 | (Dec.31.2011) The word "cunning" as used here is defined by The Living Webster Encyclopedic Dictionary (1975) as "ability, skill, or expertise; skill employed in a crafty manner." In other words, these cherubim were crafted with some pretty impressive handiwork. We'll talk about what cherubim are later.
.Exodus 36:14 | (Dec.31.2011) animals used again. I don't know if these goats got killed and skinned, or if they just shaved them and did something creative. Either way, I don't think our animal rights activists would have liked it if they were around.
.Exodus 36:19 | (Dec.31.2011) I don't know about the goats in verse 14, but these badgers definitely didn't make it out alive. Well PETA, I don't know what to tell you, except, visit Youtube and search my video IN DOG WE TRUST. Maybe that'll help explain why God allows things like this.
.Exodus 36:33 | (Dec.31.2011) This support beam is still a requirement used in the construction of houses and buildings today.
.Exodus 36:38 | (Dec.31.2011) No, chapiters are not what you read in a book. They are the upper part or capital of a column or pillar. And by column, I mean part of a building structure, not what you read in a newspaper. I know you know that, but just having a little fun with you.
Day 37: Exodus 39-40; Mark 6:1-29
.Exodus 39:10-13 | (Dec.31.2011) Why haven't I heard of these stones before? I've heard of the topaz, emerald, sapphire, diamond, onyx, jasper (I think), and amethyst, but not the sardius, carbuncle, ligure, agate, and beryl. Is it only me? Which of these stones haven't you heard of before? Send me an email.
.Exodus 39:14 | (Dec.31.2011) Looking at verse 7, and how they are This seems to be where the twelve birthstones originated. These are not all of the same stones we see listed today, but most of them are (at least 7 or 8 out of the 12). As with anything God creates, perverts do what they do best and pervert it. These originally were simply stones for the memorial to the children of Israel as the Lord commanded Moses (v.7). Now people have come along and sold
the idea that the stones have mystical properties and all of this other stuff. Commercial advertising in recent history said that you must absolutely buy one of them (diamond) in order to get married, and a bunch of other stuff that we (literally) buy into because we don't know any better. Now apparently these stones to us are no more a memorial to the children of Israel, just another commodity that people are enslaved over, killed, dismembered, and other unheard of things over these travesties that were not God's
intended purpose for these stones. I'm not saying it's wrong to have or buy them, but just know what they are and what they aren't.
.Exodus 39:20 | (Dec.31.2011) I know what you learned as a child, but I don't think the word "curious" here is referring to the Curious George type of curious. Aside from that meaning, the word is defined in the dictionary as meaning "odd," and in the context it's used in here, it may have some other meaning. But that could relate back to the other meaning, because something that's odd would likely pique the interest of old Curious George.
.Exodus 39:24 | (Dec.31.2011) I've never heard of a blue pomegranate before. Is this a blueberry perhaps? They do kind of look the same.
Day 38: Leviticus 1-3; Mark 6:30-56
.Leviticus 1 | (Jan.1.2012) This chapter instructs on how to properly make a burnt offering/ burnt sacrifice. The first offerings to God are recorded as being Cain and Able in Genesis 4:3-4. The second offerings ever made were burnt offerings in Genesis 8:20 made by Noah. This was done before the law, and although it says "clean beast" and "clean fowl" it was done even before God gave Moses the message in Leviticus 11:1-23 to tell the people which animals were considered clean. The word "clean" as used here doesn't simply mean that it didn't have any dirt on it. The next offering made
was also a burnt offering, which appears to be the first offering that was commanded to be made. This is probably the second most famous offering ever made (the most famous was Jesus on the cross). This offering was when God commanded Abraham, born many generations after Noah, to give his son as a burnt offering in one of the mountains, wherein God stops him from killing his son and provides a ram in the bush, or as it says in my Bible, "a ram caught in a thicket" (Genesis 22:13). It is interesting to note
that although Noah gave a burnt offering before any law or command was given concerning it (Exodus 20:24; Leviticus 1:1-17; 6:9-13), Christians today do not cite this incidence as a justification to continue making burnt offerings as is done with Abraham who tithed before the law. I haven't known Christians to ever make burnt offerings.
.Leviticus 1:1 | (Jan.1.2012) Exodus 34:3 and 40:35 gives us an idea about why God had this tabernacle built. We see here in verse 1 that it says the Lord spoke to Moses "out of the tabernacle," not in the tabernacle. If you remember from Exodus 40:35, it says Moses was not able to enter into the tent of the congregation, because the cloud abode thereon, and the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle. From Exodus 40, here's a quick drawing I made of how it might have looked . I know today, we have something that people call "altar call" where people come up to the front where the
pastor preaches, but in the Bible, the altar does not appear to be a place where people stood up and preached in or invited people into every Sunday. There was a tent outside of the altar. Between the tent and the altar was the tabernacle. Moses wasn't allowed in the tabernacle when the glory of the Lord filled it. There is quite a bit of studying to do in this area, and I haven't finished yet, but it appears that what we call an altar nowadays in our Christian church houses is not actually an altar.
.Leviticus 1:2-3 | (Jan.1.2012) As of today, January 1, 2012, I haven't finished studying about burnt offerings yet, but from what I've studied so far, I haven't seen the Lord command that it must be done by anyone. However, He has commanded and established law concerning how it is to be done, if someone does it. We see here in verses two and three, God says "if any man of you bring an offering..." and "if his offering be a burnt offering..." So if anyone happens to make a burnt offering, this is how it must be done.
.Leviticus 1:2 | (Jan.1.2012) This is specifically for the children of Israel, as said here. In 6:9, God specifies also that the command for burnt offerings was to Aaron and Aaron's sons, who were priests. The priests are the ones who were designated to facilitate the offerings. Again, when Noah made his burnt offerings, none of this was yet in place.
.Leviticus 1:3,10 | (Jan.1.2012) "a male without blemish" is what Jesus was/is.
.Leviticus 1:4 | (Jan.1.2012) This is what Jesus did. He made atonement for us. When I see the word "atonement," I see "atONEment," being that we are brought back into oneness with God and being reconciled with Him.
.Leviticus 1:6 | (Jan.1.2012) The word "flay" is apparently the same word as "fillet" which means to slice it across a certain way. Oftentimes you'll see in the Bible that the way something is spelled, is of lesser importance than the way it sounds or is pronounced. I can't recall many instances (or any instances) where something in the Bible was pronounced the same way, but spelled two different ways to mean something different. It happens all the time today, where spelling is primary, and sound is secondary, such as the words "no" and "know" or "two," "too," and "to." But what was more
important in the Bible was how it was said, not how it was spelled. Perhaps that's due to us having a higher literacy rate.
.Leviticus 1:7 | (Jan.1.2012) "Aaron the priest." Aaron was a priest (Exodus 40:13).
.Leviticus 1:8 | (Jan.1.2012) "the priests, Aaron's sons." Aaron's sons are also priests (Exodus 40:12-15). Moses anoints and sanctifies them in Leviticus chapter 8.
.Leviticus 1:11 | (Jan.1.2012) This also happened with Jesus Christ's blood when they pierced Him in His side and blood and water came out (John 19:34).
.Leviticus 1:15 | (Jan.1.2012) This would almost work for an episode of "Dirty Jobs" with Mike Rowe.
.Leviticus 1:16 | (Jan.1.2012) (highlighted)
Day 39: Leviticus 4-5; Mark 7
.Leviticus 4 | (Jan.6.2012) This chapter deals with ignorance of sin; What happens if you sin, but didn't know it was a sin.
.Leviticus 4:2 | (Jan.6.2012) This is being spoken to the children of Israel. God specifically tells Moses "Speak unto the children of Israel." You'll notice later, in Leviticus 6:9, God also specifically states who it's for, saying "Command Aaron and his sons," which are the priests. So we see at 6:9, God shifts who He is speaking to. God specifies again, in Malachi 1:6, saying "Saith the Lord of hosts unto you, o Priests, that despise my name." And in Malachi 2:1, saying "And now, o ye Priests, this commandment is for you." And God is apparently still speaking specifically to them throughout the rest of the book of Malachi.
.Leviticus 4:2 | (Jan.6.2012) Sinning unknowingly. I'm glad you're hear to read the Bible because here is a common question answered, which is asked by those who do not read the Bible. I've heard it asked as if God never thought of that scenario, but it's right here. I find it interesting that God says "if a soul shall sin..." and focuses on that part of man that is eternal. This gives the listener the idea that it's not just the body that is doing the sinning, but that it is the soul that sins, and we now knowing that the soul is eternal, know that the soul does not escape itself when the body dies. In other words, it is the soul that
commits the offense and carries this sin with it when it passes from this earthly body to stand before the throne of judgment.
.Leviticus 4:4 | (Jan.6.2012) Now we have Jesus. Here, they had to bring their own bloody sacrifice. In verse 4 here it says "and he shall bring" - If we look at verse 3, we see that the "he" refers to the priest.
.Leviticus 4:11-12 | (Jan.6.2012)
.Leviticus 4:13-14 | (Jan.6.2012)
Day 40: Leviticus 6-7; Mark 8
.Leviticus 6:2 | (Jan.7.2012) Lying and deceiving is wrong. Most of us know that lying is wrong in God's eyes. Some of us think that lying about small things is okay if it's for a good reason, and that deceiving is alright also as long as you don't tell a certified lie. They are all wrong.
.Leviticus 6:3 | (Jan.7.2012) In elementary school we used to say "finders keepers, losers weepers." That doesn't seem to go to well with God. At least, if someone finds something, they are not free to lie about it in order to try to keep it. The word "Lieth" here means "lies," but just uses a "th" instead of an "s" as usual. The term "sweareth falsely" is used here. in the Old Testament, if I can remember, it was not expressly commanded for people not to swear, but here we see that swearing falsely is definitely wrong. However in the New Testament it says not to swear at all, meaning never. Matthew 5:33-37 Jesus talks about a similar shift. Genesis 47:31 shows an example of someone swearing, which in this use of the word, does not mean using profanity, but moreso making an oath. According to what Jesus says
here, it was apparently spoken against at some point before His time, but
now He says "Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths: But I say unto you, Swear not at all; Neither by heaven; for it is God's throne: nor by the earth; For it is His footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great king. Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black. But let your communication be, yea, yea; nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil" (The words of Jesus in my Bible are in all CAPS, so I used my own upper and lowercase, so please don't place much emphasis on my casing here). So pretty much, we are now called to a higher standard, which is to always keep our word, which includes both telling the truth and doing what you say you will do. If you have to
swear, that means that your word is weak, and your word should not be weak. If I know your yes means that you will do it, then there is no need to swear. Swearing is like saying "I know last time I said I was going to do it, but I didn't, but this time I'm really going to do it." This also means that we can't be so casual with giving out "yes" answers. If we're not sure we can live up to our yes, then we shouldn't give a yes. Of course something out of your control could prevent you (beyond a matter of mere inconvenience), but for the reason that something could prevent us, is why we have no business swearing to do something (such as an oath). If you must swear that you're telling the truth, it probably
means that you don't always tell the truth. So by using the "I swear" technique, you are allowing yourself a loophole to lie, which is wrong. Leviticus Chapter 5 speaks about swearing, but I am writing my notes for chapter 6 before chapter 5, so my expounding on the issue of swearing may have been a little more fitting for Chapter 5, but not sure when I'll get to my chapter 5 notes.
.Leviticus 6:4 | (Jan.7.2012) highlighted "The thing which he hath deceitfully gotten" and "the lost thing which he found"
.Leviticus 6:5 |
.Leviticus 6:6 | (Jan.7.2012) highlighted "A ram without blemish out of the flock"
.Leviticus 6:9 | (Jan.7.2012) At first God was speaking to the children of Israel, but now to the priests. Also see Leviticus 1:2 and 4:2.
.Leviticus 6:10 |
.Leviticus 6:13 | (Jan.7.2012) Like Hell, there is always someone's offering being given to it for the payment of sin, feeding the flames.
.Leviticus 6:14 | (Jan.7.2012) highlighted "Aaron." The sons of Aaron are the priests.
.Leviticus 6:18 |
.Leviticus 6:23 | (Jan.7.2012) "wholly burnt" means burn the whole thing.
.Leviticus 6:26 |
.Leviticus 6:27 |
.Leviticus 6:28 |
.Leviticus 6:29 |
.Leviticus 6:30 |
.Leviticus 7:6 |
.Leviticus 7:7 |
.Leviticus 7:8 |
.Leviticus 7:12 |
.Leviticus 7:13 |
.Leviticus 7:16 |
.Leviticus 7:18 |
.Leviticus 7:23 |
.Leviticus 7:24 |
.Leviticus 7:26-27 |
.Leviticus 7:28 |
.Leviticus 7:29 |
.Leviticus 7:30 |
.Leviticus 7:34 |
.Leviticus 7:36 |
.Leviticus 7:37 |
.Leviticus 7:38 |
.Mark 8:3 |
.Mark 8:4 |
.Mark 8:5 |
.Mark 8:7 |
.Mark 8:14 |
.Mark 8:19 |
Day 41: Leviticus 8-10; Mark 9
.Mark 9:5 | (Jan.8.2012) It says "Peter answered and said to Jesus..." I've always thought of an answer only as response to a question. However here, nobody asked Peter anything, but it says he answered. In Matthew 25:37 Jesus says the righteous will answer the factual statement made in 25:36 (not a question). Luke 13:25 gives us a good example of a different way the word "answer" is used, even by us today. It speaks of answering a door being knocked on. Although this speaks about the door of Heaven, we do it with the doors of our house as well. When someone knocks on your front door at home, the person who doesn't want to answer it says to the other person "go answer the door." This is a different type of answering, because the knock on the door is not a question, nor is it a statement, but an action. It is an action that begs you to respond to it.
This is apparently what happened in Mark 9:5. This thing that Peter saw, knocked on him in a way that begged him to respond. In Acts 24:10, we see yet another type of answering, which I'd say is similar to a knocking on a door. Paul is accused of wrongdoing, and given the chance to speak, it says he "answered." They didn't question him, but he answered, because like the knocking at the door, it begged a response from him. It moved him and caused him to feel that he had to say or do something. Why is this important? What does this have to do with our lives, Jesus Christ, Heaven or Hell? In Revelation 3:20, the Son of God says "Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: If any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to Him, and will sup with him, and he with Me."
I'd imagine there are very few people who will hear someone knocking at the door of their house, office, or room, and will completely ignore it. That knocking will move almost any person to take some action. They will either go answer it, check to see who it is, or they will hide or try to quiet themselves so they are not detected, or they will turn their attention away from their TV or whatever noisemaker so they can listen. Their car is out front, but they are acting like they aren't home. The point is that they are responding. There are few who will sit there and carry on as normal, taking no action at all.
Like Peter on the mountain with Jesus, there are things in our life that we see or experience that knocks on us, and begs us to answer. They are nearly impossible to ignore. God will use these things to reach us, but it is up to us whether or not we choose to answer.
Like Paul, who stood accused (whether rightly or wrongly), he felt compelled to give an answer for himself. He was wrongly accused, and yet he answered. God has made our wrongdoing known to us. We've tried to ignore it, but we have heard the accusation. We have sinned. We have done wrong. His accusation is correct, and we must answer. What I've tried to show here were the different types of stimuli that demand an answer. Concerning the answer itself, there are different types of ways one can answer. One can give a verbal answer, stating their case, or their point, with the truth or a lie. They can answer by taking an action, such as when someone asks you to bring them the TV remote, and you get up and take them the TV remote, or when God says repent, and you repent. Another type of answer is found in 1 Peter 3:21. My best way to categorize it is to call it a self-evident answer.
It is speaking about baptism, which refers to the drowning of or washing away of sins, and it refers to "a good conscience" as an answer. This baptism that gives us a saving answer, is accomplished by the resurrection of Jesus Christ. It's like a man who pays the rent. As long as he pays the rent, others in his family in his house with him are not evicted; they are one. If he's in, they're in. Us being joined to Christ, and being in Him, and He dying with our sins, carrying them below and being resurrected up without them is our payment, and our purification. When the Lord hears our accusers, but sees us standing there pure and justified, cleansed from those things, with a good conscience, that is our answer. That's like being proven guilty in court, but our lawyer stands up and points to the evidence that shows the judge that "Yes, he was guilty, but look and see the evidence that his sentence has already
been served for that crime. He's free and clear to go home." As far as conscience goes, that person would feel no need to give any other answer, because the answer is already sitting right there in plain view. In Galatians 6:17, Paul points to it, saying "From henceforth let no man trouble me: for I bear in my body the marks of the Lord Jesus." Likewise in Luke, Jesus shows that He has the marks. And that is our answer. The wages of sin is death, but in Him we have a receipt for the payment being paid in full.
Any man would be wise to ask himself, "Do I have an answer? What is my answer." If you feel no need to answer, it's because you either have a good conscience, or you have no conscience. There is a world of difference between the two. One has a good conscience because he has been justified; The other has no conscience because he has become blind to the fact that he
is wrong and needs to be justified. Because of his hard heart and refusal of God, God has given him over to his own mind, sent him a strong delusion (2 Thessalonians 2:11), and allowed that man to (wrongly) see himself as right in his own eyes. While it may be true that neither of them has a guilty conscience, one is headed toward eternal life and the other toward eternal death. Again, there is a difference between having a good conscience and having no conscience. A wise man will judge himself before he is judged.
.Mark 9:36 | (Jan.14.2012) Notice that the child went among them without resisting to go. The child trusted the one that was sending it. The child knew, "I don't know what the whole point is here; don't know why I'm going to stand in the middle of these big stinky, scary men, who could rip me apart with their bare hands, but I trust Jesus knows what's best, and that He loves me and cares about me, so if He's telling me to do it, then it must be okay." So the child went boldly, even while they were probably staring at the child while walking in among them and the child may be thinking "aw man, they're looking at me." You know kids can get scared pretty easily, even when an adult they don't know too well looks at them for even two seconds. They want to go hide behind their mommy or daddy for protection, although it doesn't say how old this child is.
Also notice similar thinking by the twelve disciples who knew, "We're grown men here. Having a child among us may hurt our image. Is this child going to be one of us now? But if Jesus is sending this child among us, then it must be okay. We trust Jesus; He doesn't lead us wrong." So they let the child into the midst of them without objection. So if they would have rejected the child, they would be rejecting the one that sent the child as much as they are rejecting the child. In fact, if they don't know the child, have never seen this child, but they know the one who sent the child, then it has nothing to do with the child. They would be rejecting the one that sent the child. Likewise, when Jesus sends us forth among others, they may reject us, but if they do, they are not really rejecting us, they are rejecting Him.
.Mark 9:37 | (Jan.14.2012) Likewise, it's not Christians (followers), who are better than non-believers, but God who is great. As the scripture says "Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is He that is in us than he that is in the world" (1 John 4:4).
Jesus is saying here in 9:37 "It's not you that is great, it's me; Or better yet, Him that sent me." A similar thing to 9:36-37 is said in Luke 10:16, John 5:23, John 8:42, and John 12:44-45.
Day 42: Leviticus 11-12; Mark 10
.Mark 10:1 | (Jan.13.2012) "as he was wont" | "Wont" - means being accustomed to, or used to. So this was something he did regularly this way.
.Mark 10:4 | (Jan.13.2012) This is a reference to Deuteronomy 24:1-2.
.Mark 10:5 | (Jan.13.2012) Matthew 5:31-32 Moses wrote this because they had hardened hearts, but divorce, for any reason, wasn't how it was it was in the beginning. When Adam sinned, not only did death enter in, but it also became possible that a relationship situation could get so bad that divorce could be allowed under certain specific circumstances.
.Mark 10:6 | (Jan.13.2012) Genesis 1:27-28 this was the beginning of creation.
.Mark 10:7-8 | (Jan.13.2012) This is speaking of Jesus and us becoming one. Romans 7:3-4. There is another scripture that explains this more specifically, but I'll need to go back and find it. If you know it, please save me a little time and send it to me. (Thanks)
.Mark 10:12 | (Jan.13.2012) This completes what is said in Matthew 5:32, which doesn't mention her putting away her husband. This may be the only verse that mentions a woman putting away her husband. It doesn't say here, but I would assume it would be for the same cause spoken of in Mt. 5:32, fornication.
.Mark 10:15 | (Jan.13.2012) He said this also in Matthew 18:3.
.Mark 10:18 | (Jan.13.2012) It is important to pay very close attention to Jesus' words; not only what He says, but what He does not say. Jesus didn't say He wasn't good, He said there is none good, but One, that is, God. Jesus was asking this man, based on his belief, or disbelief, why he was calling Him good. From verses 21-22, it is apparent that this man did not believe that Jesus was the fulness of the Godhead bodily, because if he did, he would have obeyed. But it says he went away grieved. I don't know what eventually ended up happening after that, but I know if he truly believed, I don't think he would have went away grieved, and I don't think he would have gotten questioned by Jesus like this. But anyway, my point is that Jesus wasn't making a statement that He wasn't God, or that He wasn't good, but was testing this man's faith
according to what this man knew. We'll see how a few verses later, He allows the man to show his faith by his works. As we know James says that faith without works is dead.
Day 43: Leviticus 13; Mark 11
.Mark 11:9 | (Jan.14.2012) So when they were saying "blessed is He that cometh in the name of the Lord," they were saying what was explained in Mark 9:36-37 notes above.
Day 44: Leviticus 14; Mark 12
.Mark 12:7-8 | (Jan.15.2012) Chief priests, scribes, Pharisees, and elders wanted to own "religion."
.Mark 12:12 | (Jan.15.2012) Matthew 21:45 says it was the Chief Priests and Pharisees that this is speaking of.
.Mark 12:14-15 | (Jan.15.2012) This is just flattery. They didn't really believe this they say. And when they ask Him this question at the end of the verse, they're trying to give him a "yes" or "no" question to trap Him with, but
Jesus is wiser than that and doesn't simply give them a "yes" or "no" answer. On top of this, it appears they tried to ask two different questions at the same time, so when he answers one question, they can say he answered the other question. For example, if He said
"no," but He's really saying "no" to the second question (should we give or not give), then they can see He said "no, it is not lawful," claiming that His "no" was His answer to the first question about whether or not it was lawful. Then they could say that Jesus said that it was against the law for anyone to give to Caesar.
.Mark 12:21 | (Jan.15.2012) This is like what happened in Genesis 38:10.
.Mark 12:27 | (Jan.15.2012) I'm wondering if the origins of this word "err" has any relation to the person "Er" in Genesis 38:7.
.Mark 12:28 | (Jan.15.2012) Notice here that they asked Him for one commandment, but He gave them two commandments. They try to ask leading questions, but He does not allow their questions to form His answer. Likewise, although we answer others' questions when necessary to give them a reason for our faith, it is not necessary for us to allow others to form our answers for us with faulty questioning. With their questioning, they tried to lead Him into saying that there is one top commandment that is above and beyond all others, but He mentions two and presents them as commandments that are tied together.
.Mark 12:29-31 | (Jan.15.2012) This is covered also in Matthew 22:37-40, and are the greatest commandments. However, He does not say that these are the only commandments. This commandment to love the Lord God "with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might" is found also in Deuteronomy 6:5, and if we read on through verse 7, we see that it is also commanded to teach this to one's children also. And it doesn't say to teach them only when they are in school, but when they are sitting in the house, and when walking by, and when you're laying down and when you're getting up. In other words, all the time. This business about letting one's children deciding to choose their own spiritual path and find their own way is nonsense, and there is nothing honorable in it for those of us who know the Truth of God's Word. If you neglect
to teach them the way, you can be sure that someone else will try to teach them what's right, and there's no guarantee that they will not lead them astray. Don't let anyone talk down to you by claiming that your parents influenced your beliefs. There is no child that grows up that is not influenced by anything. If children did not need their parents to teach them, protect them, and show them the way, then we would be a species that births self-sufficient children who leave their parents at birth and go their own way. So teach your children to love God with their all. Romans 13:9 mentions some other commandments and says that other commandments can be briefly comprehended in the saying "thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." This, along with Matthew 7:12 is the biblical basis of what we know today as "the golden rule," which is to "do unto others as you would have them do unto you,"
but I don't think those particular words are from any version of the Bible, although they sound like it. Matthew 7:12 says "Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the Law and the Prophets."
.Mark 12:29 | (Jan.15.2012) "The Lord our God is One Lord" is covered also in Ephesians 4:5-6 which says, "One Lord, one faith, one baptism, One God and Father of all..." Deuteronomy 6:4 says this also, "The Lord our God is one Lord"
.Mark 12:30 | (Jan.15.2012) Loving God with all one's heart is not just a new testament thing. In Psalms 138:1, David understands that God wants his whole heart. 2 Kings 23:25 also speaks of King Josiah turning to the Lord "with all his heart, and with all his soul, and with all his might, according to the law of Moses." So not only was this something that was done, it was understood to be part of the law, even back then, and it is no different in Jesus' time. Man is expected to turn to God with his whole heart, soul, mind, and strength. Take your gaze off of the ten commandments for a moment to focus on this commandment. Have you broken this commandment? Can you tell me you are not guilty and in need of salvation for breaking this commandment? Now look back at the ten commandments in Exodus 20:2-3, and see that this is the first commandment.
.Mark 12:31 | (Jan.15.2012) It appears Jesus is speaking of Leviticus 19:18,34 which also says to love your neighbor as yourself, and even to love the stranger that dwells among you as yourself.
Day 45: Leviticus 15-16; Mark 13
.Mark 13:1 | (Jan.16.2012) Here it says "one of his disciples saith unto him, Master, see what manner of stones and what buildings are here!" So although we see it was only one disciple that actually spoke, there was more than one disciple here, as we find out in Matthew 24:1, when Matthew speaks of this same incident. There was more than one disciple there, but one of them was doing the speaking. My guess would be that it was Peter, just because Peter was usually the most vocal one, but that's just a guess. My second guess would be Judas.
.Mark 13:2 | (Jan.16.2012) Jesus says "great buildings," meaning this temple is actually made up of more than one building. Notice also that Jesus does not call it a temple, but just calls them what they are physically, which is buildings, as he proceeds to talk about how one stone won't be left upon another. Later, we will be the temple. Judas may have lied on Him about what He says here and twisted Jesus' words, because in Mark 14:57-58 Jesus is later falsely accused of saying that He would destroy the temple. And being that He was speaking to his disciples here, it must have been one of them that went out talking about how He said the temple would be thrown down. It is possible that one of the other disciples innocently mentioned it to other people, and then those people twisted the truth into a lie.
.Mark 13:6 | (Jan.16.2012) I don't know about you, but I've had two come to me, claiming to be Jesus Christ, and I'm just one person, so I know it's something that must happen frequently. One was a homeless man in Maryland, and the other was an old lady at a Hotel in Newark, Delaware. They were serious in their heart, and behaved very nicely, but were delusional. I know because Jesus said when He comes back, He's coming in the clouds and everyone will see Him. Also, I asked them some questions that Jesus would know the answer to, that they couldn't answer, and that was really so they would know that they weren't Jesus Christ, because they may have truly thought they were Him. I was just talking with the old lady, and out of nowhere, unrelated to the conversation, she just said calmly and clearly "and my name is
Jesus Christ." Boy, that'll make your heart drop, like "What did you just say?" and found myself standing right there in the middle of Mark 13:6. And you can't just tell a person like that "you're not Jesus Christ," because if they think they're Jesus Christ, then they think they are true and everyone else is a liar. So I had to ask the lady some questions and get some "I don't know" answers out of her so she could say "hmm, Why don't I know the answer to that? Maybe I'm not Jesus Christ." Then you can gently tell them they're not Jesus Christ.
Day 46: Leviticus 17-18; Mark 14:1-31
.Mark 14:1 | (Jan.26.2012) Some people think this verse conflicts with John 12:1. Let's
take a look.
Was this meal supper or some other meal of the day? (people have to eat in the morning too).
John 12:2 says it was supper.
Did this supper happen six days before the passover or did it happen at the time of the passover?
All we know is that it was some time between the 8th and the 13th of the month (John 12:1; Mark 14:1). Jesus arrived to Bethany around the 8th, and the Passover feast started on the 14th (Exodus 12:6).
Mark 14:1 says after two days was the feast, giving us some idea of when the chief priests and scribes were plotting, but just because he
talks about both events at the same time, does not allow us to say that both events were happening on the same day (the plotting / Jesus at Simon's supper). So we can't just apply
verse one's time reference to verse three, which talks about Jesus eating supper at Simon's, with Martha and Mary who broke the alabaster box. However, John 12:1 says Jesus came to Bethany
six days before the passover, but it doesn't say this particular supper happened on the first day He arrived. The Bible covers thousands of
years, so it can't always tell when the exact day was of every single event, or else it would be much longer because of unnecessary
information, which would detract from the facts and lessons that are important. It tells what we need to know, and I don't think we
need to know the exact day of this supper. We know approximately what day it was, and that's enough.
If we don't need to know the exact date of this supper, then why am I addressing the issue?
The reason why I'm addressing this now is because people have taken these two verses, Mark 14:1 and John 12:1, and wrongly claimed that the
two writers are telling conflicting stories, when in actuality, they are just reading it wrong. It's similar to when people see the title of
my first book, Verbalizions, but they say "Verbalizations." It says "Verbalizions," but their brain wrongly adds an "at" in there, because
the brain thinks it's smart and tells them that it says "Verbalizations." If I ever denied writing a book
called Verbalizations, then they would think I was lying, and they would feel like they couldn't trust me. So I'd have to explain to them that
they saw it wrongly, to show to them that I'm not a liar. Therefore, they can still trust me because I really didn't write a book called Verbalizations.
This is what has happened with these verses, so I'm pointing out what it actually says, and what it doesn't say, so brethren with doubts
will know that they can still trust the Bible, and so all brethren may have a ready answer for those who question. Mark and John are giving correct information.
In this case, people read that Jesus arrived six days before passover, then they assume that this supper was eaten six days before the passover.
But Jesus had to eat supper everyday. And it doesn't tell us which one of those days this was.
Then they read that the chief priests and scribes were plotting a day before (or two days) before the passover, and they assume that the
dinner happened on that same day, but the text does not actually say that.
When was the Passover?
This is another area that could throw us for a loop and cause us to assume we've found an error, when in fact, we just didn't understand what
we were reading. The passover meal was on the evening of 14th of the month Abib (Exodus 12:6-8; 13:4; Deuteronomy 16:1),
but the Feast of Unleavened Bread, which went along with that, was from the evening of the 14th through the evening of the 21st.
So the feast was not just one day, it was actually seven days. But that seven days is sometimes referred to as a day. I'll explain this
in more detail below.
Does the scripture say the Passover and Feast of Unleavened Bread was seven days or eight days? 7 or 8 days?
The scripture says "seven days," but those seven days covered eight calendar dates, from the 14th through the 21st. Let's look and see
how that's possible.
Judging by the calendar dates, it looks like it is actually eight days if we don't understand how the seven days is counted. I'm going to use
the information we're given in scripture to thoroughly explain how we may understand it. It's long, because I've tried to be as thorough as possible,
but it will only take you a fraction of the time to read it as it took me to research and write it, so have fun.
In Exodus 12:2 God establishes the Passover, telling them this is to be the first month of
the year to them. This tells us that God is putting them on a different calendar system than others, although they still live among others.
In Exodus 12:3-8 God says that on the 10th day each household sets apart a lamb to be sacrificed, which is killed on the
14th day in the evening and eaten that night with unleavened bread and bitter herbs. Exodus 12:6 actually says the lamb is kept
"until the 14th day," so we see when the word "until" is used, it includes the day mentioned (i.e. until the 14th day means from
day 10 through 14, not 10 through 13); we'll need to know this to understand following scripture that says "until the 21st day of the month".
In verse 10-11, God tells them to eat it in haste and leave no left-overs (scarf it down), so it's not a sit back and take a bite here and there and shoot the breeze for an hour type of meal.
Okay now, this next part can get confusing, so I'll try to make it simple. From what Exodus 12:15 says, the unleavened bread is supposed
to be eaten for seven days, beginning
on the 14th of the month. However, Exodus 12:18 says it ends on the 21st. The confusing part is that 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 and 21 is
eight days, not seven days like it says in 12:15. Here's my explanation. From Ex 12:15, we know that the first of the seven days is the 14th.
From Ex 12:18, we know that the last of the seven days is the 21st (I know that seems impossible because on the calendar it's eight days, but
bear with me). In addition to that, God says in Leviticus 23:6 that on the 15th day of the month is the Feast of Unleavened Bread and seven
days they must eat unleavened bread. Fifteen to twenty-one is seven days, but 14 to 21 is eight, but the scripture 12:15 says that 14th is the
first day, because it's on the 14th that the leaven is put out of the house. We also know that when it says "until" the 21st day it includes
the 21st day, because of how the word "until" was used in Exodus 12:6. How could the seven days be from the 15th until the 21st like Leviticus
says, but also be from the 14th until the 21st like Exodus says? Again, this is my explanation, but is the only thing I see can possibly make
sense: Remember that this is said to be the 14th through 21st day of the month, yet God tells them in Ex 12:2, this is supposed to be the
first month to them, although it's not the first month to everyone else. God places them on a different calendar system. If He can do that,
then He can reasonably also set a different start and end time of their days as well, at least when it comes to this Feast of Unleavened Bread.
It makes perfect sense to me that their first day of this seven days starts on the evening of the 14th day of the month. It ends on the 15th at
evening. The second day starts on the 15th at evening, and ends on the 16th at evening. This explains how the first day of the Feast of
Unleavened Bread can start on the 14th of the month, like Exodus 12:15 says, yet the first day of Unleavened Bread is also the 15th day of the
month, like Leviticus 23:6 says. This would mean that their days went from evening to evening, allowing the 14th and 15th to both be included
in the first day, and both considered as the first day. This is not a new concept. In Genesis 1:5 it says "and the evening and the morning were
the first day." It seems here that there was only evening and morning, not morning, noon, afternoon, midday, evening, night, and midnight
like we have now. And that "evening" probably meant when it was dark outside, and "morning" was when it was light outside. Genesis 1:5 says
God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night, so we know that God saw it simply in terms of light and dark (or as we say, He
was looking at it in black and white). It makes sense that God would start counting these days at night, because the Passover is done in remembrance
of God bringing them out of Egypt on this same calendar date at night (Deuteronomy 16:1). So if we're looking
at the 14th - 21st in this way, from evening to evening (or a day consisting of evening + morning, in Genesis 1:5 terms), then it is actually
only seven days from the 14th until the 21st, not eight days. for understanding, I'll apply our clock system and say it is seven 24-hour
periods. I believe it's on purpose, for clarity, that the words "of the month at even" were included at the end of Exodus 12:18 to specify
that it's speaking of the 21st as a calendar date, not an evening+morning day. Seeing also that Exodus 12:19 says there should not even be any
leaven found in anyone's house for this seven days, the 14th couldn't be considered as one of the seven days because on the 14th is when
they put the leaven out of the house, meaning that at earlier on the 14th there was leaven found in the house, which would put them in violation. So the calendar date of the
14th can't be considered as the first of the seven days, because it would contain leaven, but if the evening of the 14th was considered the
first day, then it complies. Now let's bring this whole topic back to where it started, which was
Mark 14 and John 12. Okay, so we've seen three ways in which the word "day" is used (1.calendar date | 2.evening+morning period | 3.when it was light outside - God called the light day and the darkness night). There is a
fourth way in which the word "day" is used. And it is not an antiquated way. We still use it this way today, when we say things like "back
in the day," or like older people say, "back in my day." People say "it's a new day in age." The word "day" in these instances is being
used in reference to a loosely defined time period that consists of several days, months, or years. God uses it in this way in Exodus 12:17,
when He says "and ye shall observe the Feast of Unleavened Bread; for this selfsame day have I brought your armies out of the land of Egypt:
Therefore shall ye observe this day in your generations by an ordinance for ever." He's saying observe this "day," but the Feast of Unleavened Bread is actually
a time period of seven days, not just a single day (unless God is speaking of the actual day they left Egypt). So here in Mark 14:1-2, it says after two days was the feast of the passover, and the chief
priests and scribes were planning on how to take Jesus and kill Him, "But they said, Not on the feast day, lest there be an uproar of the people."
It sounds like they are actually on the calendar date of the passover meal (the 14th), but as we see in the next verse and what's mentioned in
John that Jesus is sitting down eating supper, which is not the passover meal. This supper was eaten at Simon the leper's house (Mark 14:3), but He
ate the Passover meal somewhere else (in a large upper room in the city - Mark 14:13-15).
So we know that this is not actually on the 14th, although they
are near the time. Furthermore, the feast day (the Feast of Unleavened Bread), is a period of seven days, and they are using the term
"day" in the way God uses it in Exodus 12:17. So they are somewhere near that seven day period, but they are not already in it. Remember, these
are chief priests here; they know how to plan ahead and carefully orchestrate events, so they are not going to do their planning, and then on
the same day try to go capture and kill Jesus like some dumb thugs. They operate more like lawyers than gangsters and thugs. So understanding
these things, we can see that the time frame mentioned in Mark 14:1-3 is the same as that mentioned in John 12:1-2, and there is no conflict.
So why was Jesus here six days before?
Jesus, being the Passover Lamb, is supposed to be in the house four days before (Exodus 12:3-6). I don't know if He went into the house four days before or six days before, on the day when He actually arrived in town, but either way
He would have been in the house for four days before. I do know that traveling by foot, one can face all sorts of distractions that could delay you, unlike traveling in an automobile where you are insulated from the outside world. So if you need to be somewhere on time, you do best to try to get there early. Now in Mark 14:1, they wouldn't have been plotting a murder on the day of the murder, so we can assume they are having their little meeting before the actual feast day (seven days). We must also remember that although Jesus was the Passover Lamb, He was not yet understood to be the Passover Lamb by everyone, so everybody still had their Passover lamb in all of their houses, as usual, just like every other year. And
He did it also, because He was still of the children of Israel and couldn't break that ordinance, or appear to break it. God told them to observe
this day in their generations by an ordinance forever (Exodus 12:17).
.Mark 14:20 | (May.15.2012) When Jesus says "it is one of the twelve that dippeth with me in the dish" it's possible that the person wasn't dipping at the time Jesus said it, and they forgot to stop watching to see who would do it. However, the one who did end up doing it (Judas) probably realized it when it happened, like Peter realized what he did when he denied Jesus and the cock crowed. This may have caused Judas to feel like Jesus chose him to be the betrayer by purposely dipping with Judas, possibly causing Judas to rebell. However, we know from scripture that Judas was already evil in his heart, but he was hiding it from everyone. We know he was hiding it, because otherwise everyone would have instantly knew that Jesus was referring to Judas.
Day 47: Leviticus 19-20; Mark 14:32-72
.Leviticus 19:3 | (Jan.27.2012) God knows how He made us. From my observation, it appears that He made us to learn by repetition. Here in verse three, God says something to Moses that He didn't say much before. He says "I Am the Lord your God," and keeps repeating this, starting in 18:2 and past 22:16. In fact, He says it over 32 times (sometimes just "I Am The Lord" or "I the Lord"). I stopped counting after the 32nd time in Leviticus 22:16, but He continues to say it more. Why this is special, is that one of the first times He talks to them about being their Lord is in Leviticus 11:45, where it appears that He is reclaiming credit for bringing them out of Egypt. If you remember back in Exodus 33:1, God doesn't expressly claim the credit for bringing the people out of Egypt, but gives the credit to Moses,
saying to Moses, "the people which thou has brought up out of the land of Egypt." That seems like God was sort of disassociating Himself from them. This is special because God has chosen to deal with these people again because Moses pleaded Him to, and the gruesome thing that happened later on in Exodus 32. These people seemed to have gotten on His everlasting nerve, to the point where God told them "Leave me alone" (Exodus 32:9-14). Wow! If you make God say "Leave me alone!" you must be REALLY BAD. Good gracious! (and I mean that literally). So although it looks like God is playing the God Card, which is to say "because I'm God, and I said so," I see it as a much needed reminder, and even an assurance that God is even associating Himself with them.
.Mark 14:36 | (May.14.2012) There was a famous satanic leader that used a perverse version of what Jesus Christ says here to our Father in Heaven. Jesus says to our Father for His will to be done (the Father's will, that is), but the satanic leader says opposite of what Jesus says here. Jesus, being a man in body, with man's inborn mechanisms of self-preservation asks to have his flesh spared in this moment (or at least not to have it done in this way), but then Jesus says "nevertheless not what I will, but what thou wilt." Jesus essentially says here that the will of our Father in Heaven is supreme over man's will. Should the two ever conflict, then man should bow down to the Father's will, no matter how righteous that man may be. On the contrary, the satanic leader tells man to do what he will (for man to hold his own will as supreme). This essentially tells man that man is God; that man is in charge. There is a famous rapper that echoes that satanic leader and also has blatently told man to do his own will, leading many men to follow the ways of Satan. All of them use similar words, but Jesus is speaking to God the Father, while the other guy and the rapper are speaking to man. They are saying the direct opposite of what Jesus says. What did Satan do in the garden of Eden? He told Eve to do what she wanted to do, and disregard what God said not to do. Satan (as the serpent) said to Eve in Genesis 3:5 "ye shall be as gods." One of Satan's main desires is for people to treat themselves as God. This appears to be the epitome of idolatry, pride, and vanity. This is what got Satan (as Lucifer) casted out of Heaven (Isaiah 14:12). He regarded his own will to be supreme to God's. This is also what brought the fall of man. Adam held man's will in higher regard than God's will (esteeming the created to be greater than the creator); man's will over God's will. This is the breaking of the first commandment in Exodus 20:3 "thou shalt have no other gods before me," which includes regarding man as a god, or regarding Satan as a god, or anything else. It is also an attempt to get man to deceive himself, as Galatians 6:3 warns "For if a man think himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceiveth himself." Similarly, Romans 1:21-25 says "...when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22) Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, 23) And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things. 24) Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: 25) Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen." Serving Satan doesn't necessarily mean you must regard Satan as supreme. If you regard yourself as being supreme, you are being obedient to Satan, because you are opposing God's will, treating God as less than the Almighty Supreme Alpha and Omega. Whether you worship yourself, a golden calf, or Satan, or some other person or object, it doesn't matter. It is all generally the same sin that will send you to the lake of fire that was created for Satan and the fallen angels who did the same thing, unless you repent, humble yourself, and bow down to God's will before your judgment comes. However, it will probably first help for you to realize that God wants you to be with Him. He will forgive you (yet, keeping in mind that the Bible says blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is unforgivable as Jesus says in Matthew 12:31-32). Is it possible to still go to Heaven if you have committed that sin that can't be forgiven? At the moment I can't recall any scriptures that answer this (if anyone has scriptures, send them my way), so currently I don't know, but if you've never blasphemed the Holy Ghost, don't do it. Don't even play with the idea of it. If you ever have, I'd suggest still trying to appeal to God. God doesn't want anyone to perish in Hell. Satan, on the other hand is not for you. I can promise you that. He's a liar and a deceiver. He's scared, miserable, and defeated. And it doesn't matter how much your pledge your allegiance to him, you can't trust him. He's still going to lie to you and deceive you. When he was in heaven, he lied, betrayed, and deceived himself, and earned himself a new home in the lake of fire; a fate he'll soon meet. The greatest lie the Devil ever told was to himself. For that, I can only believe that he hates himself. He hates himself for deceiving himself. He hates himself for believing himself. And if you believe him, you'll just remind him of himself and he'll hate you for believing him also. He'll have more respect for you if you don't believe him, not if you do. He'll also hate you if you're with Christ. He's going to hate you either way. In the end, he's not going to protect you. Jesus will protect you. Call out to Jesus. When you realize the situation you're in, call on Jesus. In fact, call on Jesus to help you see the situation you're in. Don't be ashamed to admit that you believed a lie. That's what lies do, they deceive people.
Admit it, ask Jesus to come to you and open your eyes so you can see how to follow Him. Seek the truth like people seek degrees. Jesus is not a gold medal, where only one can win Him. He's accessible. He was even accessible when He walked the earth. He was out in the public. He walked among the people. During His time walking the earth, He was Lord, but He was still a man of the people. He showed compassion and understanding. Our God is a God of the people. He's available to those who seek Him. He's not like a celebrity, protected and tucked away with limited availability. Go after Him with all your heart, all your mind, all your soul. See how a man goes after a woman of his desire, and go after Him more than that. You see how men go after money. Go after Christ much more than that. He's not going to get stolen, spent up, taxed away, and His value does not decrease. His value only increases.
Day 48: Leviticus 21-22; Mark 15
.Leviticus 22:23 | (Jan.28.2012) In the news yesterday (1/27/12), a story made headlines about a six-legged lamb. To many people, it seemed like something new that was happening. However, this happened even way back here in Leviticus, where God even mentions it to the people. Leviticus is believed to have been written between 1450 and 1400 B.C., almost 3,500 years ago. Remember, following genealogy and birth records, the earth is only around 6000 years old according to the Bible. This is further explained in AnswersInGenesis.com. So this type of thing has been known to have happened for more than half of the earth's lifetime. So, when you see strange things like this, don't panic.
It's interesting also to note here in this verse that God says He will accept such an animal that has extra parts or missing parts as a freewill offering, but not for a vow offering. I'm not sure that this would mean a freewill offering is any less serious or important as a vow offering, but just a different scenario, such as the woman in the New Testament who cast her two mites into the treasury, because that's all she had. It wasn't a tithe, it was simply her giving all that she could give. God could simply be opening up the opportunity for those who have less, to give less. I haven't studied vows yet, so I can't say exactly how vows worked in the Bible, but it's also possible that God didn't want to give people the option of making a vow to give one of these rare animals as their offering, because
some people may say "when I get one of these animals, then I will make my offering," but the person probably won't ever get one of these rare occurrences. And maybe it's just as simple as what God says in verse 24 and verse 25, which is not to offer to the Lord that which is bruised, crushed, broken, or blemished. Although we, with our new political correctness would rather just call it rare, special, or something like that so we don't hurt the poor animals feelings, should probably just admit that it is blemished, and therefore not acceptable for a vow. If the president, any president, came to your house to eat, would you offer that to them?
.Leviticus 22:27 | (Jan.28.2012) This may be for a similar to the reason why the Lord commanded their men to be circumcised on the eighth day.
.Leviticus 22:32 | (Jan.28.2012) In Matthew 6:9, in what we know as The Lord's Prayer, Jesus made mention of what this says here.
Day 49: Leviticus 23-24; Mark 16
.Mark 16:1 | (Jan.29.2012) This is also told in Matthew 28:1, except there it just calls her "the other Mary." I believe this Mary (mother of James) is Jesus' mother, because Jesus had a brother named James. If the priests truly regarded Jesus as evil, then it would have been forbidden for them to anoint Him like this, according to Leviticus 10:6. If someone was killed for being evil, then it is considered to be the Lord's will, and if someone openly grieves that person's death, which is considered justice then the wrath that came upon that person may come upon all of the others. So if they truly thought Jesus was evil and deserving of what happened to Him, then I don't believe it would have been lawful for them to do what they were about to go try to do.
.Mark 16:5 | (Jan.29.2012) Luke 24:4 says two men in shining garments, while here it says a young man. Matthew 28:2 speaks about the Angel of the Lord. I'm going to look into this more when I have a moment to study it. Some things in scripture require studying and gaining more understanding, instead of just reading over it. There are certain things mentioned or not mentioned in each of these three verses that I'd like to look into. It's going to be interesting, and I know I'm going to learn something, so check back here later. However, I'm writing my notes from the whole Bible, and I have a lot of other things to cover, so I'm not sure how long before I get back to this verse.
In fact, John 20:12 touches this incidence as well, so maybe (possibly) I'll be able to get into it more when I do notes for that day. If you study it before I do, let me know what you learned. According to what one believer says, it may be as simple as there being two angels on the inside of the tomb, and one on the outside.
.Mark 16:20 | (Jan.29.2012) Notice that they didn't just show, they preached the word everywhere and not just some places. There is no significant change in instruction between then and now, so we must conclude that we are also to go and preach the gospel "to every creature" as it says in verse 15. This means that simply living a good life, and being nice to people is not sufficient. They didn't just preach in a little building on Saturday or Sunday mornings, they preached everywhere. And it says the Lord worked with them, and confirming the word with signs following. It sounds as though the Lord did things after they even left. Also, it didn't say that they always showed or performed signs or wonders themselves, or that in every instance the Lord showed people a sign (although He may have).
Day 50: Leviticus 25; Luke 1:1-38
.Luke 1:1-4 | (Jan.29.2012) It is important that we think about what this is that Luke is saying and why. We may have wondered before why this book is written, if Matthew, Mark, and John exist to tell the story. Wouldn't one book be enough? We also know that Luke is not one of the twelve apostles that walked with Jesus, so we may wonder whether he has knowledge enough to write a gospel account of what happened. Luke answers these things here in the first four verses. He acknowledges that others have written about this life and walk of Jesus and all things surrounding. Although Luke wasn't one of the twelve who walked everywhere with Jesus, he tells us in verse 3 that he did have perfect understanding of all that happened, and according to verse 1, he was a believer of it. He tells us that he's writing so that Theophilus might know the certainty of the things in which he's been instructed.
We have all of the gospels together in front of us, but lets think back to then for a moment. There was no Internet, email, ebooks, radio, TV, or whatever other modern invention that we have now that allows us to mass produce information, along with our own image and personality. Stories and writings floated around from person to person, often without the ability for everyone who received the story to be able to meet the person who was telling it. It adds a little authenticity and believability in the readers mind when they hear it told and affirmed by someone they personally know. Luke had people that he knew personally, who would probably receive the message better if he told it to them, instead of it coming from someone who they do not know, never met, and may never get a chance to meet. He also was better acquainted with the way that Theophilis thought, learned, and understood, and may
have written it in a way that could communicate the message better to him, then perhaps some of the others presented it. Perhaps, for example, the other gospels may have presented all of the information, but didn't present them in the exact order in which they happened, but Theophilus was the type of person that needed to hear it in the order it all happened, so he'd understand it better. I'm not saying that was the case, but just using that as an example of how people learn differently. Also, by writing his account, he was co-signing what had also been written, showing his agreement with it, and further establishing its credibility.
.Luke 1:3 | (Jan.29.2012) Theophilus (theo-phil-us) is said to mean "friend of God."
.Luke 1:7 | (Jan.29.2012) John the Baptist was a miracle baby too, as was Jesus. Jesus was born from a virgin, but John the Baptist was born from an old woman who was barren.
.Luke 1:13 | (Jan.29.2012) This John is John the Baptist.
.Luke 1:15 | (Jan.29.2012) Since it says "neither wine nor strong drink," we can see that wine and strong drink were considered two different things. This is before the day of Pentecost also, we should note, as it will be assumed by some that those people were drunk. Being a person who doesn't drink removes from others the ability to claim that he was drunk when he was prophesying or doing whatever ministry he was doing. I'm sure there were people who tried to say that John was crazy, but one thing they could never say was that he was drunk. People tend not to take what drunk people say very seriously, and sometimes don't even pay attention to what they say, and rightly so.
.Luke 1:16 | (Jan.29.2012) 1:77
.Luke 1:17 | (Jan.29.2012) Elias (Elijah) came in spirit and power through Elisha in 2 Kings 2:4-15.
.Luke 1:37 | (Jan.29.2012) Philippians 4:13
Day 51: Leviticus 26-27; Luke 1:39-80
.Luke 1:41 | (Feb.1.2012) So here we have Mary pregnant with Jesus, who has just been conceived. John the Baptist is about 6 months in Elisabeth's womb. He's a miracle baby. Jesus is probably about one to three weeks conceived in Mary's womb. He's a miracle baby. When Jesus enters into the house, John the Baptist leaps in the womb and his mother becomes filled with the Holy Ghost. It appears that Mary, is of course already filled with the Holy Spirit, being filled with Jesus, who is the fullness of the Godhead bodily. And it also appears there is some meeting between Jesus and John the Baptist here, although they are still in each other's mother's wombs. And what it says here in verse 41, is that when Elisabeth heard Mary's voice greet her then John leaped in her womb. John was first filled with the Holy Spirit, which we are told in Luke 1:15. We should also note too, that this
occurs before the day of Pentecost, meaning that the day of Pentecost does not mark the beginning of people being filled with the Holy Ghost. It should also be noted that neither John the Baptist here or Elisabeth are said to have spoken in tongues as evidence of being filled with the Spirit, although they are truly filled with the Holy Spirit. Jesus has just been conceived also, but He's already a very real person, which tells us that babies of any age are people, not to be aborted as if they are non-entities.
.Luke 1:44 | (Feb.1.2012) Elisabeth in her own words about the babe leaping in her womb when she heard Elisabeth's salutation. Or to say it another way, when the word passed from Mary's mouth into Elisabeth's ear. We call it sound waves, but there was a little something more powerful than sound waves traveling between Mary and Elisabeth's bodies here.
.Luke 1:53 |
.Luke 1:56 |
.Luke 1:59 | (Feb.1.2012) They called John the Baptist Zacharias, before his mother corrected it to what his name was supposed to be. This verse seems to hint at the idea that children were named on the 8th day, which must have been their custom, because in 2:21 it's very clear that Jesus was named on the 8th day, even though they already knew what His name would be before He was even born.
.Luke 1:65-66 |
.Luke 1:73 |
.Luke 1:74 |
.Luke 1:75 |
.Luke 1:76 |
.Luke 1:77 |
.Luke 1:78 |
.Luke 1:79 | (Feb.1.2012) highlighted "to guide our feet" | Mark 4:16 and Psalms 23:4 also mention the shadow of death, and Psalms 23:3, 37:23, and 119:133 also speak of God leading one's path/steps (guide our feet). Proverbs 4:10-19 and 16:9 also speak of the Lord ordering one's path or guiding their steps.
.Luke 1:80 | (Feb.1.2012) John grew up in the deserts away from Jesus and Israel. This is why John and Jesus didn't know each other much as adults (outside of the Spirit) though they were 2nd cousins; Mary and Elisabeth were cousins (verse 36).
Day 52: Numbers 1-2; Luke 2
.Luke 2:1 | (Feb.2.2012) Tax the whole world? I'm not sure if he literally means tax the whole world; Or the world as they knew it. This would be interesting to look into. How far wide did Caesar's tax extend, and was anyone else taxing people?
.Luke 2:8-11 | (Feb.2.2012) These shepherds were abiding in the field, because they were the type of shepherds who literally watched over sheep (not church members), and the angel came upon them. An angel of the Lord also came to a woman out in the field in Judges 13:9, and it was for the same purpose, to tell them about a child that would be born, Samson.
.Luke 2:21 | (Feb.2.2012) Like John the Baptist in Luke 1:59, Jesus is also named on the 8th day. This was their custom. It seems odd to us, since we name our children on the first day they are born, but it's not so odd in that you get to know the child for eight days, and can give them a name that has a meaning to fit their personality better. On the contrary, God named Adam and his wife on the day He created them (Genesis 5:2).
.Luke 2:22 | (Feb.2.2012) Leviticus 12:2-4 says this time of purification is 40 days.
.Luke 2:22-23 | (Feb.2.2012) I'm typing out these two verses because they are drastically changed in the NIV version and perhaps some other versions:
22) "And when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished, they brought him to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord;
23) "(As it is written in the law of the Lord, Every male that openeth the womb shall be called holy to the Lord;)"
Day 53: Numbers 3-4; Luke 3
.Luke 3:3,4-6 | (Feb.11.2012) Notice here that John the Baptist is preaching the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins, however, Jesus has not died on the cross yet, but apparently, since Jesus dies once for all (into the future, and into the past) they can still likely gain salvation status at this point through believing although they knew not yet The name to confess yet. However, I'm sure they could confess "Emmanuel," because that name was already known. This baptism may have just been for remission of sins. However, John the Baptist is a prophet, and his greatest prophecy is the coming of the Messiah, so although it hasn't happened yet (the Messiah on the cross), he still taught that people must look to the Lord for salvation in verses 4, 5, and 6.
.Luke 3:7 | (Feb.11.2012) Other books in the Bible tell us that he was talking to the Pharisees here.
.Luke 3:10-14 | (Feb.11.2012) John didn't just baptise them, he called them to repent and change also.
.Luke 3:11 | (Feb.11.2012) James 2:15-17
.Luke 3:13 | (Feb.11.2012) He doesn't just say "don't steal," but it is still stealing. They might have thought in their mind "well, it's not really stealing, it's just our custom." It's just their custom to steal and rob people, but it's still stealing and robbing, and it's still wrong, even in today's industries for people who do this.
.Luke 3:14 | (Feb.11.2012) He didn't just tell the soldiers to do their job. Today, soldiers do violence and claim no personal responsibility because they're just "doing their job," but we see here that's not acceptable. He told the soldiers not to do violence to anyone. What a bold statement that is. Again, he had to leave very little wiggle room. (Feb.22.2015) I wouldn't say this applies for all situations for all soldiers or police officers, etc. However, I do think that it means that being hired to do a "job" does not excuse a person from personal accountability. It may excuse them in the eyes of the law, but in God's eyes, an individual is still largely responsible for their own personal actions. Some may disagree, but if the soldier is
ordered to go stab their own mother, because it's their job and they just need to do their job without question, then I think it will be safe to say that the soldier will easily recognize that, in actuality, they are personally responsible in the matter, and may choose to exercise restraint. Sure, they may face consequences for non-compliance, but they do recognize that they do indeed bear some personal responsibility for the actions of their own hands, and they do have a choice. It's also interesting to note that he told this to them, not their commanding officer. He also didn't tell them to quit their position as soldiers.
Day 54: Numbers 5-6; Luke 4
.Luke 4:1-2 | (Feb.13.2012) Jesus was tempted by the devil for 40 days while being full of the Holy Ghost. For some reason, I mistakenly thought that He fasted for 40 days and then He was tempted, but looking back at the scriptures, I see that the tempting happened during the 40 days, and I'm sure contained much more temptation than the three instances we are told. We're talking about Satan here. He doesn't just tempt people once or twice a month, especially not when so much is at stake. From Jesus enduring this temptation, I believe He received a crown of life (James 1:12) if He didn't already have it. Now let's look back at the timing of this temptation. In verse 2 here, it mentions things in a different order than Mark 1, and also Matthew 4:1-3. They all mention the happenings in a slightly different order, but that is just the order that they are
mentioned in; they do not say that the events occurred in that order. Let's start in Matthew 4:1-3. It says "1) Then was Jesus led up of the spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil. 2) And when he had fasted forty days and forty nights, he was afterward an hungred. 3) And when the tempter came to him, he said, If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread." First of all, verse one tells us why He was led by the Holy Spirit into the wilderness (Matthew says spirit, Luke says Holy Ghost). The purpose was to be tempted. Verse 2 tells us that after the 40 days he was hungry, which is the same thing Luke 4:2 says. However, Matthew 4:3 does NOT say "And then when the tempter came..."; It says "And when the tempter came..." We don't know when the tempter came. We are not told that, and we can't just assume that just because it was mentioned in verse
3, that it happened after whatever was mentioned in verses one and two. Luke 4 specifies it and says "Being forty days tempted of the devil, and in those days he did eat nothing: and when they were ended, he afterward hungered." We also know that it was forty days because of what Satan does in verse 9. He takes Him to Jerusalem (Luke 2:42 says Jesus was acquainted with Jerusalem before this). Unless he just spiritually teleported Jesus there, which I don't think he did, I'm assuming they just walked (because they didn't have cars) and that would have taken some time, especially for someone without the extra energy from food. So that had to happen during the 40 days, and not just all in a moment of time after the 40 days, as if Satan did it all in a 15 minute magic show. How tempting is that? Satan likes to sneak up on people when they're not expecting the temptation. He likes to use other people and things to tempt people, and sometimes he likes to
act like it's innocent and like he has nothing to do with the temptation. I would imagine Satan tried to pull all of his best tricks. Yet, Jesus could still have identified it as Satan, especially if He was full of the Holy Spirit. Like that time Peter said something wrong to Him and Jesus looked at Peter and said "get behind me Satan," knowing that Satan had somehow found a way to use Peter to tempt Jesus. Mark 1:9-13 tells us this happened immediately after Jesus was baptised in the Jordan by John the Baptist, and is somewhat specific in saying the tempting happened during the 40 days.
.Luke 4:3 | (Feb.13.2012) In case it's questioned, it's mentioned here that the devil = Satan. Look at verses 3 and 8.
Day 55: Numbers 7-8; Luke 5
.Luke 5:1-11 | (Feb.15.2012 by Lynnelle Harrell)
After Jesus finished speaking to the crowd, feeding them spiritually, helping them. He did not stop there. His teaching would continue and this lesson would be experiential in nature. Christ instructs Simon to launch his net out into the deep to which Simon basically said we’ve worked all night and haven’t caught a thing, which is probably why they were out of their ships and washing their nets. They were calling it a day, they were okay with having caught nothing, going home empty handed. But Simon did not stop there, he actually stated his present circumstance (how they had not caught any fish), but obeyed Christ anyway. After all, Simon had just witnessed Christ teach the crowd, and that must have been a powerful experience to watch. I wonder if Christ also used this as a demonstration to the men who would become his disciples to show them that not only would they become fishers of men, but that after He returned to Heaven, they (including peter) would receive the gift of the Holy Spirit (which empowers us, plunges us into the deep, spiritually speaking), and their “spiritual” nets would be full of fish. These "fish" are not actually fish, but are men. To call them fish is just a metaphor. I wonder if Simon whose surname was Peter (and the other disciples) after he denied Christ three times felt like giving up, feeling unsuccessful (that night anyway) as a “fisher of men.” But Christ, before he ascends into heaven, tells them to tarry and wait for the Holy Spirit (plunge your net into the deep…even after you think you've failed). Don’t Give up!!! And what happens afterwards? Simon Peter preaches perhaps one of the greatest sermons afterwards, mentioned in Acts chapter 2, and in verse 41 it mentions: 41) Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. (That’s a lot of fish, I mean men!!!)
So we see a practical lesson Christ taught them concerning trusting him to catch fish and a spiritual lesson of catching men! Christ, the son of God is such an awesome teacher!
Don’t give up, plunge into the deep when Christ tells you. There will be a harvest!
Day 56: Numbers 9-11; Luke 6
.Luke 6:1 | (Feb.15.2012) "the second sabbath after the first" - the sabbaths were numbered.
.Luke 6:2 | (Feb.15.2012) Contrary to what they are accusing them of, it is lawful to eat from the field on the sabbath (Leviticus 25:6) for the sabbath year at least.
.Luke 6:9-10 | (Feb.15.2012) to save the other man's life or destroy Jesus' life. They were there to try to destroy Jesus' life, so if they answered either way, they'd be accusing themselves of being wrong. If they said it wasn't lawful to destroy life, then they'd be guilty of working to destroy Jesus' life, but if they said it was lawful to destroy life, then it must also be lawful to save it, so Jesus would still be justified. On top of that, it sounds like Jesus didn't even lift a finger when healing the man's hand, so it could also be said that He didn't even do anything.
"So what did He do?" a judge would ask.
They'd respond "Well, your honor, he told the man to stretch out his hand."
Judge: "Okay, so then what did He do?"
Them: "The man's hand became whole, sir."
Judge: "Okay, that's wonderful, but what did Jesus do?"
Them: "Um, he was there, and... and... he looked at the man's hand."
Judge: "You were there too, and you looked at the man's hand too, did you not?"
Them: "Yes, your honor."
Judge: "Yes, your honor what?"
Them: "Yes, your honor, we were there too and we looked at the man's hand too."
Judge: "So, is that a confession? Are you here to turn yourself in for being guilty of a crime?"
Them: "No, your honor."
Judge: "Well, then why are you here? To turn someone else in for doing the same thing that you just admitted to me that you yourselves did?"
Them: "Well, we just thought that... well... we don't know, sir."
Judge: "Okay then, you're free to go home. And don't come back in here and waste my time again like you did today."
Them: "Thank you, your honor. It won't happen again."
Judge: (shakes his head)
.Luke 6:13 | (Feb.15.2012) It says Jesus chose twelve from among His disciples and named them apostles. This means there were more than 12 disciples. However, the term "12 disciples" is sometimes used when referring to the 12 apostles. They were apostles, but they were also His disciples.
.Luke 6:20-22 | (Feb.15.2012) His disciples were poor, hungry, and weeping. They were even hated. They were not wealthy, loved, and accepted by all the world. As we see in Numbers 11:18-20, there is a difference between being hungry and just wanted something different to eat; and there's a difference between weeping for sorrow and weeping because you're just being a big spoiled baby.
Day 57: Numbers 12-14; Luke 7
.Numbers 12:1 | (Feb.16.2012) Miriam is Moses and Aaron's sister. This here shows racism.
.Numbers 12:7-8 | (Feb.16.2012) God says here that with Moses He'll speak "mouth to mouth, even apparently, and not in dark speeches," which tells us that He has a different way of speaking to different people.
.Numbers 12:14 | (Feb.16.2012) She has no shame. Let her learn her lesson and be humbled.
.Numbers 12:15 | (Feb.16.2012) This is what was commanded in Leviticus 14:8 regarding leprosy.
.Numbers 13:6 | (Feb.16.2012) *Caleb. Remember this name mentioned here. This is Jesus' family tribe. Caleb will stand out (verse 30). Also see 14:24.
.Numbers 13:8 | (Feb.16.2012) "Oshea" is Joshua (13:16; 14:6). Ephraim is Joseph's son (Genesis 46:20).
.Numbers 13:11 | (Feb.16.2012) Manasseh is Joseph's son also (Genesis 46:20). Around my way, there's a city called Manassas. I'm not sure if this name is any relation in any way, but I do know that the name Judah in the Old Testament is Judas in the New Testament, so the name Manassas could have very well came from Manasseh somewhere way down the line.
.Numbers 13:20 | (Feb.16.2012) "And be ye of good courage" These words are very important (Joshua 1:18). Sometimes people say little stuff like this to us, and we don't know why they're saying it. The next time someone says something like this to you (i.e. be strong, hold your head up, keep the faith, stay encouraged), then pay attention and remember it. Perhaps even write it down and keep it in your pocket, because like these people, you don't know how much you may need that reminder around the corner. These may be words from God to help you through something that's coming.
.Numbers 13:25 | (Feb.16.2012) "after forty days" (14:34)
.Numbers 13:26-27 | (Feb.16.2012) highlighted "brought back word unto them, and .... shewed them the fruit of the land." and "surely it floweth with milk and honey" (the land of milk and honey).
.Numbers 13:29 | (Feb.16.2012) Deuteronomy 7:1
.Numbers 13:30 | (Feb.16.2012) 13:6
.Numbers 13:32 | (Feb.16.2012) "an evil report" because God said they should overcome them little by little, even chasing them out with bees, hornets, not all at once overthrown (Exodus 23:23-31). This is where the "be ye of good courage" comes into play (13:20). Numbers 32:9; Deuteronomy 7:17-18.
.Numbers 13:33 | (Feb.16.2012) "grasshoppers" Amos 7:1
.Luke 7:21 | (Feb.16.2012) Instead of just giving John the Baptist an audible answer, He showed and proved.
.Luke 7:22 | (Feb.16.2012) This was a prophecy from the Old Testament, which John the Baptist is familiar with, so this report will really speak to Him and confirm what he needs to know.
Day 58: Numbers 15-16; Luke 8:1-25
.Numbers 15:35-36 | (Feb.17.2012) This contrasts with how Jesus Christ healed on the sabbath and what he said (Luke 6:6-10).
.Numbers 16:2 | (Feb.17.2012) That's a lot of princes. Makes me wonder what their definition of "prince" is. Verse 15 also says 250 censers. Each of them had a censer.
.Numbers 16:15 | (Feb.17.2012) Moses stops standing up for the people.
.Numbers 16:15 | (Feb.17.2012) 16:2
.Numbers 16:21 | (Feb.17.2012) God repeats this in 16:45.
.Numbers 16:32 | (Feb.17.2012) An earthquake? I've heard of earthquakes within the last couple years doing this; swallowing up houses and people.
.Numbers 16:35 | (Feb.17.2012) This is the same 250 famous princes from 16:2,17. Numbers 26:9-11 talks about this instance too and gives the names of some of the people.
.Numbers 16:41 | (Feb.17.2012) Why are they blaming Moses and Aaron?
.Numbers 16:42 | (Feb.17.2012) 16:19-22
.Numbers 16:45 | (Feb.17.2012) God said this also in 16:21. This is about the eleventh time.
.Numbers 16:49 | (Feb.17.2012) from the Levites.
.Luke 8:5 | (Feb.17.2012) It was people that fell by the wayside, not seed (verse 12). Deliver us from evil (Matthew 6:13).
.Luke 8:6 | (Feb.17.2012) Relevant to 1 Corinthians 3:16, where Paul said he plants and Apollos waters.
.Luke 8:10 | (Feb.17.2012) 8:17
.Luke 8:14 | (Feb.17.2012) "choked with cares and riches and pleasures of this life" may have had some relevance to what happens in verse 33 where the herd of swine is "choked."
.Luke 8:17 | (Feb.17.2012) 8:10
.Luke 8:18 | (Feb.17.2012) "from him shall be taken" which I'd assume is taken by the Devil. "even that which he seemeth to have." The keyword here is "seemeth" because if you can't hold on to it or keep it, you don't really have it, do you?
.Luke 8:21 | (Feb.17.2012) When He says "My mother and my brethren are these..." He's speaking of them among Him. And He says those "which hear the word of God, and do it." James 1:22 speaks of being doers, not just hearers of God's word. In other words, it's not just good enough to "go to church."
.Luke 8:22 | (Feb.17.2012) Matthew 8:24
.Luke 8:23 | (Feb.17.2012) Sounds to me like Jesus rebukes a hurricane. It says "a storm of wind" and gives a description that would fit a hurricane.
.Luke 8:24-25 | (Feb.17.2012) Jesus rebukes the wind and the raging of the water. Here it doesn't say He rebuked the water, but the raging of it, like a parent telling their child to "sit down and be quiet." He's asking them "Where is your faith?" after they said "we perish."
Day 59: Numbers 17-19; Luke 8:26-56
.Luke 8:26 | (Feb.18.2012) Matthew 8:28 says Gergesenes, instead of Gadarenes.
.Luke 8:27 | (Feb.18.2012) Matthew 8:28 says two men. (underlined "out of the city")
.Luke 8:29 | (Feb.18.2012) highlighted "For he had commanded the unclean spirit to come out of the man. For oftentimes it had caught him..." We are told in Matthew 12:45 that when a spirit returns, it brings seven other spirits with him that are more wicked than himself.
.Luke 8:31 | (Feb.18.2012) highlighted "into the deep"
.Luke 8:39 | (Feb.18.2012) I call him The Lone Disciple.
.Luke 8:43 | (Feb.18.2012) "spent all her living upon physicians" - In case you thought this was something new.
Day 60: Numbers 20-22; Luke 9:1-27
.Numbers 20:1 | I don't know what the first month was called, but the second month was called Zif (1 Kings 6:1), the eighth month was called Bul (1 Kings 6:38), and the 11th month was called Sebat (Zechariah 1:7). Miriam the prophetess was the sister of Aaron and Moses.
.Numbers 20:8-11 | the Lord tells Moses to SPEAK to the rock, but Moses being disobedient does not do as told. Instead, he strikes the rock twice with his rod in verse 11. Notice that it says the rock shall give forth HIS water. If we look at 1 Corinthians 10:4, it begins to become apparent that the rock was Christ, which Moses
smote with his rod. I'm shocked to think that Moses struck Jesus twice with his rod, but from the wording, that seems to be pretty much what happened. In Deuteronomy 8:15, it says this was a rock of flint. Job 38:30 may be a reference to this stone/water thing.
It's so funny (and hypocritical) that Moses calls the people rebels in verse 10 while he himself is about to commit one of his most rebellious acts by striking this Rock instead of speaking to it like God told him to do. To be fair though, God did tell Moses in Exodus 17:6 that he would smite the rock in Horeb so the people could drink,
but here in Numbers 20, Moses is not in Horeb, he's in Kadesh, which is an 11 days journey away from Horeb (Deuteronomy 1:2). See my commentary for Exodus 17:6 on January 27th / Day27. Exodus 17:2 and Num 20:3 talks about how the people chode Moses (spoke angrily or scolded him) for bringing them out there,
but still he should not have let them provoke him to be disobedient. Likewise, when people on your job, in your house, or at your church house try to chew you out for your obedience to God, you should not let it hinder you from doing what you're supposed to do or acting how you're supposed to act. Do not allow others to cause you to doubt God.
.Numbers 20:12 | Moses ended up in a good deal of trouble, which the people suffered also, because of his unbelief (and subsequent disobedience).
.Numbers 20:19 | "And the children of Israel said unto him, We will go by the high way..." This must be where we get the word "highway" from. I always wondered about that.
.Luke 9:2 | Notice that the message of God did not go forth by them simply going out and being nice and living right. The word went forth and came unto you and I because they went and preached it. These days, some people say to shut your mouth and simply live your life right and let your lifestyle speak for you and that you don't have to even talk about God.
I don't know where they get that idea from, because that is not the way we're shown here. These disciples were doing some very serious miracles while Jesus was still walking the earth, yet they still had to go preach the kingdom of God. We are not doing so much greater than they, that God's Word does not need to be preached today. Neither does it say that they went on
that one day a week into some building with a pulpit in order to preach. It was not restricted to some secluded time and place then, and should not be restricted now. In verse 6, it says they "went through the towns, preaching the gospel, and healing every where."
.Luke 9:3-4 | Notice, they were told not to take anything. Effectively preaching God's gospel does not require multimillion dollar facilities, expensive "church" clothes, $5000 pens, expensive transportation or hardly any other expenses that are often claimed to be absolute necessities for ministry. A functional meeting place,
a home, some form of transportation (and a Bic pen) may help, but even they are not always necessities. God can use what you have, just as He used the rod that was already in Moses' hand. I'm mentioning this not only because we've gotten way too extravagant these days, but because I want you to know that you are not required to have these things in
order to be effective at reaching/preaching/teaching others about God. You also do not need these things to show as evidence that God is on your side. Rest assured that there are some who do have these things who are still far from God, or far from being effective in ministry.
We should not be placing all of our focus to attaining these things or waiting for these things before we feel we are equipped. There is very little equipment actually necessary when it comes to ministry, so don't let the lack of these things hold you back.
.Luke 9:5 | They were not told to make a snide remark or to take offense when they weren't received. Sometimes we've just got to keep on moving. If we claim to work for Jesus, we should not get offended and upset when people will not receive us. When someone doesn't want to hear about God or His way, it should not cause us to make arrogant or offensive remarks or
comments to them. I've seen people get upset and say "Well God Bless you!" or "I'mma pray for you!" but they say it
in such a nasty way that you can clearly tell they don't actually mean "may God bless you," but are only saying "God bless you!" as an alternative way of saying "God damn you!" (damn means damnation or condemnation). If you're going to say "God bless you," mean it and act like you mean it.
.Luke 9:19 | Matthew 16:14
.Luke 9:22 | Jesus was rejected by the elders, chief priests, and scribes. Again, He was rejected by those in the community who the people looked at as their spiritual guides. The people esteemed them as their religious authorities. Do not be surprised if you see some of the men and women in religious leadership positions reject the truth of God.
It was done then with Jesus and it will be done now in this day in age as well. It is nothing new for the people who claim to be authorities on God's Word to reject it. Do not be discouraged by their presence. And do not be so surprised when you find out there are wolves in sheep's clothing. Remember that wolves usually run in packs and look out
for each other, ordain, and validate each other, and also that our seamstresses now have better tools to make better looking, tailored sheep clothing these days.
.Luke 9:23-25 | We are expected to soon face very ferocious trials, afflictions, and persecution (possibly even deadly) for following or preaching the Word of God. There are some, even Christians, who will tell you to pick up your weapons and fight and even kill those who are coming against you to try to preserve your life. But I am brought back
to this passage of scripture. I am also brought back to Matthew 5:39 "resist not evil" and Matthew 10:28 "fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul
and body in Hell." Knowing the level of corruption that rules this world (much of which is unknown by the masses) and the corruption to come, I have to ask myself, do I love this wretched world so much that I would risk my eternity to remain in it for a few more years? Man, please! We should do the Lord's work here as long as we can, but if such
persecution comes and we are not able to flee it, we have been given an example and should do as Jesus, John the Baptist, Paul the apostle, Stephen, and go with the Lord.
| Search by Book