EXCEL!

Whatever may be your task, work at it heartily (from the soul), 

as something done for the Lord and not for men

                                                                                                                        Col 3:23 

Paul wrote to the Corinthians, "So with yourselves, since you are eager for manifestations of the Spirit, strive to excel in building up the church. (1Cor.14:12)."  Notice the word EXCEL here. We all want to excel in things, to be good at what we do. Here, Paul states in God's house, EXCEL to help build it up.  In life - do what you do as if the Lord Himself asked you to do it, not the men or people you're working for.   To EXCEL, we need to apply some tools that will help us to grow.

1. Work with enthusiasm, whether the job is big or small, they give their best. Great performers give their best effort, no matter what the size of the audience: “Whatever you do, work at it with all your heart, as though you were working for the Lord and not for people” (Col. 3:23).
2. Sharpen your skills. Never stop developing, growing, learning, and improving. The wisdom of Ecclesiastes states, "If the iron is blunt, and one does not sharpen the edge, he must use more strength, but wisdom helps one to succeed.(Ecc 10:10)." It takes more than desire to excel; it takes skill! You're never wasting time when you’re sharpening your “ax.”
3. Be reliable. People who excel, can be counted on to do what they say they'll do. Even the Proverbs state, "Many a man proclaims his own steadfast love, but a faithful man who can find? (Pro 20:6)." Learn to become trustworthy to do what you have said.
4. Learn to maintain a positive attitude. Whether under pressure, change, or unrealistic demands, don't allow yourself to become negative:  Paul wrote to the Philippians,  “Do everything without complaining or arguing, so that you may become blameless and pure, children of God without fault in a crooked and depraved generation, in which you shine like stars in the universe as you hold out the word of life” (Philippians 2:14-16). 
5. Do more than is expected. You never excel by only doing what is required. Jesus taught, "And if anyone would sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well.   And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who begs from you, and do not refuse the one who would borrow from you.(Mt.5:40-42)." 

When the scriptures tell you to EXCEL, pay attention! When you’re tempted to cut corners, or begin to think, “No one will ever know,” remember that God  sees everything you do. Give him your best this week and every week. You will not lose by doing these things. You will gain satisfaction what what you do and find yourself pleasing God in the process.

Jim

Acts 22 — Photo Illustrations — the Antonia | Ferrell's Travel Blog

Acts 22 — Photo Illustrations — the Antonia | Ferrell's Travel Blog:

'via Blog this'

Acts 22 — Photo Illustrations — the Antonia

Posted on November 12, 2012 | 1 Comment

As a result of the unjustified beating of Paul by the Jews in the temple precinct, Paul was rescued by the commander of the Roman cohort. Orders were given for Paul to be bought into the barracks. The KJV and the NKJV use the word castle.The CEB use of military headquarters probably conveys the correct idea. (Acts 21:27-40). The parembole served as headquarters for the Roman troops in Jerusalem (BDAG).

The building under consideration in Acts 21 is the Fortress of Antonia. The massive structure was built by Herod the Great and named in honor of Mark Anthony. Murphy-O’Connor says the fortress “both protected and controlled the Temple” (The Holy Land, 34). The temple was surrounded by the Kidron Valley on the east, the Tyropean Valley on the west, and a steep decline on the south. The area needing special protection was the northwest corner.

Second Temple Model, Jerusalem. The Fortress of Antonia stands on the northwest corner of the temple precinct. Photo by Ferrell Jenkins.

Josephus describes the “tower of Antonia” in the Wars of the Jews.

238 Now, as to the tower of Antonia, it was located at the corner of two cloisters of the court of the temple; of that on the west, and that on the north; it was erected upon a rock of fifty cubits in height, and was on a great precipice; it was the work of King Herod, wherein he demonstrated his natural magnanimity.  239 In the first place, the rock itself was covered over with smooth pieces of stone, from its foundation, both for ornament, and that anyone who would either try to get up or to go down it might not be able to hold his feet upon it.  240 Next to this, and before you come to the edifice of the tower itself, there was a wall three cubits high; but within that wall all the space of the tower of Antonia itself was built upon, to the height of forty cubits.  (JW 5:238-240)

Fortress of Antonia in the Second Temple Model. Photo by Ferrell Jenkins.

The photo above shows the Tower of Antonia built on the natural rock foundation at the northwest corner of the temple precinct. A portion of the Pool of Bethesda (John 5) is visible on the right.

Paul’s speech recorded in Acts 22 took place on the stairs leading up from the temple platform into the fortress. When the crowd drowned out Paul, the commander ordered that he be brought into the fortress (22:24). After Paul’s nephew informed the Roman officers about a planned conspiracy to kill Paul, he was sent to Caesarea where he would remain for two years (23:23; 24:27).

The photo below was made from inside the temple precinct. It shows the natural rock scarp in the northwest corner on which the Fortress of Antonia was built. See Leen Ritmeyer’s post about this, and his drawing showing the location of the steps mentioned in Acts 21. Ritmeyer sells digital images of his drawings.

The natural rock scarp at the NW corner of the Temple Mount. Photo by Ferrell Jenkins.

Did Jesus Turn Water into Wine or Grape Juice? | Parchment and Pen

Did Jesus Turn Water into Wine or Grape Juice? | Parchment and Pen:

'via Blog this'

DID JESUS TURN WATER INTO WINE OR GRAPE JUICE?

---

by C Michael PattonNovember 12th, 2012 23 Comments

The issue of alcohol and the Christian is an incredibly volatile subject causing great division and stern judgments upon both sides. I have been deeply affected by this issue myself as there are many of my friends and family members who are controlled by alcohol. I am not a teetotaler, but I rarely drink. I don’t like wine. Some beers are pretty good. I like Tequila. But if the comsumption of alcohol were made illegal, I would not even really notice.

There are so many different positions out there with regard to this issue. Let me try to name a few:

1. Those who abstain from alcohol and believe that this is the biblical position for everyone.
2. Those who abstain from alcohol but don’t believe that this is a biblical mandate to enforce on others.
3. Those who drink alcohol only for “celebratory” purposes (i.e. Lord’s table), but don’t get drunk.
4. Those who casually drink wine or beer, but abstain from “hard liquor” and don’t get drunk.
5. Those who casually drink alcohol in order to feel “merry” or “tipsy” but don’t get drunk.
6. Those who drink alcohol and get drunk occasionally but are not “drunkards” (i.e. addicted).

Outside of this, all Christians would (or should) agree that being addicted to alcohol is expressly forbidden in the Scripture as it relinquishes control of our faculties to the alcohol rather than to the Holy Spirit (Eph. 5:18). Paul warns Timothy about such abuses with regard to the qualifications of a deacons (1 Tim. 3:8) and elders (1 Tim. 3:3).

Concerning the above positions and which is correct, I am not going to directly discuss here. However, I do want to discuss one passage of Scripture that vexes the problem of alcohol with great passion. It is the subject of Christ and his relation to alcohol while here on the earth. Most specifically, I want to ask the question of whether Christ, during the miracle at the Wedding of Cana in John 2, turned the water into wine, unfermented grape juice, or something else. Here is the text:

John 2:1-11
On the third day there was a wedding at Cana in Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there. 2 Jesus also was invited to the wedding with his disciples. 3 When the wine ran out, the mother of Jesus said to him, “They have no wine.” 4 And Jesus said to her, “Woman, what does this have to do with me? My hour has not yet come.” 5 His mother said to the servants, “Do whatever he tells you.” 6 Now there were six stone water jars there for the Jewish rites of purification, each holding twenty or thirty gallons. 7 Jesus said to the servants, “Fill the jars with water.” And they filled them up to the brim. 8 And he said to them, “Now draw some out and take it to the master of the feast.” So they took it. 9 When the master of the feast tasted the water now become wine, and did not know where it came from (though the servants who had drawn the water knew), the master of the feast called the bridegroom 10 and said to him, “Everyone serves the good wine first, and when people have drunk freely, then the poor wine. But you have kept the good wine until now.” 11 This, the first of his signs, Jesus did at Cana in Galilee, and manifested his glory. And his disciples believed in him.

This question raised by this passage does indeed contribute to the overall debate a great deal. For if Christ turned the water into an alcoholic beverage, then his induction into the issue certainly does not fare well for those who preach that it is the biblical position that Christians should abstain from alcohol all-together. He would be serving as a bar-tender, if you will, at a celebration where abuse of alcohol certainly may have taken place. More than that, there is no reason to doubt that he himself would have drunk this wine.

Yet some maintain that the wine that Jesus produced was a non-ferminted type of wine called “new wine” (kainos neos). In this case, it would be like grape juice. Other believe that the wine that Jesus created was watered down so much that one would have to suffer a severe bladder problem in order to get drunk. However, both of these are not supported by the best scholarship in this area and seem to be driven by a desire to maintain a rigid teetotaler position.

New Wine is Unfermented Wine?

R. A. Torrey does a good job of representing the position that the wine Christ provided was unfermented “new wine.”

“[Jesus] provided wine, but there is not a hint that the wine He made was intoxicating. It was fresh-made wine. New-made wine is never intoxicating. It is not intoxicating until some time after the process of fermentation has set in. Fermentation is a process of decay. There is not a hint that our Lord produced alcohol, which is a product of decay or death. He produced a living wine uncontaminated by fermentation. It is true it was better wine than they had been drinking, but that does not show for a moment that it was more fermented than that which they had before been drinking” (Difficulties in the Bible).

However, there are significant problems with this argument. New wine was fermented. Its ability to cause intoxication is well represented in the Scriptures (Is 49:26; Hos 4:11; cf. Judg 9:13; see “Wine” Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels. 1992 [J. B. Green, S. McKnight & I. H. Marshall, Ed.], 870, Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press).

The happenings in Acts 2 represent this well. Having received the gift of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost, the Apostles are speaking in tongues and sharing the Gospel to the people. Some people are amazed, but others accuse the Apostles of being intoxicated.

Acts 2:13:
“But others mocking said, ‘They are filled with new wine’.”

How could the Apostles be accused of being intoxicated from a drink that is not fermented? There is no indication either in the culture of the day or in the Bible that there is such a thing as unfermented wine. Wine is wine because it is fermented.

Some scholars have attempted to contrast the two Hebrew terms for wine in the Old Testament to make a case that one was unfermented grape juice. However, the evidence does not support such a conclusion. Leaning heavily on C. Seltman, Wine in the Ancient World, theBaker Encyclopedia of the Bible draws this conclusion about the term that is purported to refer to grape juice:

(1) The Hebrew word is found in primarily neutral contexts; (2) often that particular word is found in contexts definitely including a fermented beverage (e.g., Gn 27:28; Hos 4:11; Mi 6:15); (3) the Ugaritic parallel to the term in question refers with certainty to a fermented wine (4) the Septuagint equivalents refer to fermented wine; (5) fermentation in the ancient Near East, unlike Greece, took only about three days, and (6) the Mishna provides no such evidence of the practice of having unfermented wine. There seems to have been no attempts to preserve wine in an unfermented state; it may have been a near impossible task.

It would seem that for the Hebrews there is no way to use “grape juice” as a cognate for wine. The article concludes: “A careful examination of all the Hebrew words (as well as their Semitic cognates) and the Greek words for wine demonstrates that the ancients knew little, if anything, about unfermented wine.

Watered Down Wine?

Some make the case that the wine used in the New Testament was so watered down that it was nearly impossible to cause one to get drunk. Norman Geisler make such a case:

Wine today has a much higher level of alcohol than wine in the New Testament. In fact in New Testament times one would need to drink twenty-two glasses of wine in order to consume the large amount of alcohol in two martinis today. (“A Christian Perspective on Wine-Drinking” Bibliotheca Sacra, Issue 553, 1982).

However, this does not seem to be the case. Geisler is assuming a mixture evidenced by some ancient Greeks. Homer writes about a water to wine ratio of 20 to 1 (Homer, Odyssey 10. 208f). However, this may be because the wine was so strong! The Mishna, which represents a better accounting of the Hebrew usage of wine, assumes a ratio of two parts of water to one part wine. The Talmudic sources speak of three to one. Wine often would contain 15% alcohol. Even if it were mixed with three parts of water, this would put it at 5% alcohol. This is a higher percentage than much beer today! Pliny, the Roman Senator writing in the first century, speaks about wine that can hold a flame. For this to happen, it would have had to been in excess of 30% alcohol! No wonder some speak of adding twenty parts water.

Not only this, but wine diluted with water was symbolic of spiritual adulteration. Isaiah 1:22speaking to the infidelity of the nation of Israel says ”Your silver has become dross, your best wine mixed with water.” Just before this God gives this rebuke: “How the faithful city has become a whore, she who was full of justice! Righteousness lodged in her, but now murderers.” The nation had gone astray. It is not seen as a good thing to have diluted wine.

Further (and most importantly) the story of Jesus at the wedding does not support a conclusion that the wine Jesus made was either excessively watered down or grape juice. After the head waiter had tasted the wine Jesus made, he went to the bridegroom and said this: “Everyone serves the good wine first, and when people have drunk freely, then the poor wine. But you have kept the good wine until now.” What Jesus created was “good wine.” According to the waiter, the custom was to serve the “good wine” first. Then when the people had “drunk” much of the wine, they served the cheaper wine. This word for “drunk” is methusko which means “to become intoxicated.” It is the same word used in Ephesian 5:18 “Do not get drunk [methusko] with wine…” (see also Luke 12:45; 1 Thes 5:7; Rev. 17:12). The only testimony we have about the state of the wine Christ created is the head waiter and he evidences that it is the type that can intoxicate (i.e. it was fermented). It is very difficult to draw any other conclusion.

Added to this, there is no reason to believe that Christ himself did not drink this fermented wine. It is evident that He drank wine at the passover (Mark 14:23). In fact, Christ seemed to have made a habit of drinking wine. According to his own testimony, he drank wine that others abstained from.

For John the Baptist has come eating no bread and drinking no wine, and you say, ‘He has a demon.’ 34 The Son of Man has come eating and drinking, and you say, ‘Look at him! A glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!” (Luke 7:33-34).

John the Baptist took a religious Nazarite vow and abstained from alcohol. But Christ did not. He explicitly says that he came “eating and drinking.” Because of this others accused him of being a drunkard.

The implications for all of this are important for the discussion about alcohol and the Christian. Christ, in celebration of the Kingdom, produced an alcoholic beverage that could intoxicate. Christ was a bartender! This certainly does not solve any of the problems associated with alcohol. The problems are tremendous. But to be controlled by alcohol is not a modern problem. This problem has been around since ancient times. However, this does not mean that God forbids things that have the potential to be destructive. We must be careful that we don’t legislate God. It is not unlike issues of gun control, sugar consumption, or tobacco. All of these have potential to hurt people, all of these have a history of hurting people, all of these have people who attempt to force moderation or abstinence, but none of them are forbidden by God. We must be careful in what we attempt to forbid, even if the legislation is for a good purpose. The solution for problems associated with alcohol is not a mandate for abstinence, but education concerning its dangers.

You Can Count On ME!

“And the things you have heard me say in the presence of many witnesses entrust to reliable men who will also be qualified to teach others.” (2 Tim.2:2)

It’s not easy to find someone who can really be counted on. Some pertinent questions to ask yourself here are, "Who can count on you? Do you have a reputation for being reliable? Would someone who knows you well stake his life on your faithfulness?"  Even Prov.20:6 states, "Most men will proclaim every one his own goodness: but a faithful man who can find?"  Everyone talks, but when to comes time for the real commitment to happen very few show up. Not everyone who volunteers to serve will actually come through.

Why is faithfulness so important in the Christian life? If for nothing else, it should be because God is faithful, therefore so should we be in all things! Psalm 33:4 says, “He is faithful in all he does." If we are not being faithful, trustworthy in our endeavors where people or God can count on us to be honest, dependable, and/or faithful then we are harboring deceit and evil intent.

Unfaithfulness is the cause of so many problems. Even Prov.25:19 says, “Like a broken tooth or a lame foot is reliance on the unfaithful in a time of trouble."  Unreliable people are a pain — like a bad toothache.  When you’re depending on an unreliable person, you can never quite relax, you’re always wondering, “Will they let me down again, or will they come through this time?” Working with someone inconsistent and unfaithful is extremely frustrating and hurtful.

We all look for faithfulness in others as we go about our daily activities. We want the mail carrier to be faithful, our Internet to work, our TV's to play, our cars to run. We want the food at my favorite restaurant to be consistent, hot, served right from week to week. The most famous geyser in America is Old Faithful at Yellowstone National Park. It’s not the most powerful geyser but what makes it famous is its faithfulness! It’s like clockwork - dependable! People appreciate dependability, even in a geyser. We can learn a lesson from Old Faithful. The duration of your life is of less importance to God than how dependable you are in your life.  Do you take what you’ve learned from God and pass it on to others? Can other brothers and sisters in Christ count on you to be there, to be a good example, to teach truth, to inspire spiritual life?  Can your family, spouse count on you to be a good and dependable provider, role model - partner in life?

When we have a car that we depend on to get to work or go somewhere, but it is always breaking down, always having something wrong with it, always needing coaxing - we get rid of it to get something more dependable.

What do you need to change in your life so you can begin living a dependable godly significance?

Jim

NT Blog: The Jesus' Wife Fragment: How the Forgery Was Done

NT Blog: The Jesus' Wife Fragment: How the Forgery Was Done:

'via Blog this'

FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 09, 2012

The Jesus' Wife Fragment: How the Forgery Was Done

I am grateful to Andrew Bernhard for sharing his full exposition of how the Gospel of Jesus' Wife was forged, on the basis of Michael Grondin's online interlinear Gospel of Thomaswebsite.

I have previously blogged about Andrew Bernhard's research on the fragment (Jesus' Wife Fragment: Further Evidence of Modern Forgery), where I drew attention to what I regarded as a possible "smoking gun" for the case, the fact that the fragment takes over a typographical error in the PDF of Grondin's Interlinear.  Andrew's essay, How the Gospel of Jesus' Wife Might Have Been Forged: A Tentative Proposal, provided a brilliant analysis of the links between the fragment and Grondin's Interlinear.

But now Andrew has produced a complete analysis of the links between these works in a new essay that he has published here:

Notes on the Gospel of Jesus' Wife Forgery

The piece is a well-written, persuasive account of how he sees the forger of the fragment working, and I would encourage you to read it all with care.

Here, courtesy of Andrew Bernhard, is a summary of the findings:

--

1. Gos. Jes. Wife borrows the framework for a simple dialogue between Jesus and his disciples from Gos. Thom. 12.

2. All decipherable words in Gos. Jes. Wife appear in Gos. Thom. with a single exception: TAHIME (“my wife.”)

3. The words of each line of text in Gos. Jes. Wife are found in close proximity to each other inGos. Thom.

4. The forger has slightly redacted Gos. Thom. by making masculine pronouns feminine and (attempting to) transform affirmative/negative statements into their opposites.

5. More than half a dozen notable textual features in Gos. Jes. Wife can be attributed to a forger’s dependence on Grondin’s Interlinear.

Summary:

I think it is now fair to begin openly describing Gos. Jes. Wife as a modern forgery.  Although it is admittedly a novel type of forgery, its text can be explained too easily and too completely as a “patchwork” of words and short phrases drawn from the Gos. Thom. by a forger relying on Grondin’s Interlinear. The possibility that Gos. Jes. Wife is a genuinely ancient writing seems extremely remote.

Gos. Jes. Wife is intended to appear as a basic dialogue between Jesus and his disciples, and the words of both Jesus and his disciples are introduced using the same words found in the basic dialogue of Gos. Thom. 12. Every word in Gos. Jes. Wife (except one) can be traced back toGos. Thom., and every line of text in Gos. Jes. Wife contains words found in close proximity to each other in Gos. Thom. – even when there is no obvious relationship between them (e.g., line 3). Where a word might easily have been spelled differently in the different texts, both Gos. Jes. Wife and Gos. Thom. have the same spelling (i.e., NAEI). In addition, the forger’s redactional tendencies, namely switching third-person pronouns from masculine to feminine (lines 2, 5, 7) and attempting to invert affirmative / negative statements  (lines 5 and 6), can be identified. The forger has also inadvertently included several tell-tale peculiarities in grammar and spelling that reveal the modern origin of Gos. Jes. Wife.

The forger’s “fingerprints” are discernible in every line of text that has more than one word in it. In line 1, the forger has reproduced a typographical error from Grondin’s Interlinear (the omission of a direct object marker) and a line break from NHC II. The second line has been copied verbatim from Gos. Thom. 12, except the forger has changed a third-person pronoun from masculine to feminine. In line 3, the forger has used a Coptic spelling for the name “Mary” that is barely attested in antiquity but could well be derived from the English translation in Grondin’s Interlinear. In line 4, the forger has omitted a conjunction (JE) that would ordinarily be expected, probably as the result of a line break in NHC II. Line 5 contains a simple inversion of a negative phrase found in Gos. Thom. 55, and the forger has switched its subject from masculine to feminine. Once the intended text of line 6 is recognized, it seems clear that a forger tried to compose the line of Coptic while thinking in English; relying on the translation in Grondin’s Interlinear, the forger attempted to transform an affirmative statement from Gos. Thom. 45 into a negative version but made a pair of grammatical errors in the process (i.e., two verbal prefixes modifying a single infinitive; a non-definite noun modified by a relative). In line 7, the forger has merely rearranged text from Gos. Thom. 29 and 30, switching a masculine pronoun to its feminine equivalent (for the third time in seven lines) in an effort to mask the identity of his or her source.

In the end, only a single Coptic word in Gos. Jes. Wife could not have been copied directly from Gos. Thom. This word, which instantly transformed Gos. Jes. Wife into an international sensation, appears near the center of the small papyrus fragment. It is a compound of a possessive article and feminine noun that could easily have been formed by anyone using Grondin’s Interlinear and the most widely available Coptic-English dictionary in the world: TAHIME (“my wife”).
--
Renewed thanks to Andrew for making this clear and convincing study available.

Acts 21 — Photo Illustrations – Patara | Ferrell's Travel Blog

Acts 21 — Photo Illustrations – Patara | Ferrell's Travel Blog:

'via Blog this'

Posted on November 5, 2012 | Leave a comment

Patara is mentioned only once in the New Testament. When Paul and his companions sailed from Miletus on their way to Syria (Caesarea), they made stops at Cos, Rhodes, and Patara in the Roman province of Lycia in Asia Minor (Acts 27:5).

And when we had parted from them and set sail, we came by a straight course to Cos, and the next day to Rhodes, and from there to Patara. And having found a ship crossing to Phoenicia, we went aboard and set sail.  (Acts 21:1-2 ESV)

Patara is known as Gelemis (in Turkey) today, but the sign on the main highway from Fethiye to Kas points to the ancient site of Patara.

Wilson says,

Patara served as a way station for sea travelers, and Paul changed ships here to Phoenicia at the end of his third journey in AD 57 (Acts 21:1). (Biblical Turkey, 91).

The beach at Patara is a popular leisure place for locals as well as visitors to the area. For this photo we drove the narrow road from the main highway through the ruins of the city to the water.

Beach on the Mediterranean Sea at Patara, Turkey. Photo by Ferrell Jenkins.

Patara already had a long history before Paul stopped there. Tradition has it that it was founded by Patarus, a son of Apollo. Persians used the port during the Persian Wars. The city later came under the control of Alexander the Great, the Ptolemies, and the Seleucids in succession before being given freedom by the Romans in 167 B.C. In 43 B.C. the city became part of the province of Lycia (Biblical Turkey, 90-91).

Our next photo shows the site of the silted up harbor of Patara. In the distance you will see a narrow sliver of blue between the trees and the sky. That is the Mediterranean Sea. Entrance to the harbor from the Sea is blocked. Ruins of granaries built in the days of Hadrian (A.D. 117-138) are visible on the west side of the harbor. Click on the photo for a larger image.

Silted up harbor. The Mediterranean is visible on the horizon. Photo by Ferrell Jenkins.

Our last photo shows the theater which was built in the Hellenistic period, but was rebuilt in the time of the Roman Emperor Tiberias (A.D. 14-37). It seated more than 6,000 people.

Theater at Patara. Photo by Ferrell Jenkins.

My Own Mouth will Condemn Me!

Keep thy heart with all diligence; For out of it are the issues of life.

                                                                                                                           Prov 4:23

Our minds are really an amazing creation. Did you know that It would take a computer the size of a small city just to carry out the basic functions of your brain. Our brain contains more than 100 billion nerve cells, each connected with 10,000 other neurons.  Such a complex organ generates complexities in life. Long before psychology God said our thoughts determine your feelings and your feelings determine your actions. If we want to change our life, we have to harness the way we think and what we find ourselves thinking about.

The problem is that a lot of us that find that our own mouths betray our thoughts. It seems like the more we strive to be righteous and live righteous, our own thoughts show that we are not. Job states, " Though I be righteous, mine own mouth shall condemn me: Though I be perfect, it shall prove me perverse. (Job 9:20 )."  Like many, we are our own worst critics. We’re always putting ourselves down. We walk into a room smiling, but inside we're thinking, “I’m fat, dumb, ugly.  I can't! I can't do anything right! And I'm always late!” Yet, do we understand that when we talk like this, we're saying, “God, I'm worthless. I'm no good. I can't do anything,” you're saying, “God, you blew it with me.”

However, this is not God talking it is the evil one trying to get you to go away from what God wants for you. How can I eliminate negative self-talk, bad and sinful thoughts so that we can become a more confident person? While it seems simplistic, Paul states,  "Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honorable, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things.(Ph'p.4:8)"  Notice what Paul tells us. When you find your thoughts wandering toward or on the bad, change your thinking to what is good, honest, pure, wholesome and of good reputation. Don’t think about all those weaknesses in your life. Focus on who God wants you to be and what God wants to do in your life - in your heart and in your mind. There is no better antidote to low self-esteem (or to facing your hurts, habits, and hang-ups) than to read God's Word every day — study it, memorize it, meditate on it, and apply it in your life. Some might say that this is boring. On the other hand, ask yourself how badly you want to change. If you truly want to change, then you will do whatever it takes to become what you strive to be.

The best thing you can do to raise your confidence level is to start believing what God says about YOU! When you find a verse in the Bible that speaks to you,  write it down on a card, memorize it, and then affirm it by saying it back to God. Let God renew your mind, because “your life is shaped by your thoughts” (Proverbs 4:23). What things that are "true and good and right" can you focus on today?

Jim

Missional Challenge: The Primary Work of the Church Is NOT on Sundays

Missional Challenge: The Primary Work of the Church Is NOT on Sundays:

'via Blog this'

The Primary Work of the Church Is NOT on Sundays

Jerry Cook writes in his book The Monday Morning Church,

“While the church on Sunday is extremely important, what happens on Sunday is not the primary work of the church. The assembly of the church is meant to equip and encourage and enhance the real work of the church, which doesn’t take place within the four walls of a sanctuary. It takes place on the highways and byways and in all the workplaces and meeting places in the world.” 

 What do you think?

I used to think that it was all about Sunday. In fact, Pastor Ed Young still thinks this:

At Fellowship, we tell ourselves every week that it's about the weekend, stupid!

I don't think this any more. The weekend worship service is not the primary work of the church. How can it be when most of the "church" is sitting on seats not doing any work at all?

The church is the Body of Christ. The work of the church happens all week long as believers engage in the mission of Jesus by following Him and helping others to follow Him too.

I'm not saying that Sunday worship gatherings aren't important. I believe they are important -- but they aren't the primary work of the church.

Today's Missional Challenge: Be very clear that the primary work of the church is not on Sunday!

Misreading the Bible because we are Western:

'via Blog this'

Misreading the Bible because we are Western

November 1, 2012 By scotmcknight 25 Comments

I speak, of course, only of Westerners. Ah-ha moments in Bible reading come to all of us, and perhaps you can remember one and tells us about it, but I can remember a few: when I realized the Bible’s writers and characters were ancient Jews and not modern American (Baptists), that they spoke Hebrew and Aramaic and Greek and Latin, that contemporary Jewish texts shed light constantly all over the Bible,  that Paul’s letters were written before the Gospels, that the Gospels grew over time, that Isaiah was not written by the same author all at once … and then there was the colossal realization that Western senses of self, freedom, and individualism just don’t compute with ancient Jewish, Greek or Roman perceptions. That our theological issues are not theirs. That those folks cared lots about purity — and purity doesn’t mean to us what it meant then. That capitalism was unknown to the Bible. That young adults didn’t fall in love, date, and then choose the one they wanted to marry. That marriage itself didn’t mean to them quite what it means to us. I could go on…

What many of us have come to realize that we get in the way at times when we are reading the Bible. That we impose, many times unintentionally and unconsciously, our world on the Bible and need to work at hearing the Bible in terms of the ancient world.

What are your best lessons in Bible reading? What were some of your ah-ha moments? When did you realize the gulf or gap between our culture and the Bible’s culture? When did you learn, or how did you learn, the Bible was not American, or European, or Australian, or whatever your culture is?

So I’ve got a book recommendation for you by E. Randolph Richards and Brandon J. O’Brien called Misreading Scripture with Western Eyes: Removing Cultural Blinders to Better Understand the Bible [if IVP can split infinitives I guess it doesn't matter anymore?]. As I read through this book I kept asking myself if this was a 9-poster book or a one-poster and I’ve decided to keep it at one and hope you will consider purchasing it and using it in your own Bible reading.

Back to the big idea: Westerners see things in the Bible not there and we miss things that are there. And this happens because we are Westerners. So they find nine areas where we need to become more sensitive:

1. Our mores — our social conventions shaping our behavior and beliefs about what is good and bad, right and wrong — are not the Bible’s.
2. Race and ethnicities: we may think all are the same, but we betray our realities; the ancient world was easier with ethnic identities. We impose our ethnic assumptions on the Bible’s lines. When Moses married a Cushite, probably a dark-skinned African woman, we might impose our racial stereotypes when those stereotypes are modern and not ancient.
3. Language: this one gets lots of attention in postmodernity. Use translations to experience some variation arising from various readings of the language.
4. Individualism and collectivism: the Bible’s cultures were not individualist as we are in modernity and postmodernity. Our preoccupation with “me” in Bible reading is modern. We need to learn to read in plural.
5. Honor/shame and right/wrong: honor has to do with status; shame with lowering one’s status. Our culture is more about right and wrong. What society expects shapes them far more.
6. Time: they discuss chronos vs. kairos senses of time.
7. Rules and relationships: the Bible’s relationships shaped rules while we tend to see rules shaping relationships. Take Paul and circumcision which seemed to be less a rule and more about relationships.
8. Virtue and vice:ours are not theirs — like tolerance and freedom and pax Americana and self-sufficiency. The Bible’s focus was love — is it ours?
9. Finding the center of God’s will: this is a variant on individualism. Ours is a world in which self is at the center.

The authors provide some suggestions:

1. Embrace complexity
2. Beware of overcorrection
3. Be teachable
4. Embrace error
5. Read the Bible together — with others.

Jesus returned “to the Sea of Galilee” | Ferrell's Travel Blog

Jesus returned “to the Sea of Galilee” | Ferrell's Travel Blog:

'via Blog this'

Posted on November 2, 2012 | 1 Comment

Mark tells us that Jesus made a trip to the region of Tyre and Sidon. There He met a Syrophoenician woman and healed her daughter. The text says that he returned “to the Sea of Galilee.”

Then he returned from the region of Tyre and went through Sidon to the Sea of Galilee, in the region of the Decapolis.  And they brought to him a man who was deaf and had a speech impediment, and they begged him to lay his hand on him.  (Mark 7:31-32 ESV)

Capernaum, Chorazin, and Bethsaida were cities around the Sea of Galilee. The region of Decapolis was located east of the Sea.
This rather unique sunrise photo gives a clear view of a least a portion of Decapolis.

Sunrise on the Sea of Galilee, view east toward Decapolis. Photo by Ferrell Jenkins.

In Decapolis, Jesus healed a deaf man with a speech impediment (Mark 7:31-37).

The Sea of Galilee has an attraction to people who love Jesus and the events that took place there. On a recent tour, I had one lady who made her second trip to Israel primarily to return to the Sea of Galilee. Every time I post a photo of sunrise on the Sea of Galilee I receive several communications from folks who say it is one of their favorite places.