Tag: Matthew

The Wedding Feast

The Wedding Feast

by preacherpollard ♥ 0 Leave a Comment

Saturday’s Column: Learning From Lehman

On more than one occasion, Jesus compared the kingdom of heaven to a wedding feast. I’d like to focus on the parable contained in Matthew chapter 22 specifically. Jesus said, “The kingdom of heaven is like a certain king who arranged a marriage for his son, and sent out his servants to call those who were invited to the wedding; and they were not willing to come. Again, he sent out other servants, saying, ‘Tell those who are invited, “See, I have prepared my dinner; my oxen and fatted calf are killed, and all things are ready. Come to the wedding.”’ But they made light of it and went their ways, one to his own farm, another to his business. And the rest seized his servants, treated them spitefully, and killed them. But when the king heard about it, he was furious. And he sent out his armies, destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city. Then he said to his servants, ‘The wedding is ready, but those who were invited were not worthy. Therefore go into the highways, and as many as you find, invite to the wedding.’ So those servants went out into the highways and gathered together all whom they found, both bad and good. And the wedding hall was filled with guests.

“But when the king came in to see the guests, he saw a man there who did not have on a wedding garment. So he said to him, ‘Friend, how did you come in here without a wedding garment?’ And he was speechless. Then the king said to his servants, ‘Bind him hand and foot, take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’ For many are called, but few are chosen.” (Matthew 22:2-14).

Looking back on this parable with the benefit of hindsight, knowing the centuries of the Church’s history, it’s easy to understand most of what Jesus is saying. The king had an initial group of people that were invited to wedding, but refused the invitation. In the same way, the invitation of the gospel was initially given to Jews only. However, especially among the religious establishment—Pharisees and Sadducees—there was widespread rejection of that invitation. So, the king opens up the invitation to everyone in the highways, both bad and good, just as the invitation of the gospel was extended to Gentiles and Jews alike—everyone is invited.

However, there’s the strange detail near the end that can confuse us in our modern times, living so far detached from the culture that Jesus gave the parable to. We see a man at the wedding who doesn’t have wedding clothes on, and he gets kicked out of the wedding because of it! In our culture, we might wonder about this man, perhaps even feel sorry for him. Perhaps he didn’t have good clothes for a wedding because he was poor and couldn’t afford them. But the way we do weddings is different from the way they did weddings in Jesus’ time and culture. Back in that day, the master of the wedding feast would provide garments for all of the wedding guests. In fact, it would be a great insult for someone to refuse to wear wedding garments at the feast. That’s why the man is speechless when the king asks him how he got in there without wedding garments.

What does that represent? Baptism. As many of us as are baptized into Christ have put on Christ (paraphrase Galatians 3:27). Just as the master of the feast provides wedding clothes for the guests, God provided baptism for us. And just as the man without wedding garments was thrown out, none of us should expect to attend the wedding feast if we aren’t wearing the garments God provided at His own cost.

Andy Wright
Unleavened Religion

Unleavened Religion

by preacherpollard ♥ 2 Comments

Friday’s Column: Brent’s Bent

The misunderstanding of the disciples recorded in Matthew 16.5–12 and Mark 8.13-21 has always amused me. Jesus warned them about the leavening of the Pharisees and Sadducees as they sailed away from Magadan, where He had just encountered some annoying members of those religious sects. According to Matthew and Mark, the disciples assumed Jesus was disappointed that they had forgotten to bring bread. Instead, Jesus reminded them that He had recently fed a total of 5,000 and 4,000 men with only a few loaves and fish. In Matthew’s account, the disciples finally realized Jesus was referring to their teaching when he repeated that they should avoid the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees. Luke tells us that Jesus had also given a similar warning to the people (Cf. Luke 12.1-2).

Pharisees and Sadducees crop up in every era, and it is vital to identify the error we should avoid. Thus, let us think about the fallacies against which Jesus cautions. We begin with the issues that characterized the Pharisees. The original Pharisees, whose name comes from the Hebrew word for “to separate,” were strict observers of the elders’ traditions. The Pharisees separated themselves by refusing to assimilate into Greek culture. Though laudable, the Pharisees eventually revered their traditions as sacred as the Law of God, which Moses received on Mount Sinai. 

We can find similar practices today in creeds, catechisms, disciplines, and papal decrees. These traditions, however, need to be more trustworthy. Stories can be altered, manipulated, and distorted to the point where the original narrator would not recognize them. The only way to avoid this is to keep the divine inspiration flowing throughout the distribution process. God only put such safeguards in place for His Word. Traditions can also be harmful to God’s Law. The ancient Pharisee, for example, interpreted the Law according to his rules, rendering it null and void. And so, the Pharisees would do things like pay tithes on items in their herb garden while neglecting the weightier matters of the Law (Matthew 23.23; Luke 11.42). Jesus called them experts at setting aside God’s commands to keep their traditions (Mark 7.9).

And what of the Sadducees? The Sadduccees’ origins are up for debate. The Sadducees claimed descendancy from a priest named Zadok, who anointed Solomon as king (cf. 1 Kings 1.39). On the other hand, the Sadducees were most likely the followers of a man named Zadok, who had been a pupil of the Pharisee Antigonus of Sokho. Zadok misinterpreted what Antigonus of Sokho said to mean there was no afterlife. (According to Antigonus of Sokho, one should obey God out of love and reverence rather than expectation of reward.) The spreading of Zadok’s beliefs to others formed the Sadduceean sect. The Sadducees were similar to the Epicureans, except that the former believed God created the world and governed it through his providence. 

The Sadducees were wealthy and boasted of superior intelligence. Herod was a Sadducee who led the Galilean Sadducees. As a result, the group is also referred to in the Gospels as Herodians (Mark 3.6). The leavening agent introduced by this sect is probably called pseudo-intellectualism. Sadduceeism exists not only in the past; we can also find it today under different names such as atheism, deism, agnosticism, positivism, rationalism, and Erastianism. We typically observe these beliefs in opposition to modern Phariseeism.

But what do the Pharisees and Sadducees have in common? To put it briefly: hypocrisy, lack of knowledge of God’s Word, and hostility toward Jesus. Jesus more effectively exposed their hypocrisy than I could, so I will let His condemnations stand in my stead. So, let us first observe how both groups failed to understand how the prophecies of God fit into the divine plan. They were not spiritually enlightened enough to see the signs that God was giving through Christ. As a result, they did not benefit from Jesus’ teachings in the here and now or the hereafter. (This is especially true of Jesus’ warnings in Matthew 24 about the Romans destroying Jerusalem. Cf. Matthew 24.15, 28.) If the Pharisees had been less concerned with tradition and the Sadducees with looking smart, they could have saved themselves by actually listening to Jesus’ words. But today’s society is just as blind to God’s Word and, therefore, blind to vital information.

Second, there was another thing upon which Pharisees and Sadducees could agree. They both opposed Jesus and could put aside their differences to crucify Him. The proverb, “The enemy of my enemy is my friend,” has been around for a long time; scholars traced the earliest known use of the phrase back to a 4th century BC Indian Sanskrit. And unfortunately, even those who advocate opposing errors frequently join forces to fight God’s truth today. The Pharisees act piously while ignoring God’s goodness, and the Sadducees claim scholarship while opposing God’s truth.

When we consider the errors Jesus found in the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees, we can appreciate the importance of His warning. The Bible emphasizes the pervasiveness of leaven. Any substance you add it to will be altered. For example, accepting sinful behavior in Corinth introduced a type of leaven (1 Corinthians 5.6). A Christian had married his father’s wife! Even the heathen, according to Paul, would not do such a thing. As a result, Christians must discipline the sinner to correct this error. And, according to Galatians 5.9, a little false teaching, like yeast, can leaven the church. In this context, Paul refers to the Judaisers’ negative influence on the Galatian saints. Paul expressed his surprise that a false gospel could easily persuade them in Galatians 1.6-7. In Galatians 3.1, Paul even says it is as if the Judaisers bewitched them.

The leaven of Phariseeism and Sadduceeism can cause us to be hypocritical, remove the boundaries of belief, and lead us to false doctrines. Their teachings can demoralize us and make us feel hopeless if we don’t have faith. We must also be aware that false teaching can discourage our temperament and behavior, even leading to blasphemy. If you recall the context upon which I based this article, Jesus separated Himself from the Pharisees and Sadducees by crossing the sea, which may be a good symbol of the great chasm between the righteous and the wicked. We must also distance ourselves from the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees today. Let us be more like good King Josiah of whom God said walked righteously without departing to the right or left (2 Kings 22.2).

Brent Pollard
Darkness, Earthquakes, And The Dead Walking!

Darkness, Earthquakes, And The Dead Walking!

by preacherpollard ♥ 2 Comments

Tuesday’s Column: Dale Mail

Dale Pollard

In Matthew 27 we find the start of what appears to be a mixture of supernatural and natural phenomena. 

Clearly, Matthew, Mark, and Luke (the inspired authors of the synoptic gospels) make an airtight case for the diety of Jesus. Additionally, three extra biblical historians validate their accounts as well: Thallus, Africanus (the name of Janelle’s and my future first born— I hope), and Phlegon. 

The Darkness 

“From noon until three in the afternoon darkness came over the land.” Matt. 27.45 

Phlegon records in the 2nd Century AD, 

“…in the time of Tiberius Caesar, at full moon, there was a full eclipse of the sun from the sixth hour to the ninth—manifestly that one of which we speak. But what has an eclipse in common with an earthquake, the rending of rocks, and the resurrection of the dead, and so great a perturbation throughout the universe? Surely no such event as this is recorded for a long period. But it was a darkness induced by God, because the Lord happened then to suffer.”

Not that we need Phlegon to confirm what God told us three times, but it’s interesting! 

The Earthquake That Freed The Dead 

Beginning in v.51ff, an earthquake splits the veil in the temple. The veil wasn’t a thin piece of fabric either— it’s thickness was equivalent to a man’s hand. 

Next, the earthquake (used directly or providentially by God) cracks the circular stones open and the dead walk the earth. There’s some discussion over the identity of these “Saints” or “Holy ones” but it’s likely that they are followers of God who died in the past. Whether they were faithful servants that we read about in the Old Testament or followers of Jesus who were killed for their loyalty isn’t made clear in the text. My personal opinion on the matter is that they are Old Testament followers of God as this would indicate to “many” that a new Covenant or Testament is being fulfilled. These risen ancient followers would effectively convince those following the Jewish religion that Jesus is now who they should look to, and not Moses or Elijah (see the Transfiguration, Matt.17). 

The Timeline Of Events 

View One Of Chronology: 

“The dead rise with Christ.”

Matthew captures the magnitude of Jesus’ death on the cross by describing the abnormal events surrounding his death in chapter 27. It’s important that the reader keep in mind the goal of the letter, and that’s Jesus. The tombs splitting open, then, likely occurred during the death of Jesus. After three days, the dead would then emerge along with Jesus and appear to many. 

Matthew records what literally takes place, then, as well as alludes to the Day of His return. On that Day, all of the dead in Christ will rise. 

View Two Of Chronology: 

“The dead rose first before Jesus.”

The Bible is saturated in types and apocalyptic language. The New Testament brings a new light and depth to the things of the past. For instance, the flood account directs our minds to the second destruction of earth. The crossing of the Red Sea alludes to baptism. The blueprint of the tabernacle is symbolic of church and the entrance to her. 

With that in mind, 1 Thessalonians 4.16 says, 

“For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the voice of an Archangel, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first.”

This seems to indicate an order of resurrection. Those who followed God in life— rise first. This would fit beautifully with Matthew’s record of events in Matthew 27. 

View Three of Chronology: 

“The dead rise at the death of Christ, but enter Jerusalem three days later with Jesus.” 

The NIV suggests that the dead were resurrected when Jesus died and then went into Jerusalem after Jesus’ resurrection. A number of theologians and Christians agree with this view. 

Many others say that since Christ is the firstfruits of the dead (1 Cor. 15.22), then the resurrection did not occur until He was raised. This view takes the phrase “after Jesus’ resurrection” and then fits them with “…were raised to life and came out of the tombs.” This is possible in the Greek and is also hinted at in the KJV and the NASB. The tombs broke open at Christ’s death due to the earthquake, but the bodies were not raised till Christ was raised— which is the view I currently hold. 

A special thanks to Brittany Dyer for posing some interesting questions. She’s a committed student of the Bible and an excellent example to the Tompkinsville church of Christ family. 

“Get Up!”

“Get Up!”

by preacherpollard ♥ 0 Leave a Comment

Monday’s Column: Neal At The Cross

Neal Pollard

The phrase “got up” is found 41 times in the Bible. It is used four times in Matthew 9, of four different people and situations. I want us to make some application of that.

A struggling man got up and went home. This is the man brought to Christ by his four friends. Jesus began the encounter, “Take courage, your sins are forgiven” (2). This upset the Pharisees and Jesus proved His power by healing the man of his paralysis. He sends him on his way, saying, “Get up, pick up your bed and go home” (6). That’s exactly what he did (7). This amazed everyone who saw it. But what about this man? He never says a word. All we know is he obeyed Jesus. He got up and went home. When we are healed by Jesus, part of our responsibility is to take that to our homes. That may not seem like much, but it’s a great opportunity. We should go home and show our family how much this week has positively effected you. Be a blessing to your home!

A sinful man got up and followed Jesus. This is the narrator of the gospel, Matthew. He was a tax collector and Jesus called him to follow. Tax collectors were lumped in with other sinners (10-11), but they receive dishonorable mention. Matthew 9:9 says, “And he got up and followed Him.” Following Jesus changed him pretty quickly. All of us when we come to Jesus come as sinners (Ecc. 7:20; Rom. 3:23; 1 Jn. 5:19). But following Jesus will bring change (Mat. 16:24). When our sins are washed away, we are committing to follow Him and spend our lives growing closer to Christ.

A spiritual man got up and served. The third person to “get up” in this chapter is Jesus. Jairus’ daughter has died and he tells Jesus he believes He can raise her from the dead. What great faith! What does Jesus do? “He got up and began to follow Him, and so did His disciples” (19). Two things are noteworthy. First, the Creator of the universe was humble. He simply gets up and goes to serve. For good measure, He heals a sick lady on the way. Jesus demonstrated greatness by serving (Mat. 20:25-28; John 13:12-17). Second, servants influence others. The disciples got up too. Godly service is contagious! Following Jesus will lead us to serve. We must “get up” and take that mindset with us every day (Phil. 2:5ff)!

A sleeping girl got up and lived. Jairus’ daughter had died, but Jesus tells the mourners and the crowd, “Leave, for the girl has not died, but is asleep” (24). They thought Jesus was joking, but He showed that He could raise the dead as though she was just sleeping. But the girl “got up” (25). And the news spread throughout the land (26). It is so easy to fall asleep spiritually. Our fire can go out and our passion for Christ can leave us. Sometimes, God tells us, “Awake, sleeper, and arise from the dead, and Christ will shine on you” (Eph. 5:14). We may need to wake up, get up and live the example of Christ like never before. 

Maybe, we see ourselves in one or more of these individuals and their situations in Matthew nine. All of us must get up and go home, get up and follow Jesus, get up and serve, and get up and live. That is the essence of revival! 

Jesus Has All Authority

Jesus Has All Authority

by preacherpollard ♥ 2 Comments

Monday’s Column: Neal At The Cross

Neal Pollard

Jesus has come to Jerusalem and taken the gloves off. By His unparalleled authority, He is directly challenging the religious establishment whose shallow righteousness has been rejected by His Father. He has come to take the Old Law out of the way and establish His church. It’s teaching like this parable in Luke 20:9-18 that will provoke those leaders to the point that they will trump up charges and bribe false witnesses to arrest, try, and have Him crucified. This parable is stark and shocking, and the moral as heavy as an anvil. Notice.

THESE LEADERS WERE GUILTY OF IMPROPER STEWARDSHIP (9). The “man” in the parable represents God, the Father. He made Israel a nation and gave the Jews a Law to follow and keep. The Jews, particularly the religious leadership, were entrusted with faithfully carrying it out, but they did not. 

THEY WERE GUILTY OF TAKING WHAT DIDN’T BELONG TO THEM (10). In fact, these leaders–dubbed “the vine-growers” by Jesus in this parable–thought that they were in charge. They sought to make people subject to them, to follow their rules (cf. Rom. 10:3-4). The end result was vain religion (Mat. 15:8-9).

THEY WERE GUILTY OF ABUSING THOSE SENT TO THEM (11-15). The “slaves” sent to them were presumably prophets and teachers, no doubt inclusive of John the Baptist. These were the Father’s spokesmen, come to teach and correct them. Each one sent was treated the same, sad way: they “beat him and sent him away empty-handed.” Last of all, the son was sent (13-14). The “owner” (the Father) sent Him, saying, “I will send my beloved son; perhaps they will respect him” (13). Instead, seeing Him as the heir, they plotted to kill Him (14). Obviously, Jesus is referring to Himself and the very thoughts these religious leaders were thinking as He told the parable! 

THEY WERE GUILTY OF LOSING WHAT WAS ENTRUSTED TO THEM (16-18). Instead of being convicted by this parable, these religious leaders recoil at the moral of the parable: “What, then, will the owner of the vineyard do to them? He will come and destroy these vine-growers and will give the vineyard to others” (15-16). Their emotion boils over and they audibly reply to Jesus’ parable, “May it never be!” They missed the travesty of the behavior they and their forefathers had shown to God’s messengers and the sin they were about to perpetrate on His Son. They didn’t want to lose their grip on the power and influence they had taken. But Jesus doubles down, changing the imagery from a vineyard to building construction. They were going to reject Jesus, the stone, but He would be made the chief corner stone. He would judge and destroy them, if they did not abandon their rebellion.

Jesus is full of love, kindness, and peace. But, that’s an incomplete picture of Him. He came to establish His rule and reign. He must be King and Lord of our lives. We must submit to His way and truth to enjoy His life. 

Open Bible on a black table with book marker and pink highlighting
Jesus Has All Authority
The Gift That Jesus Gave

The Gift That Jesus Gave

by preacherpollard ♥ 0 Leave a Comment

Neal Pollard

Often, during this time of year, there is an emphasis placed upon the gifts brought by the magi to Jesus—“gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh” (Mat. 2:11).  They understood how Jesus was worthy of worship (2:2,11) and celebration (2:10).  Their giving flowed from that recognition.

The book of Hebrews turns the tables and reveals the Jesus who is the gift-giver. The same Greek word used to describe the wise men’s gifts to Jesus is used twice by the writer of the epistle to talk about Jesus’ gift. He does so in the context of Jesus’ work as a High Priest, as contrasted with the gifts offered by priests under the Law of Moses. In Hebrews 5:1, the writer talks about the qualifications necessary to serve in that role—taken from among men, working on behalf of men in order to offer both gifts and sacrifices for sin. Chapter five deals more with His qualification to serve and offer, but the writer does deal with the gift itself later on. Later on turns out to be chapter eight. The writer uses that same word for “gifts” in Hebrews 8:3-4 to talk about what Jesus offered. His gift is contrasted with those that cannot make the worshiper “perfect in conscience” (9:9). He gave His own blood (9:10) and with it obtained eternal redemption which will “cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God” (9:14). The writer summarizes that gift, “the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all” (10:10), as the gift that sanctifies us to God.

But what do we give in return? We cannot repay His priceless gift. But God presupposes that we will be motivated to give. Jesus does, referring to worship in Matthew 5:23-24. He does again, referring to the monetary gifts of the wealthy and the sacrificial (Luke 21:1-4). The Hebrews writer will use Abel as an example of faith-fueled giving (11:4). But our most generous gifts to Christ, however moved by sincere love and unwavering commitment, is but a shadow and reflection of His gift. We give Him money, honor, time, energy, heart, and everything else we can, because He is the greatest giver of all. May we take the time, every day, to honor and give freely, to the Gift-Giver!

hqdefault

One Of The Hardest Biblical Positions To State

One Of The Hardest Biblical Positions To State

by preacherpollard ♥ 7 Comments

Neal Pollard

There are few statements or pronouncements that are clearer than Jesus’ words in Matthew 19:9, yet perhaps none, in our current culture, is more intimidating to state. Jesus contrasts His will on marriage, divorce, and remarriage with the already existent stance of the Law of Moses. He says, “Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery” (19:8-9).  From this brief response (the Pharisees ask the question, testing Him in verse three), we see:

  • The teaching transcends time and culture—“From the beginning…and I say to you”
  • The teaching transcends all other authority—“I say”
  • The teaching transcends only believers—“Whoever”
  • The teaching transcends the caveats and conditions men have tried to place on the matter of marriage, divorce, and remarriage (not the specific law with its exception).

Yet, despite the clarity of Jesus on the subject, in the spirit of Christ we want to always approach this with utmost compassion, patience, and tenderness. Souls are at stake. Often, children are involved. Emotions are inevitably involved. A cold, callous treatment of people’s lives will surely draw Divine disapproval. That’s why Jesus’ stated position on this matter is one of the hardest to take. But, that cannot mean that we refuse to stand with Him in His teaching. However, we should ask why it is so hard to stand where the Bible stands on this matter?

—Learned men have stated different positions from this.
—Divorce is so prevalent in our culture.
—All of us have family members who are in marriages that violate Matthew 19:9.
—Marriage involves one of mankind’s greatest drives and needs (cf. Gen. 2:18-25).
—Leadership in more and more congregations refuse to deal with marriage, divorce, and     remarriage in the classroom, pulpit, or the hands-on shepherding of the local church.
—Few of us relish the role of being “the bad guy” (the one who has to break heartbreaking news to husbands and wives).

I could lengthen the list of reasons, and you could add several to it, but if the list grew to hundreds of reasons, we have one sobering, gut-wrenching question to ask, “Do any of them nullify the strength of Jesus’ teaching?” If Matthew 19:9 were not in the Bible, fewer preachers would have lost jobs, fewer elders would have lost favor, and fewer churches would have seen members go to congregations accommodating their marriages. But, Jesus warned that His way was difficult (cf. Matt. 7:14). He tells aghast disciples that discipleship requires whatever sacrifice is necessary to follow Him (Matt. 19:10-12). That message must be shared lovingly, gently, and patiently. There can be no other way (cf. Eph. 4:15). The harsh, unkind, or mean-spirited will deal with the Judge of all (cf. 1 Pet. 4:5; 2 Tim. 4:1). However, what will be the case for those who neglect, change, or distort what Scripture says to accommodate people? Perhaps there’s no way to ask that question without evoking a visceral reaction from those who have reinterpreted Jesus’ words, but in light of eternity it must be asked. Balance looks for biblical truth in between unbiblical extremes. However unpleasant a position that may put us in, that is the place we must always humbly stand. But, the only enduring place to stand is on the rock solid foundation of Christ (cf. Mat. 7:24-27; 1 Co. 3:11). God give us loving, but courageous, hearts to stand there.

16026538371_0dfe26b678_b

THE PATTERN FOR MARRIAGE

THE PATTERN FOR MARRIAGE

by preacherpollard ♥ 4 Comments

Neal Pollard

Matthew 19:1-12 records an incident where, because the Pharisees are trying to test Jesus (vs. 3), He has occasion to reveal His will about marriage.  As we analyze this text, we find several notable facts about marriage. These verses show us the mind and will of God on an institution that is increasingly under assault. Consider four facts about this great passage of Scripture.

This is from the Christ. One of the more common arguments made even by supposed biblical scholars is that Jesus never condemns homosexuality. But what does He do? He defines marriage (4-5). The law of exclusion says that what God doesn’t authorize in His Word is forbidden in doctrine and practice. The Lord has authorized marriage as an institution between man and woman. He did not have to say, “…but not between a man and two or more women” and “not between a man and an animal” and “not between two people of the same gender.” He makes clear what He sees marriage as being.

This is from the creation. Other passages tell us Christ is actually the Creator (John 1:1-3; Col. 1:16-17; Heb. 1:2). So not only does He, as Deity, designate what marriage is—He designed it in the first place. Jesus reaches behind changes made to God’s marriage law under the Law of Moses and cites how God designed it “from the beginning” (4). Anything that does not conform to His pattern in this text runs counter to God’s original intent. You may not that this excludes more than same-sex marriage. It excludes adulterous marriage (vs. 9) as well as sex outside of marriage (this is implied here: “joined to his wife,” not “girlfriend”; of course, “fornication” or “sexual immorality” is dealt with explicitly in many other New Testament passages). Jesus goes back to the creation to state the pattern for marriage as being one man and one woman for life.

This is a command. It is not a command that you have to be married, but if you do get married you must conform to Christ’s will concerning it. We see this in the force of Jesus’ “but I say unto you.” He is exerting His right of authority, even showing His law trumps the Law of Moses. A person who is looking to be married must make sure their relationship conforms to His command.

This is controversial.  It is not just the homosexual community who balk at Jesus’ words here. I have close family members (and so do you, probably) whose marriages are at odds with what Jesus commands in this context. Jesus Himself forewarns that this is a difficult and narrow teaching (10), a rejected teaching (11), and a teaching that calls for extreme sacrifice (12). I dare say there is as much blowback from the heterosexual community as the homosexual community where this passage is clearly taught. In either case, it comes down to whether we will follow the command of the Christ, the Creator. Our submission or rebellion cannot change the immutable (i.e., unchangeable) nature of Divine truth.

Marriage is a beautiful gift given by a loving God. Though society may corrupt it and seek to redefine it, but the will of God stands forever. May we have the courage, humility, and strength to take Him at His word and conform our lives to it—on this and every subject.

Did James Bartley Live To Tell Being Swallowed By A Sperm Whale?

Did James Bartley Live To Tell Being Swallowed By A Sperm Whale?

by preacherpollard ♥ 3 Comments

Neal Pollard

On his tombstone in Gloucester, England, James Bartley had written “A Modern Jonah.”  Bartley was allegedly swallowed by a sperm whale while helping to hunt and kill the giant in 1891.  The whale, as the tale goes, was ultimately subdued and conquered, and when its stomach was hoisted on deck two days later, an unconscious and crazed Bartley was found inside. He was a member of a party sent out to harpoon the beast, and in the melee that ensued Bartley was said to be accidentally ingested.  By the mid-1890s, the story was published and circulated as fact on both sides of the Atlantic.  For over 100 years, the Bartley story has been told by eager apologists to defend the veracity of the biblical account of Jonah.  It has served as a theological pingpong ball vollied back and forth between believers and unbelievers.  Research, particularly by a Bible-believing professor named Edward Davis (http://asa.calvin.edu:80/asa/pscf.html | 19:53:53 Mar 16, 2003), ultimately shows beyond a reasonable doubt that the story is a hoax.  Too many aspects of the story do not stand up to scrutiny.  The alleged ship, “Star of the East,” was not a whaler. There was no fishing off the Falkland Islands in 1891. Bartley’s name never appeared on a manifest of the aforementioned ship. The captain’s wife said that her husband never lost anyone overboard in all their years of marriage, and they were married in 1891.  Atheists and skeptics have rejoiced in such findings, using them to discredit the Bible’s account of the Jonah incident.  Apparently, some less than scrupulous (or, at best, sloppy researching) “Christian Apologists” have taken the Bartley story and run with it in an effort to substantiate that ancient account.  Yet, opponents of Scripture have been as out of bounds in their response, making the nonsensical jump from the fraudulent Bartley story to try to discredit the validity of the book of Jonah.  Because modern man fabricated a story about a man being swallowed by a whale does not mean that the account in Scripture should be rejected.

The account of Jonah is believable for at least these reasons.  First, the Bible does not call Jonah’s captor a whale.  It was a fish (Jonah 1:17). The NAS has “sea monster” in Matthew 12:40, but it is better translated “big fish, huge fish” (Louw-Nida, np). Second, this fish was “prepared” (appointed, NAS) by God for the occasion. We have no record of this “species” prior to or after this special occasion meant by God to persuade His pekid prophet.  Finally, Jesus validates the historicity of the Jonah incident. In the aforementioned gospel account, Jesus refers to Jonah as fact rather than fable. If it was a fairy tale, Christ gives no hint of it.  In fact, He says, “…just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of…” this creature (emph., NP).

Have creationists and “fundamentalists” ever overreached to try and prove their point? Undoubtedly!  Have skeptics and atheists ever overreacted to try and protect their non-theistic bubble? Absolutely!  When such battles as these are being waged, I find my confidence in going back and reading the text.  Seeing what the Bible actually says is powerful in keeping us away from either extreme.

Five Reasons God’s Law Of Marriage, Divorce, And Remarriage Applies To All

Five Reasons God’s Law Of Marriage, Divorce, And Remarriage Applies To All

by preacherpollard ♥ 4 Comments

Neal Pollard

People approach the very sensitive subject of marriage, divorce, and remarriage in several ways. Some, ignorant of what Jesus says about it, are a law to themselves and come up with any number of “alternatives” including living together without marriage, homosexuality, adultery, and the like. Some have become stricter than Jesus, saying that divorce for any reason is a sin. This is making a law where God has not (Prov. 30:6; Rev. 22:18-19). Some have become less strict than Jesus, making allowance where He has not. One of the most common allowances is the idea this law does not apply to everyone. Also, some have tried to make the sin of adultery something other than what context shows it to be. Here are five reasons why God’s law of marriage, divorce, and remarriage applies to all.

(1) Jesus Goes Back To The Beginning Of Creation (19:4,8). Jesus is not teaching something that was limited to His own time and it certainly was not an articulation of the Law of Moses (see 19:7-8). Instead, Jesus goes back to the dawn of time to Adam and Eve in the Garden. Jesus, in giving His command, reaches behind Moses to “the beginning.” This shows a timelessness to the command. God designed it a certain way, man distorted it, and Jesus dictates a new way that is universal in nature. He points ahead by pointing back to the beginning.

(2) What God Has Joined Should Not Be Separated (19:6). When two people have a right to be married, whether or not a preacher or religious person performs the ceremony, God is joining those two together. Verse nine gives God’s only exception for allowing the marriage bond to be severed and only then for the one against whom fornication is committed (the “innocent party”)(see the last phrase in verse nine). There is no qualifying phrase beyond that one exception to justify ending one marriage and forming another.

(3) Jesus’ Teaching Is Explicitly Clear (19:9). It truly takes “expert help” to misunderstand what Jesus teaches here. Take out the exception and here is how the “rule” reads: “Whoever divorce his wife and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery.” That could not be clearer! The exception is also perfectly clear.

(4) The Disciples’ Reaction (19:10). Their reaction is actually extreme. They conclude that it is better not to get married. Jesus does not validate such thinking, but it gives us insight in to what they understood. Jesus’ law for marriage, divorce, and remarriage is stringent! If “adultery” merely meant “covenant breaking,” would the disciples react so? One would simply need to “repent” of having broken their marriage vows, and then enter another marriage. If Jesus meant that, the disciples would hardly have reacted at all.

(5) Christ’s Final Response About Eunuchs (19:11-12). Jesus clears up any doubt by how He ends this discussion. He speaks of three classes of eunuchs-those born that way, those made that way by men, and those who make themselves that way “for the kingdom of heaven’s sake.” Being delicate here, we understand what it means to be a “eunuch.” That cuts to the heart of what our Lord is saying and one of the blessings accompanying the marriage relationship. Those who divorce for reasons other than the exception Jesus gives in verse nine would have to be in that third category of person discussed in verse 12.
This is not a truth that can be delivered with cold stare, pounding fist, and judgmental heart. It is one that more likely will be accompanied with breaking heart, blinding tears, and extreme hesitation. Probably nothing is more unpleasant to teach, but as part of the “whole counsel” (Acts 20:27) it must be taught. Culture cannot be the authority on this matter. Neither can emotion. Instead, as always, we must let Jesus be the authority (cf. Col. 1:18; 3:17; Matt. 28:18).