#Preaching Messianic Prophecies | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

nijjhar · 5 months

Video

youtube

Super Blind "Hireling Dog-Collared Priests" created by the sacked Husban... Super Blind "Hireling Dog-Collared Priests" created by the sacked Husbandmen of the Destroyed "Winepress", the Temple. https://youtu.be/LmpgSVzuWyc Holy Gospel of our SUPERNATURAL FATHER of our supernatural “souls” Elohim, Allah, ParBrahm, etc., delivered by the first Anointed Christ, which in my native language Punjabi, we call Satguru Jesus of the highest living God Elohim, Allah, Parbrahm, etc. that dwells within His most beautiful living Temple of God created by the greatest artist demiurge potter, the lord of the Nature Yahweh, Brahma, Khudah, etc. and it is called Harmandir or “Emmanuel” if you are not “greedy” according to Christ Rajinder:- HAPPY EASTER, THE REIGN OF SUN, THE CHRIST. John, the Baptist never baptised a woman, Gentile, or a Samaritan but only the men of age who repented becoming the Jews outwardly under their Rabbis learning the moral laws instead of spiritually inwardly, he baptised them of age and the holy spirit, which is “common sense” in the name of Abraham and Jesus was Baptised in the name of his heavenly father Yahweh, Brahma, Khudah, etc., the Potter of male and female. The Messianic Jews, the Husbandmen of the DESTROYED FOREVER "WINEPRESS", the temple who killed Jesus were good for no other job than the job of a Ruling Priest, they jumped over the Wall of the Mammon-Free Church of God, One Fold, Headed by One Shepherd, our Bridegroom Christ Jesus, like a THIEF and established themselves with the Jewish Leaven, the FORBIDDEN written Torah, the Old Testament Scriptures or the letters of the law that finished with the Last Prophet John, the Baptist – Luke 16v16 and started creating the “hired” Presbyters, Pope, and these hireling "DOG-COLLARED" PRIESTS that killed more people than the Temple High Priest did fulfill Matt 12v43-45. So, Jesus came to set us "FREE" in the holy spirit, the spirit of man which is "COMMON SENSE" but these "CROOK MESSIANIC JEWS" who keep all the Seven Candles of the Menorah at the same level that Messiah has not come yet and made fool of the people so much so that in the Catholic Churches, you find the Middle Candle of the Menorah missing altogether or replaced with the dead icon of Jesus. AND ABOVE ALL, THESE UNIVERSITY PROFESSORS WORSE THAN THOSE BLIND RABBI GUIDES WHO LED THE BLIND MEMBERS OF THE CONGREGATION TO THE PITS OF HOLOCAUST such as the one in Germany under Hitler. Thus, Hitler killed the "SINNER JEWS" who became Jews outwardly and became unfaithful to Abraham and Yahweh, the "SALTLESS" sinner Jews worse than those at the times of Christ Jesus. This is AMPLY REFLECTED IN THEIR ATROCITIES TODAY fulfilling Matt 12v43-45. That is why these "TARES'', the sons of the highest Satan Al-Djmar Al-Aksa are getting bundled up in Israel for the FINAL BURNING DURING THE ATOMIC WAR, which is expected very soon - Matt 13v24-30 is getting fulfilled. Much more in my other over 8900 YouTube videos; The Gospel Truth would be Preached before the End of the Age or the Atomic War. Easter Playlist:- https://studio.youtube.com/playlist/PL0C8AFaJhsWylziOpNWyWaLauSjMOeudK/edit Taste of Easter:- Reincarnation through works under Yahweh, Dharm Rai whilst Resurrection by Grace of Elohim. https://youtu.be/x3BD1z0Buq0 Allah is NOOR and you cannot apply Sharia Laws that bind you on NOOR that sets you FREE. This Islam is not of Allah called INSHALLAH but of Mullahs called Inshmullah. Our Khokhar Jatt Chaudhry Saddam Hussein Khokhar Jatt was executed by the American Jews. The Last Prophecy Matt 13v24 - 30 is getting fulfilled and the Atomic War is around the corner. https://youtu.be/aIfQiigjDFA JEWS THEMSELVES ARE ANTISEMITIC. www.gnosticgospel.co.uk/JAntisem.htm A Jew is spiritual of heart inwardly and not in the flesh outwardly. So a Jew is never born or dies but the tribal people of Judah, Levi, Benjamin, etc. led by their blind guides, the “sinners” died. END TIME GOSPEL TRUTH – FREE LECTURES AND SEMINARS. www.gnosticgospel.co.uk/JAntisem.htm www.gnosticgospel.co.uk/GistEndGospel.htm Other:- www.gnosticgospel.co.uk/Nobility.htm http://www.gnosticgospel.co.uk/tenlights.htm http://www.gnosticgospel.co.uk/JattIslam.htm Proofs of the Virgin Birth of Jesus: - www.gnosticgospel.co.uk/bojes.htm Matt 21v33-46:- As the Jews killed the Prophets and then collected money from the devotees, so they did to Christ Jesus and created the Antichrist Pope and his killer stooges. https://youtu.be/aOH6r380ECo Super Hitler tribal Putin https://youtu.be/FQ9TyEEZcDQ There were no WMD in Iraq https://youtu.be/NIB8q3YiQZs Super Hitler Putin speaks the truth versus the great blasphemers of the USA and the West. https://youtu.be/WCjpz-_w0y0 This is America - Israel in Disguise:- Grim American Jewish Reaper waving sickle to kill more in Venezuela as they did in Iraq, Libya, Syria, Ukraine, etc. www.gnosticgospel.co.uk/GrimReaper.htm John's baptism:- www.gnosticgospel.co.uk/johnsig.pdf Trinity:- www.gnosticgospel.co.uk/trinity.pdf

#youtube

0 notes

pastortomsteers · 7 months

Text

The Bible Study –

Our reading for Friday, February 16 is Mark 1:29-45.

Christ’s first day of public ministry recorded in Mark is a busy one.

Jesus heals Simon Peter’s mother-in-law. Then at sundown the people of Capernaum bring their sick and demon possessed to Christ, the text tells us the whole city gathered at the door.

The Saviour of the world fulfills Messianic prophecies by healing the sick and freeing those in bondage to evil.

The same is true for us.

The Gospel and the Sacraments instituted by Christ Himself, Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, continue to save us from sin, death and the devil.

Although our Lord had more to do in Capernaum, He takes time for private devotion, praying to the Father. When the disciples say that “everyone is looking for you,” our Lord explains, “Let us go on to the next towns, that I may preach there also, for that is why I came out.”

The mission to spread the Good News and heal continues today in and through Christ’s true Church.

A leper appeals to Jesus, in faith saying, “If you will, you can make me clean.”

Christ heals the man restoring his health and his place in society, uniting him once more with family and friends.

Jesus also restores our relationship with our heavenly Father. Through His sacrificial death on the cross that paid for our sins, believers receive forgiveness and eternal life.

Pastor Tom Steers

Christ the Saviour Lutheran Church, Toronto

#christian religion #lutheran #christian #faith #jesus #salvation #bible #evangelism #holy spirit

0 notes

casmong · 8 months

Text

The Hope of Israel

“So for this reason I have called to see you and speak with you. It is because of the hope of Israel that I am bound with this chain.” Acts 28:20

For the hope of Israel I am bound with this chain.—The mention of “chain” in the singular agrees with the fact stated in Acts 28:30, that he was entrusted to the keeping of a single soldier.

The words “the hope [מִקְוֵ֤ה (miq·wêh)] of Israel [יִשְׂרָאֵל֙ (yiś·rā·’êl)]” occurs verbatim twice in Jeremiah's prophecy, a man who himself spent a long time being imprisoned for the faith and being ‘bound by chains’[ Jeremiah 14:8; 17:13], with both references making mention of YAH being a Saviour who saves, and that there is no other to save.

The word ‘hope’ is itself reference to a cord, as when Rahab hid the spies that came to asses how to conquer Jericho she hid them and after the city authorities were gone let them down through her window and made a covenant that they would rescue her from the destruction they would bring, and the token of the arrangement would be the scarlet [הַשָּׁנִ֨י (haš·šā·nî)] cord [תִּקְוַ֡ת (tiq·waṯ) חוּט֩ (ḥūṭ)] she used to facilitate their escape[Joshua 2:18]. A cord was made of twining strands of natural fibers together, which teaches of how our lives are intertwined with YAH and our Savior Jesus the Anointed.

The scripture carefully makes mentions of the chord being ‘scarlet’, which of course brings our minds and makes reference to the Saviour and Messiah, the 'hope of Israel', who in the Messianic prayer of Psalm 22 started with 'My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? why art thou so far from helping me, and from the words of my roaring?' and then later continues on to say "but I am a worm, and no man; a reproach of men, and despised of the people.- Psalm 22:6

The Mention of "am a worm" [תוֹלַ֣עַת (ṯō·w·la·‘aṯ) - worm, scarlet stuff, crimson] alludes to 'coccus ilicis' or scarlet worm, where when the female is ready to give birth to her young, she would attach her body permanently to the trunk of a tree, and would deposit her eggs beneath her body where they would be protected until the larvae were hatched and able to enter their own life cycle. As the mother died, the crimson fluid stained her body and the surrounding wood. It is from the dead bodies of such female scarlet worms, the commercial scarlet dyes of antiquity were extracted. It was this scarlet blood stain that was used to color the cord Rahab used to allow the spies to escape all these years before, and it will be the blood stain of Jesus that also saves us.

This hope of Israel also referred to the hope of the resurrection as previously mentioned [Acts 26:6,7], where Jesus will return as the realization of the things hoped for of Messiah, and the evidence of things yet to be seen; of Jesus the Christ the Anointed [One], who is himself the hope of Israel.

The context was that Paul was already a prisoner in Judea, and more that forty Jews covenanted themselves to assassinate Paul for preaching Jesus[Acts 23:12], and had made arrangements with the ruling Jewish Council (viz Sanhedrin) to invite Paul for an audience, so that their co-conspirators and murderous assassins could kill Paul. Paul's nephew heard of the plot and eventually informed Paul who being a Roman citizen made arrangement with the 'chief captain' [Gk χιλίαρχος, ου, ὁ (chiliarchos) - chilliarch, a commander of a thousand men, a military tribune] who dispatched two centurion and two hundred men, who safely brought Paul to Caesarea before Antonius Felix the procurator (viz governor) and ranking Roman official in charge of Judea and Samaria. Caesarea in Palestine or Caesarea Maritima was at the time the administrative headquarters of the Roman procurators and of the Roman garrison in Palestine.

After the Jewish rulers and their eloquent orator Tertullus 'descended' from Jerusalem to Caesarea and were unable to persuade Felix to hand Paul over to them. Eventually after two years Felix was replaced by Porcius Festus (~55 AD), who sent Paul to Rome to stand trial under Emperor Nero. Even though Paul was again able to argue his point, that he did not violate Jewish, nor Roman laws, nor committed treason against Caesar, but because Festus was newly appointed in the notoriously rebellious province, he wanted to gain good will among the rambunctious Jews, and so intended to send Paul to be tried before the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem. To avoid being handed over to the Jews who wanted to kill him, he appealed to Caesar, and being that he was a Roman citizen they were obligated to grant his request.

So in that context, Paul is saying that the only reason he is bound with a chain is because he preached Jesus Christ, the hope of Israel; and since he was actually innocent according to Jewish and Roman laws and customs, the only reason why he was a prisoner bound with a chain is because of the gospel he believed and preached.

The connotation of the hope of Israel is that the hope of Israel is a Saviour and Deliverer and Redeemer, and when the things hoped for come to fruition those who trust and place their confidence in the hope of Israel will be safe.

#hope #grace #jesus #god #love #faith #bless

0 notes

lesfeldickbiblestudy · 1 year

Text

Through the Bible with Les Feldick LESSON 2 * PART 4 * BOOK 78 PART 1 of the MESSIANIC PROPHECIES – PART 4 Psalms 2, 8, and 16 We’re glad you’re all here. For those of you joining us on television, we’re going to continue on where we left off in our last half hour, coming out of the 16th Psalm—which is a Messianic Psalm. We’re going to pick it right up again in Acts chapter 2, where Peter quotes from the 16th Psalm concerning the resurrection of Christ. Now you have to understand, that resurrection was not a daily discussion. It certainly was evident throughout the Old Testament, but yet it was not something that was constantly referred to. As we hopefully do today—because resurrection is the very core of our gospel of salvation. And as Paul says, “If Christ be not raised from the dead, then you are yet in your sins.” But nevertheless, since Christ has been raised from the dead—all still in association with His dealing with Israel—there has not yet been a word said about Him going to the Gentile world, except as He had planned to do in the Old Testament economy. Israel was to have been priests of Jehovah. Israel was to have been the evangelists. But they dropped the ball and lost the opportunity. But Peter doesn’t realize that yet. Peter thinks this is all still part of God dealing with the Nation under those covenant promises. I’m going to come back where we left off in our last half hour, as we didn’t really get to finish—Acts chapter 2. And let’s just go back and repeat as we closed the program. Acts 2:26-27 “Therefore did my heart rejoice, and my tongue was glad; moreover also my flesh shall rest in hope: (See, he’s quoting from the Psalms.) 27. Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, (Or, as I explained in the last program, that’s Hades—the place of the departed.) neither wilt thou permit thine Holy One to see corruption.” And Christ didn’t. He did not see corruption even in those three days and three nights. Now verse 28: Acts 2:28-30a “Thou hast made known to me the ways of life; thou shalt make me full of joy with thy countenance. (Now, Peter comes back and picks up his interpretation of all this. And he says,) 29. Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre (his place of burial) is with us to this day. (But now here comes the answer to it all.) 30. Therefore being a (What?) prophet,….” See, most people don’t think of David as one of the prophets. We normally think of Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, and all the Minor Prophets. But, no, David was a prophet. The Psalms has got all kinds of prophecies, especially with regard to the death, burial, and resurrection. In fact, as I speak of these things—I can’t help that. That’s my mode of teaching, and most of you are used to it. Keep your hand here a minute and go ahead to 1 Corinthians 15. Most of you already know what that says. 1 Corinthians 15, Paul’s Gospel that has now been going out to the Gentile world especially, but also to the Jew. But here are some statements that I suppose a lot of people have wondered about. That’s what made me think of it. 1 Corinthians 15 starting at verse 1, where Paul states: I Corinthians 15:1-2 “Moreover, brethren, (writing to fellow Gentile believers) I declare unto you the gospel (not a Gospel) which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, (That’s why he could call them brethren. They are believers.) and wherein ye stand; 2. By which also (by this Gospel) ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.” Now, here comes the Gospel of salvation. I Corinthians 15:3-4 “For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, (That is from the ascended, glorified Lord of Glory.) how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; (Well, I know a lot of people say, what’s he talking about? Old Testament, see? It wasn’t back there in black and white, but it was back there in what we’d call innuendo.

Just enough that now with our knowledge of the New Testament, yes, we can go back and see that God had it on His mind all along.) 4. And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day (What?) according to the scriptures:” Now that is what we must believe for our salvation. All right, that’s what we have to see. Come back with me now to Acts chapter 2. Not only in the Psalms, but even in Scriptures before Paul comes along, we have this revelation of this death, burial, and resurrection of the Messiah—also as it would be passed on to every true believer. All right, back to Acts chapter 2 and verse 30. Acts 2:30a “Therefore being a prophet,…” One that not only spoke forth as we see it in this bit, but one who saw the future—a thousand years. Now he didn’t understand it. There’s no way that David understood a crucifixion. He didn’t understand the fact the Christ was actually going to die and have His blood shed and be placed in a tomb and all that. That was all details that were still unknown. But he certainly accepted the fact that if the suffering Savior was to become a Glory that would follow, there would have to be a death and a resurrection in-between here. It’s the only way it would fit. But you see, even the Jewish rabbis and scholars didn’t figure that out. They couldn’t comprehend how one person could play both roles. But David had unction of it, but only as the Holy Spirit revealed it to him. And how much of the details? I don’t believe he understood any more than Daniel did. But reading on in verse 30 again. Acts 2:30a “Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins,…” Now who are we talking about? David’s loins. And what does that mean? The promises of this coming Messiah began with David. Now, in a latent way, yes, it goes all the way back to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. But when it actually came out to foretelling of a coming glorious Kingdom and a King, it began with David. In fact, keep your hand in Acts. Let’s go back a minute to II Samuel chapter 7. Let’s start with verse 8. Here God is dealing through the prophet Nathan. Nathan is, in turn, going to go and speak to David. II Samuel 7:8-10a “Now therefore (God says) so shalt thou say unto my servant David, Thus saith the LORD of hosts, I took thee from the sheepcote, from following the sheep, to be ruler over my people, over Israel: 9. And I was with thee whithersoever thou wentest, and have cut off all thine enemies out of thy sight, and have made thee a great name, like unto the name of the great men that are in the earth. 10. Moreover I will appoint a place for my people Israel, and will plant them,…” Now this is God speaking—that Nathan is going to pass on to David. II Samuel 7:10 “Moreover I will appoint a place for my people Israel, and will plant them, that they may dwell in a place of their own, and move no more; neither shall the children of wickedness (That is the Arab world around them—that constantly tormented the Nation of Israel.) afflict them any more, as beforetime,” II Samuel 7:11a “And as since the time that I commanded judges to be over my people Israel, and have caused thee to rest from all thine enemies….” Now you want to remember, David was successful in all of his battles. He brought peace and prosperity to the Nation as a result of all his wars. II Samuel 7:11-12 “And as since the time that I commanded judges to be over my people Israel, and have caused thee to rest from all thine enemies. Also (On top of all this. Looking down the eons of time.) the LORD telleth thee that he will make thee an house. (a royal family) 12. And when thy days be fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, who shall proceed out of thy bowels (inner-most being—which was Solomon), and I will establish his kingdom.” II Samuel 7:13-14 “He shall build an house for my name, (again, a royal family) and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever.

14. I will be his father, and he shall be my son. If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him (That’s speaking of the Nation of Israel.) with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men:” II Samuel 7:15-16 “But my mercy shall not depart away from him, as I took it from Saul, whom I put away before thee. (And now here it comes.) 16. And thine house (Your royal family—going all the way from David clear down to Joseph and Mary.) and thy kingdom shall be established forever before thee: thy throne shall be established for ever.” All right, now we see that laid out so clearly in the genealogies of Matthew 1 and Luke 3. We won’t have time to look at them right now. So come back with me, again, to where we just were in Acts chapter 2. All of this began with the promises made to David of a coming King who would rule over a Kingdom of which Israel would be the primary nation; but it’s going to be a world-wide Kingdom. Now back to Acts chapter 2 verse 30 again. Acts 2:30-31 “Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, (A thousand years later here would come the Messiah.) he would raise up Christ to sit on his (David’s) throne; 31. He (David) seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, (See that!? That’s a thousand years beforehand. David saw it through the eyes of prophecy.) that his (Christ’s) soul was not left in Hades, neither did his flesh see corruption.” All right, now I have to think of a verse that Paul wrote. Keep your hand in Acts, I’m not quite through here yet. But come over with me now to Ephesians. See, we can tie all of this together—that, yes indeed, from the cross, Christ in soul and spirit went down into Hades on the Paradise side. He took the thief on the cross when He told him, “today thou shalt be with me in Paradise.” The thief went with Him. Then Peter tells us that when He got there, He preached to those Old Testament Saints waiting for their release from their place in captivity—because the atoning blood had now been shed. All right, now Paul puts it this way. Ephesians 4:8-10 “Wherefore he saith, when he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, (Those Old Testament souls that had been kept there waiting for the atoning blood, remember?) and gave gifts unto men. 9. (Now that He ascended, (That is up to Glory.) what is it but that he also descended first (See, before He went to Glory.) into the lower parts of the earth? (Into that realm of what we called Hades and Sheol—into the Paradise side, and having preached to them, then--) 10. He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all the heavens, that he might fill (or fulfill) all things.)” All right, now Peter is, of course, way back here yet several years previous to Paul’s revelations. But he sees it clearly enough now—that as David saw that the Messiah would suffer and die, He’d be resurrected back to life so that He could still yet fulfill the Kingdom role of King. Now, if you’re back in Acts chapter 2, drop down into verse 32. Acts 2:32 “This Jesus (See how plain we make all this?) hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.” In other words, the resurrection wasn’t one of those things where there wasn’t evidence. You see, a lot of things in Scripture—and I smile when mankind has a lot of problems with things. For example, Noah’s Ark. My, they get all shook up. They can’t find the Ark. Then they get people who think they have. And then it’s proven that they haven’t. Well, you know, I’m sure God sits in His heaven and smiles, if I may use the expression. Foolish men, why do they want to find that Ark? Well, they think that then they can prove that the Bible story was true. But you know what God says? You believe it whether you see it or not. And that’s faith. But you see, with the resurrection He didn’t do that. With the resurrection He gave ample proof. Not only did the Twelve recognize it, but five hundred at one time saw Him in His resurrected body.

And then Paul says what? “And last of all, I saw Him also.” But there are so many things in Scripture that God makes us take by faith. Another one is—do you realize there’s almost no archeological evidence of Israel ever having been in Egypt? And that just drives these archeologists up the wall! Well, you and I don’t have to have archeological evidence to know that they were in Egypt. We believe it. The Book says it. But, oh, then we like to read the account of how they think they found chariot wheels in the bottom of the Red Sea. Well, then that perks everybody up. Well, it must be true. Because there they see the chariot wheels. But, beloved, we’re to take this Book by faith. But here’s an example where God doesn’t even leave it to faith. He left ample proof that Christ arose from the dead. All right, back to Acts chapter 2 verse 33. Acts 2:33 “Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he hath shed forth this, (Now remember, this is Pentecost day, when the Holy Spirit came down in outright evidence of His presence.) which ye now see and hear.” Now he’s back to David again, back to the Psalms. Acts 2:34 “For David is not ascended into the heavens: (So goodness sakes, when the Psalms says ‘I see him ascending into the heavens,’ who was it talking about? Jesus the Christ! All right, so David hasn’t ascended into the heavens.) but he saith himself, (David said it.) The LORD said unto my Lord, sit thou on my right hand,” Well, we won’t look at Psalms 110:1 again, because we looked at it in the last program. What did it say? “The LORD said unto my Lord, come sit at my right hand.” And we know that the Book of Hebrews confirms that. That when He had purged us from our sins, what did He do? “He sat down on the right hand of the Majesty at High” in fulfillment of the Psalms. Okay, back to Acts chapter 2 verse 35. Acts 2:35 “Until I make thy foes thy footstool.” Oh, then what? Then He’s going to return and mete out vengeance and wrath and justice, which would be followed by the glory that’s coming. All right, so here again is where the Jews would get upset—when Peter would make these kinds of statements. In this case, in verse 36, it was a positive response. Instead of like those women in Jeremiah 44, here the Jews of Pentecost respond—in verse 36. Acts 2:36 “Therefore (Peter said) let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.” He’s alive. He can still be our Promised Anointed and our Messiah. Now verse 37 and the Jews respond better than they did back in the Old Testament days. What did they say? Acts 2:37 “Now when they heard this, they were convicted in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?” In light of the fact that this Christ, whom they had crucified and thought was dead and out of the way, was what? Alive—and ready to bring in the Kingdom. Now, I’m thinking of a verse that I’m going to be using, I think, at a later taping. But let’s go back and look at it. You’ll have forgotten it by the time that rolls around. Come back to Psalms. I think I want 68, if I’m not mistaken. Because I like to use this when people call and say, “Well, why did they get so upset when Stephen said, ‘I see Jesus standing’?” You know those verses? When ordinarily He should have been sitting, but Stephen saw Him standing. Well, what’s all this? Now I’m not so sure that I’m 100% right, but I think I’m close, if I’m not. Psalm 68. I think those Jews of Stephen’s day immediately put two and two together. That when Stephen said, “I see Jesus standing,” this Psalm came to mind. No wonder it angered them. The quicker they could kill this guy, the better—before anything worse could happen. Now read it. Psalm 68:1 “Let (Who?) God arise, (Well, who was sitting at the right hand of the Father? God the Son.

So I’m sure this is a reference.) let his enemies be (What?) scattered. (Oh, they didn’t want to have that happen.) let them also that hate him flee before him.” Was that word hate used rightly? Oh, yes. They hated Him. They hated Jesus of Nazareth. Saul of Tarsus was not the only one. He was just simply the one that carried it out. Now look at the next verse. Psalms 68:2 “As smoke is driven away, so drive them away: (Oh, they could see there was a reference to them - those who hated the name of Jesus; those who were trying to kill Stephen for standing up for Jesus of Nazareth.) as wax melteth before the fire, so let the wicked perish at the presence of God.” You see, those Jews were all shook up when Stephen said, “I see Him standing.” I think this says it all. All right, but now we’ll save that for a later time. We’ve still got three minutes left. Come back with me, once again, to Acts chapter 2—for the moment or two that we’ve got left. Acts 2:37 “Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?” If the One we rejected is alive, and if He is still going to bring in the Kingdom, what do we have to do to appropriate all that? And look at Peter’s answer. That’s why, again, that I said this isn’t church language. This isn’t Body of Christ language. This is Jewish language. All you have to do is stop and think. Who made the very same statement at the very beginning of everything? John the Baptist. And what did he say? Repent. Repent every one of you and be baptized. That’s John the Baptist’s message. Come back to Matthew chapter 3, starting at verse 1. John the Baptist is just beginning his ministry. Matthew 3:1-2 “In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judea, 2. And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” Well, what was he talking about? The King was alive. The King was in their midst. He’s only a few months younger than John the Baptist. So He’s already about the same age. And here’s the introduction to the whole Kingdom program coming to fruition. Matthew 3:3 “For this is he that was spoken of by the prophet Isaiah, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.” All right, drop on down to verse 6. Matthew 3:6 “And were baptized of him in the Jordan, confessing their sins.” Just exactly what Peter said in Acts 2:38, “Repent and be baptized.” And they were confessing their sins, so we call it a baptism of repentance. So the whole thing was now quickly coming to fruition. All right, now if you’ll come over with me a few pages to chapter 5 in Matthew. This will almost wind it down. Matthew 5:17 “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to (What?) fulfill.” Well, what’s He going to fulfill? All these Old Testament promises concerning a King and a Kingdom promised to the Nation of Israel. But, what was their problem? The eye—the blinded eyes of unbelief. They couldn’t see that any good thing would come out of Nazareth. So they rejected Him out-of-hand. We’ll not have this Jesus of Nazareth to rule over us. So what happened? They crucified Him. But God raised Him from the dead.

1 note · View note

bernardo1969 · 1 year

Text

It was the turn of the prophet Jeremiah to witness one of the saddest moments in the history of the people of Israel, the destruction of the Kingdom of Judah and its capital Jerusalem at the hands of the Babylonian empire. But Jeremiah's activity began long before this event, the prophet began to preach with a vision of the future given by the Lord. And with this vision, God sent Jeremiah to Jerusalem to preach about his conversion. But the hearts of the inhabitants of the city had hardened like a rock, so wrote the prophet: "Jerusalem, wash the evil from your heart and be saved. How long will you harbor wicked thoughts?" Jeremiah 4:14. And it was so that the prophet understood that the destruction was inevitable, the Lord for the sins of Israel, particularly idolatry, had removed his protective hand from his people: "I have withdrawn my blessing, my love and my pity from this people" Jeremiah 16:5. But not all of Jeremiah's oracles were sad and dark, Jeremiah also left room for hope, like many prophets he remembered the pact made between God and David, the Davidic pact. The prophet with his mind perceived the arrival of a benefactor of the people of Israel, after the exile in Babylon, and that is why he made a messianic prophecy, for Christians this prophecy has a very special meaning, because Jeremiah anticipated the arrival of Jesus with these words: "´The days are coming,´ declares the LORD, ´when I will raise up for David a righteous Branch, a King who will reign wisely and do what is just and right in the land. In his days Judah will be saved and Israel will live in safety. This is the name by which he will be called: The LORD Our Righteous Savior´" Jeremiah 23:5-6. This descendant of David, for Jeremiah, would be called savior and with his wisdom, he would establish a new Israel no longer according to the flesh but according to the spirit, and this savior, Jesus for all christians, according to the prophet's thought, would establish a new alliance between God and men.

#prophecy #christian religion #sacred scriptures

0 notes

veale2006-blog · 1 year

Text

You as a Messianic Prophecy Wednesday, April 12, 2023 Filled with the Fullness It says in the scripture, "in the fullness of time, God sent His Son into the world.." Now the word fullness in Greek is "pleroma." The picture is of a glass filling up, the filling up of time. The Jewish understanding of time is that it is something with a purpose set by God. So your life is like a cup. It's the cup of God's purposes, written over your life, waiting to be fulfilled. It's a cup of holiness; of righteousness; of a victorious life; of peace; of joy and blessing. You can't fill your life. He is the one who fills everything, the pleroma who is the fulfillment of us. He came into the world in the fullness, the pleroma, of time. He comes into our lives to also give us fullness. Messiah is the fullness specifically of your life. In the same way there are a lot of different Messianic prophecies but He fulfills all of them. So your life is like a Messianic prophecy waiting to be fulfilled. He is the pleroma, not only of the Hebrew Scriptures and of the universe, but of your life.

Today's Mission Spend time alone with Him in your secret place. Come into His presence, so He can fill up everything you are, your heart, your soul, your emotions, your life.

Ephesians 3:9 9 And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ: This is my life work: helping people understand and respond to this Message. It came as a sheer gift to me, a real surprise, God handling all the details. When it came to presenting the Message to people who had no background in God’s way, I was the least qualified of any of the available Christians. God saw to it that I was equipped, but you can be sure that it had nothing to do with my natural abilities.

And so here I am, preaching and writing about things that are way over my head, the inexhaustible riches and generosity of Christ. My task is to bring out in the open and make plain what God, who created all this in the first place, has been doing in secret and behind the scenes all along. Through followers of Jesus like yourselves gathered in churches, this extraordinary plan of God is becoming known and talked about even among the angels!

HAVE A BLESSED DAY AND WEEKEND!

0 notes

svlpastor · 1 year

Text

Nothing Stands In Jesus' Way

Some of the Pharisees in the crowd said to Jesus, “Teacher, rebuke your disciples!” “I tell you,” he replied, “if they keep quiet, the stones will cry out.” (Luke 19:39-40)

Yesterday was the beginning of Holy Week. The Sunday that begins the week is called Palm Sunday. Luke 19 tells us that on this day Jesus rode into Jerusalem on a donkey in fulfillment of an ancient prophecy in the book of Zechariah. Jesus was proclaiming to everyone that day and in the future, he is the Son of God, the promised Messiah, who would rescue people from their sins.

There were a lot of people who welcomed and cheered his arrival. The gospel writer John says, "Crowds of people went out to meet him." They shouted Hosanna (that means "Lord, save us, now!") Many people knew why he was there, to save them from their sins.

The crowds also cheered for Jesus because they knew about his miracles and his preaching. They knew that just a few days earlier, he had raised Lazarus from the dead. That grabbed everyone's attention, but not everyone was happy about it. The religious leaders seethed with anger and jealousy, knowing that Jesus' popularity was through the roof. They hated it.

So when Jesus rode into Jerusalem to the shouts of "Hosanna", the Pharisees urged Jesus to keep his disciples quiet. They didn't want to hear Messianic language attached to Jesus. But Jesus told them that if his disciples stopped praising him, the rocks would shout. Christ had come to his big week, to do the thing he was sent to do, save the world by laying down his life and taking it up again, and nothing would stop him. Everything would shout his praises because he would win forgiveness and salvation for all mankind.

Jesus accomplished that great task of saving you. We are going to remember it and celebrate it this week. You belong to Jesus through faith and God's covenant of grace to you. Nothing stood in Jesus' way of accomplishing that for you long ago. Nothing today will stand in Jesus' way of maintaining the covenant he made with you. Nothing will ever stand in Jesus' way of bringing you safely to his heavenly kingdom.

Your Jesus accomplished your salvation. He won your forgiveness. Nothing ever stood in his way of winning that for you and delivering it to you.

0 notes

cmariottini · 2 years

Text

Preaching on Messianic Oracles

Claude MariottiniEmeritus Professorof Old TestamentNorthern Baptist Seminary In understanding Old Testament passages related to the birth and ministry of Jesus Christ, it is important to grasp two very important factors. First, each passage must be understood in its proper historical and theological context. The prophets, who proclaimed the divine promises related to the coming of the Anointed…

View On WordPress

#David #Hebrew Bible #Messiah #Messianic Prophecies #Old Testament #Preaching #Prophets

0 notes

the-single-element · 2 years

Text

Good morning.

We continue, today, through the season of Advent. We continue through the prophecy of Isaiah - the first Isaiah, who was writing amidst a Kingdom of Judah that was still ruled by the line of David, a world where the cycle of exile and return had not yet become a cycle. And yet, he was writing to a people who knew how precarious their world was. Enemies menaced on every side, and kings so often turned cruel and tyrannical.

Isaiah knew that all this was an unstable equilibrium. He preached to warn the kings of his age, among others, that their decisions would lead them to destruction by war and conquest.

But he also foresaw another way. He spoke of a different kind of king, who ushers in an age of impossible peace, who conquers his foes not by a sword of bronze but the words from his mouth. He prophesied a reckoning that would set everything right again, no matter how wrong they might have to go first.

We recognize this imagery. Just two weeks ago we talked about what it means for the Kingdom of God to be a "kingdom", and what kind of king has authority in it.

But the Jewish people of Jesus's time recognized Isaiah's words, too.

After several rounds of exile and return, of slavery and redemption... and now, under the yoke of Imperial Rome... they were waiting for a liberator, to usher in the Messianic age. You can imagine how easy it'd be, for someone to step into that environment and claim to be the "new sprout of Jesse", the heir to the Kingdom of David. The secular powers of the time were certainly concerned about having to face such rabble-rousing, especially given the strange omens that we'll soon hear were happening at the time.

And into this environment steps one of the most colorful and distinct people in the Good News: John the Baptist, who seemed, in his preaching, to deliberately defy every expectation he could.

Picture it. A man who shows up, claiming to be the culmination of Isaiah's prophecy... but not the Messiah. Who, instead of living like a king, lives like a caveman, wearing animal pelts and eating bugs and sleeping in the desert.

Who takes the practice of baptism, which at the time was probably more of a ritual used for purifying converts to the Sinai covenant, and starts using it as a symbol of rebirth for everyone, as a way to prepare them for a new world, a new paradigm.

And just like he re-frames baptism in this way... and just like he re-frames Isaiah's "voice crying out to prepare God's way" as a person, a prophesied herald for the prophesied savior... he re-frames Isaiah's vision of exile and return for the people of his time. Isaiah's famous song of the vineyard, which Jesus will someday debate in Jerusalem, is turned into a metaphor for what must be done to prepare a highway for the Lord. Isaiah's prediction of the destruction of Jerusalem, and of a remnant preserved afterwards to be gathered back in, becomes the process of winnowing, of taking harvested ears of wheat and separating the edible from the inedible - a process that must happen in our hearts.

And so we, who recognize the meaning of Isaiah's dream today - we who long for the coming of a Kingdom that we have, at least, begun to understand - have the opportunity to take John's words to heart as well.

The coming of Jesus which he predicted, happened... and our preparations for celebrating it continue even now. Three weeks remain.

But the coming of Jesus which we long for, where Isaiah's new paradigm will fill the whole world... we need to prepare for that, too. That's why we have Advent. That's where we're journeying.

May this coming week be another step along that journey, towards our glorious homeland.

0 notes

kabane52 · 3 years

Text

Luke and Romans

A reasonable argument can be made for the idea that each of the four gospels was written intentionally as part of a canonical set of books known to us as the New Testament- and that each of the four gospels has a partner epistle.

Matthew is clearly connected with the letter of James, which quotes teachings of Jesus in Matthew according to Matthew's transcription.

Mark is the witness of the Apostle Peter and so is connected, in my view, with 1 Peter and was published together with it as Matthew was with James.

John's Gospel and letters are so obviously connected it hardly needs comment.

That leaves Luke. Luke's connection with Paul is well-known. Might one point to a specific work of Paul's that could have been published together with Luke as 1 Peter was with Mark and James with Matthew?*

I've suggested elsewhere (and am not the first to do so- David Trobisch provides evidence for the publication of the New Testament as a single text, meaning it was meant to be read as a collection with a specific order- Trobisch puts this in the mid second century, I just roll it back to the Apostle John) that the books of the New Testament are apostolically ordered with intentionality to link in coherent ways with the Tanach (in its tripartite construction calling attention to central themes at compositional seams) and with itself. That Revelation ends with a reference to the whole company of the prophets, John's collegiality with them, and with the "neither add nor subtract" command** at the very least warrants consideration of an apostolic unity to the New Testament as hypothesis.

Romans makes most sense as the letter of Paul co-published with Luke and circulated together with it. As above, the evidence is reasonable but does not compel one to this conclusion. Several reasons:

-Romans is the first letter in the Pauline corpus and is not an occasional letter, despite attempts to read it as such. On the contrary, Paul presents it as an ordered explanation of his preaching, since he has not personally visited the Romans. Its position after Acts (in the Majority Text- I don't want to get into this trail in the comments but in certain manuscripts the Catholic Epistles precede the Pauline Epistles) makes great sense. Acts begins in Jerusalem and ends in Rome with Paul proclaiming the gospel. Romans presents the content of this proclamation. It begins with Rome- Paul's express wish to visit the church in Rome- and ends with Jerusalem, completing the circuit we see in Acts- the gospel radiates out from Jerusalem and returns to Jerusalem in successively greater distances. It ends without a return journey to Jerusalem, but Paul describes exactly such an intent in the letter (he will "reap some harvest" in Rome and then in 15:16 will present that harvest as "tribute" to God- fulfilling the prophecy of Isaiah 66, remembering that the tribute offering is of bread and thus the result of what is harvested).***

-Luke addresses his Gospel to "Theophilus" and describes that which was transmitted by designated "witnesses" who were "from the beginning" ministers of the word. Acts makes it explicit that these "witnesses" played a formal role in verifying the risen kingship of Jesus as the heart of their apostolic calling. Romans 1:6 is addressed to those who are "loved by God" - the only letter of Paul with this kind of address- which is what "Theophilus" means.**** Moreover, Paul begins Romans by directly citing his unique apostolic call to bear witness to the risen kingship of Jesus in 1:5. Like the address to those "loved by God", this is a feature which differs from every other of Paul's epistolary introductions but which is *shared* with the Prologue of Luke. In terms of an inductive argument, that double-relationship is probably the strongest.

-Finally, the leading words of Romans very closely connect with Jesus' closing words in Luke. Compare:

(Romans 1:1-5) Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God, which he promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy Scriptures, concerning his Son, who was descended from David according to the flesh and was declared to be the Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness by his resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord, through whom we have received grace and apostleship to bring about the obedience of faith for the sake of his name among all the nations,

(Luke 24:44-49) Then he said to them, "These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled." Then he opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, and said to them, "Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead, and that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem. You are witnesses of these things. And behold, I am sending the promise of my Father upon you. But stay in the city until you are clothed with power from on high."

1. "Promised beforehand through his prophets" comes from Jesus' "Everything written about me" in law, prophets, and writings "must be fulfilled." The participial "promised" here is the verbal cognate of the noun "promise" in Luke 24 ("promise of my Father").

2. Reference to Davidic descent in Romans matches Jesus' identification of His prophesied mission as that of "the Messiah." To say "Son of David" is to say "King Messiah." (That Jesus speaks of the "promise of my Father" likewise underscores His identity as Son of God and could be construed, in light of other factors, as an implicit connection between the two texts)

3. That Jesus would "rise from the dead on the third day" is constitutive of His messianic vocation as in Romans: "declared to be the Son of God in power...by His resurrection from the dead."

4. The apostolic call enjoined is to proclaim the reign of Jesus "all the nations" in both Luke 24 and Romans 1. Jesus says this is done for "in His [the Messiah's] Name" and Paul says "for the sake of His Name."

5. Jesus instructs the eleven to wait until the coming of the Spirit clothes them with "power" and enables them to carry out their appointed mission as apostolic witnesses. Paul says that the Spirit constituted the Son of God "in power" (unless otherwise noted here, verbal links are made on the basis of identical or immediately cognate Greek words) and is the one "through whom" he fulfills his apostolic witness for "all the nations" and the "Name" of Jesus.

To sum up:

-There is a pattern of epistolary correspondence with a Gospel. James quotes Matthew directly, Peter's witness is the basis for Mark, 1 John and the Gospel of John are obviously intimately bound up. And Luke is the companion of Paul..

-With Romans being the most "theological" and by far least occasional of the letters- not to mention standing at the head of the collection- it is the most likely candidate for a matched letter to begin with.

-Romans 1:1-5 has divergences from every other of Paul's epistolary introductions which converge with Luke's Prologue.

-There are a series of closely connected verbal and thematic links between the apostolic commission of Jesus in Luke 24 and Paul's description of his own commission in Romans 1:1-5.

Finally, I will note that in 1 Timothy 3:16 there is a very strong parallel to Romans 1:1-5:

(1 Timothy 3:16) Great indeed, we confess, is the mystery of godliness: He was manifested in the flesh, vindicated by the Spirit, seen by angels, proclaimed among the nations, believed on in the world, taken up in glory.

Yet on further consideration, this isn't a reference to Romans 1:1-5. This is a reference to Luke 24. "Seen by angels" has no parallel in Romans 1:1-5 but it makes perfect sense as a reference to Luke's narration of two angels at the tomb of Jesus. The word for "proclaimed" here in 1 Timothy is the very word used by Jesus in Luke 24 in "proclaimed to all nations." And while Romans 1:1-5 lacks a reference to the ascension, there *is* such a reference in Luke 24. Finally, the word for "taken up" is "analambanw" in 1 Timothy 3:16- almost identical (the prepositional prefix is the only difference- the angels' reference to Jesus' being "taken" up is completely identical) to Luke's narration of the ascension in Acts which uses "upolambanw." Specifically, it is a *cloud* which is said to have "taken" Jesus from their sight. Such a cloud is the *glory-cloud* of the Old Testament, the cloudlike presence of God which went with Israel and dwelt in the tabernacle and temple. And so in 1 Timothy 3:16 it is "in glory" that Jesus is taken up.

Add into the mix the fact that Romans 16 ends by recalling 1:1-5- identifying it as a "mystery", which is the very word used to introduce 1 Timothy 3:16 AND the fact that 1 Timothy 5 quotes Luke's Gospel *directly* and one has a very powerful case- at the very least- for the idea that Paul in Romans 1:1-5 is intentionally echoing the specific words of Jesus written down in Luke's Gospel. But my argument goes further and suggests that the four gospels- which have compositional links to each other- each have a corresponding letter with which they were first circulated. They are:

Matthew-James Mark- 1 Peter Luke- Romans John- 1 John

*If one rolls with that- and while there is reason to think it is true, it's clearly not enough to intellectually *compel* one in the strict sense)

**The "prophecy of this book" should be read in light of immediate context. We have just heard of "your brothers the prophets" whom the Spirit inspired. In Revelation 10 we are told that Revelation describes the fulfillment of that which was amounts to God's "servants the prophets", so it makes sense to take this as a reference to the biblical authors (this is the usage of 2 Peter as well). It's a little too perfect to have the last book of the Bible conclude with on the nose references to Genesis 1-3 and a final injunction to preserve the given text as is if Revelation was meant to be taken as a standalone work alongside the Tanach with no relation to its order.

***Obviously Acts is written after Romans. I take Luke to have been written in the mid to late 50s with the intent to publish the Acts when appropriate. That time comes in 62- on this hypothesis, Romans is the epistolary partner of Luke. Acts is written intentionally to precede Romans and the two are joined in that way rather than Paul beginning his letter to follow Acts. See links on the relationship among the four gospels.

****Obviously "Theophilus" is from "philia" and not "agape" as is used in Romans 1:6. But "philia" and "agape" were often interchanged with one another and I am not aware of a personal name meaning "loved by God" rooted in "agape"- though there may be one out there. In case it's not clear, I suspect that "Theophilus", like John's "elect lady" is a way of designating the church as beloved of God.

7 notes · View notes

revchainsaw · 3 years

Text

Nausicaa and the Valley of the Wind (1984)

Prayers and Salutations Cult Members! I am your mysterious minister Reverend Chainsaw and this is another nights revival service at the Cult Film Tent Revival. I bring you a special word tonight. Tonight's word is about a person who roamed the earth, in a time where people were backward and warlike. A leader emerged into a kingdom full of eschatological expectation. This leader came preaching peace, and was killed for the sins of the world, but was resurrected. In that resurrection a new hope was brought to the planet, and true healing through the power of love in the face of violence is made possible. I am talking of course about Princess Nausicaa from the Valley of the Wind.

The Message

Nausicaa and the Valley of the Wind is the film that put studio Ghibli and Hayoa Miyazaki on the map. No animated feature this grandiose and epic had been achieved by 1984, as much as Disney may beg to differ. The tale may be simple, and it may feel super 80s to us today, but Nausicaa is a masterpiece, and the fact that Howl's Moving Castle is brought up alongside Princess Mononoke and Spirited Away more often than Nausicaa is a farce and a tragedy.

The film takes place on a fantastic planet that seems to have suffered the ravages of an apocalyptic war. A war that involved gigantic warriors with powers so devastating they about made the entire planet inhospitable if not uninhabitable; save for a few areas. The fall out of this ancient war has left the earth in a state of repair, where the natural processes of a planet healing has creating giant toxic jungles.

Beyond these jungles lie two imperialistic factions, they seem almost to be city-states but it's not terribly clear. The Kingdom of Tolmekia, a militaristic proto-fascist society of almost Spartan sensibilities. Tolmekia is governed by the ambitious and cynical Princess Kushana, But I like to call her Furiosa. Just like Furiosa, Kushana is physically missing parts of herself, a visual metaphor for her metaphysical lacking and the parts of her humanity she has cut away. Kushana's world view is one of fear, a fear that can only be quelled by waging a genocidal campaign against her enemies.

Speaking of enemies, the Athens to Tolmekias Sparta would be the Pejite Kingdom. The Pejites might like to view themselves as simply responding to Tolmekian aggression, but the narrative of the film, and the story told quite visibly on the body of Kushana, is quite different. The Pejites are just as bloodthirsty if not more palettable in their approach, but like the Tolmekians, they believe only their own lives have any value. And thus, in this theatre of war, a Giant Warrior from the ages before is unearthed by the Pejite Kingdom, Stolen by the Tolmekians, before the forces of nature themselves, seem to conspire to drop the Giant Warriors "egg" right into the Valley of the Wind.

The Valley of the Wind is populated like the world of Avatar the Last Airbender, that is mostly of children and the elderly. The people of the Valley have been able to remain untouched by the ravages of war and the toxic jungles of the damaged world primarily due to geographic luck that's explained in minor exposition in the film. They are ruled by a King, and they are all deeply enamored by their beloved Princess Nausicaa.

Nausicaa is a gentle soul. She is kind to animals, she is empathetic, unreasonably patient, and bears pain and grief inflicted on her out of cruelty with a saintly understanding. She really is a thinly veiled Christ figure, scratch that. There is no veil. But she's also my favorite Christ figure. She does not preach a message, as much as she tries to save everyone from their own short sighted goals. She is not perfect, she does lash out and do some fantasy sword fight murder, but she regrets her actions so deeply that it seems to have played a part in motivating her to become even more compassionate and patient with the evils of the world.

Nausicaa discovers yet another plot by the Pejites, who are afraid of the possibility of the Tolmekians awakening the Giant Warrior, to use animal cruelty to enrage a group of almost invincible giant insects known as the Ohm. By luring the Ohm into the Valley of the Wind where the Tolmekians have become an occupying force, they hope to completely wipe out everything that threatens them. The Tolmekians DO awaken the Giant Warrior and pure pandemonium ensues. Nausicaa manages to save the Baby Ohm and calm the rage of the bloodthirsty Ohm swarm, and to defeat the warlike tendencies of both the Pejites and the Tolmekians. All the while fulfilling a prophecy fortold about a messianic savior figure called the Man in Blue.

Now that you have heard the Gospel of Nausicaa, please stand to receive The Benediction.

Best Character: Half a Person

Now that I've spent the better part of this review gushing about our Lord and savior Nausicaa. I have to admit, she's at times a bit too perfect, a bit too saccharin. Even her flaw, or her one weakness and her failing to be perfect, just adds to the perfection. I can't even say she never makes mistakes cuz she made one, and that's infuriating. It's even more infuriating that I still think she's a great character. Normally this kind of thing really kills a hero. Most Chosen Ones are the most boring and least likeable characters in their narratives. I don't know how Nausicaa avoids this trap, but she does. I'll have to do some meditating on that.

However, just like in your typical Chosen One fantasy narrative, the hero is a lot less fun than the villain. I'm going to say the best character in Nausicaa is Kushana. I want to be like Nausicaa, but I don't understand her. She's almost alien, even though we learn all about her. Kushana is mysterious, secretive, and enigmatic, yet I understand her. She barely has an arc, she doesn't really change. She's cold and cynical to the bone, but I don't need to see much of her situation to completely understand why she is the way she is. I usually hate totalitarian bad guys, but Kushana I like. Sue Me.

Also fun fact, did you that Nausicaa means 'Sinker of Ships'. That's kinda fun.

Best Scene: Spoiled for Choice

I'm going to be lazy and say take your pick. There is really not a bad seen in this movie. If the action isn't going, then there's intriguing dialogue. If there's no dialogue then you may be about to get hit with a forceful burst of whimsy. There's horror, there's swordfights and aerial dogfights. The only thing in Nausicaa I don't like to see, is the bloody tortured Ohm Baby. It's like a god damned Sarah Mclachlan commercial.

Best Creature: Foxy Shazam!

The Ohm are so simplistic yet so detailed. The number of eyes is alien, but the way they are used is expertly expressive. Who'd think you could get me to love what basically amounts to a silverfish with the intensity that I love a kitten. How did Miyazaki pull an Okja with a creature that should be haunting our dreams? I don't know.

And what about the Giant Warrior! If you are an Evangelion fan then you probably already know that Hideaki Anno designed and animated the melting goopy biomechanical beast. Surely a sight that would make both H.R. Giger and Clive Barker giddy with excitement. Just the image of the silhouettes marching amidst the desolation of the old world is burned into my brain.

So which of these is the best creature from Ghibli's first outing? It's fucking Teto. It was always gonna be Teto you idiot. Just look at Teto, he's adorable. He's too cute to exist. I'm so alone. I need a pet.

Best Character Design: Tolmekian Regalia

I originally included this category to talk some about Kushana, however, at that time I also thought I was going to say Nausicaa was the best character. I thought hard about deleting it, but I think it's a different category and you can't accuse me of playing favorites because my favorite character is clearly Teto. Just to keep it simple. It's the two costume shift from full military regalia in white and gold, to the one metal arm, warrior princess get up. It's a great costume and a great look. Get on this shit cosplay nerds. It's great for Cons in Canada, you have to think about layers, and you can't keep going as Mr. Plow. It's lazy.

Best Excuse to Talk About Patrick Stewart's Character: Lord Yupa

I just realized that I was about to write this whole review without talking about Lord Yupa. Lord Yupa is a sword saint and all around badass I think a lot of entertainment, especially in the west is lacking bad ass old men. Lord Yupa particularly shines in the early half of the film as a warrior and as a wise council to Nausicaa. If she's Jesus then Yupa is John the Baptist. He is also voiced by the elegant and eloquent Patrick Stewart. He also comes with 2 chocobos!

Worst Character: For Whom Asbel Tolls

This might also be the worst actor category as well. Actual Cannibal (haha meme) and actual monster (haha real life) Shia Labeouf doesn't so much act in the role as he read the lines and it was recorded. The good news it doesn't effect the film too much because Asbel is completely forgettable. He is a catalyst to some of the action, but besides that I don't really care for him.

Worst Aspect: To Be Fair ...

It would be unfair to completely ignore anything negative about Nausicaa. I have already mentioned in many places that there are some pretty corny, or pretty predictable tropes to this movie. But what I can't capture in words is exactly why it feels fresh when it's done in this movie. I suppose that's what makes it good. It's just so good that it's weak points are lifted up by it's strengths. Some people may bored of Nausicaa's unyielding goodness, or that she very rarely chooses to take action as much as she chases and pleads with her surroundings, but I mean, she does pay for that eventually. It's a fantasy story and it hits a lot of timeless themes that have been hit in stories for as long as human beings have been telling stories. Some people may feel that it doesn't do enough to stand out.

Summary

I have defined the S tier for myself as "near perfect and personal favorite" films. I like to think that Nausicaa and the Valley of the Wind is near perfect. Some may say that it looks like it might just be a personal favorite. In the case of Nausicaa, I'm having a very hard time telling the difference. I think it would be overly simple to claim that Nausicaa is just an ancient archetypal heroes journey with an 80s anime coat of paint. I think it's doing quite a few new and interesting things with that formula, those things are just playing out all around that narrative as opposed to being at it's center. For a first full length outing by the studio, you can really see Miyazaki's heart and the values he holds close to. I'll repeat myself so that we are completely clear on the matter. I think Nausicaa and the Valley of the Wind is a near perfect movie.

Overall Grade: S

9 notes · View notes

mauryepstein · 3 years

Text

How Reliable Are the Gospels?

Judaism

Jesus was a historical figure. Modern historians and students agree. That informs us something, but not a great deal. Did the Gospel writers take the real man, Jesus of Nazareth, and embellish him with your things as a virgin birth, miracles, sinless life, voluntary martyr's death, resurrection, and ascension into heaven?

Folk music

Most tell you today that is precisely what happened. Doesn't that seem to be the most reasonable explanation? Those "added features" seem unnatural; they appear unnatural. They actually aren't the rock-hard reality we encounter everyday.

So what will we use those grandiose claims of Jesus? He said he is the Son of God! Could a guy having a sound mind state that about himself? So we keep encountering miracles, including raising the dead; and he himself was reported as resurrected from the grave. Not to mention there is also the virgin birth. Doesn't the inclusion of supernatural elements make the entire story questionable?

You know how it's when stories are passed around. Just a little enhancement here, a little trying out the details there, and before long you've got a story full-scale of proportion to that of the original. By the time Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were placed on paper, tall tales were well established parts of the story.

However, we currently realize the Late-date-for-the-Gospel theory was flawed from the beginning. The case for this was not according to evidence. It had been mere speculation, speculation to permit sufficient time for that legend surrounding Christ to build up. The reality involved tell us a different story. What evidence we are able to muster has a tendency to confirm early dates for Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

Papias and Irenaeus Discredit Late Gospel Theory

In A.D. 130, Papias, the bishop of Hierapolis in Phrygia, quoted The Elder (the apostle John) as stating that Mark accurately recorded Peter's statements regarding Jesus' actions and words. Since Mark hadn't personally witnessed the events, however, they weren't designed in chronological order. However, Mark was scrupulously faithful to Peter's teachings. Nothing added, nothing omitted.

As you can tell, Papias strongly endorses the book of Mark. The succession may be wrong, but, he assures us, these are the very words of Peter.

Irenaeus was the bishop of Lugdunum (what's now Lyons) inside a.D. 177. He would be a student of Polycarp, the bishop of Smyrna who was burned at the stake inside a.D. 156. Polycarp consequently would be a disciple from the apostle John.

Irenaeus informs us that, "Matthew published his Gospel one of the Hebrews in their own individual dialect, while Peter and Paul were preaching the gospel in Rome and laying the foundations from the church. After their deaths (Paul approximately A.D. 62 and 68 and Peter in regards to a.D. 64), Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, passed down to us in writing what had been preached by Peter. Luke, follower of Paul, set down inside a book the Gospel preached by his teacher. Then John, the disciple from the Lord himself, produced his Gospel while he was living at Ephesus in Asia."

Papias agreed saying, "Matthew recorded the 'oracles' within the Hebrew tongue." All the early church leaders say the same thing, namely, Matthew was the first written Gospel. Just when was it written? Irenaeus indicates it was probably produced in the early A.D. 60s. Mark's Gospel followed Matthew, Luke wrote third, and John composed his narrative a while later.

Spot the real significance of Irenaeus' comments. None of the Gospels ever experienced a number of oral hand-me-downs. He assures us the apostle Matthew wrote his own account of what he had seen and heard. Likewise, the apostle John produced a manuscript of what he himself had witnessed. The apostle Peter preached. Mark wrote down his words, and wrote them down accurately too, based on Papias. By the same token, Luke recorded what he heard from Paul.

Irenaeus was just the second generation from the apostle John. Over time as well as in acquaintances, he was not far from the facts. He said the only real oral tradition in Mark is what Peter told Mark; the only oral tradition in Luke is exactly what Paul told Luke. In Matthew and John, the oral tradition wasn't a factor at all.

Oral Tradition

What about the oral tradition anyway? The very first century was a dental society. Yes, they had writing, but it was primarily a spoken word tradition rather than a paper based society like our very own. We do not depend on our memories as much as they did in the first century. We write it down and refer to it later, or we look it to the pc. It's easier that way.

But before age the printing press, books or scrolls were too expensive for the average man to possess. Whatever one needed or wanted to know, he'd to hold around in the head. That required a good memory.

Gospel Authorship and Dating

Gospel of Matthew

The Gospels themselves contain a number of clues giving us a tough concept of when they were written. Matthew is a great one. The first church fathers were unanimous in attributing this work to Matthew, the tax collector who left his job to follow Jesus. His occupation required him to help keep records, therefore it doesn't surprise us he had the ability to write.

We find his Gospel were built with a distinctive Jewish style and character. Based on both Papias and Irenaeus, the very first edition was designed in the "Hebrew tongue." It's a Jewish book compiled by a Jew for a Jewish audience.

The author starts by tracing Jesus' ancestry to Abraham, the patriarch. Throughout his narrative, Matthew is constantly mentioning how Jesus is fulfilling this or that Messianic prophecy. His goal is to convince Jews, Jesus may be the Messiah and the Son of God according to documents they consider beyond reproach.

Matthew feels no need to explain Jewish customs, that is reasonable if he is addressing Jewish readers. Also he uses such Jewish euphemisms as "Kingdom of Heaven" and "Father in Heaven." Jews were reluctant to even mention the name of God. Consequently, these terms were common substitutes in their vocabulary. And what may well be more Jewish rather than talk about Jesus as the "Son of David?"

The exclusive Jewish character of Matthew suggests the book was composed soon after Jesus' crucifixion, a period when the Christian movement was almost entirely Jewish.

In the 1996 book Eyewitnesses to Jesus: Amazing New Manuscript Evidence Concerning the Origin from the Gospels, Carsten Peter Thiede, A German papyrologist, analyzes three small scraps of Matthew chapter 26 from Magdalen College at Oxford University.

He found several ancient documents which were comparable both in style and technique: the Qumran leather scroll of Leviticus, dated to the middle of the first century; an Aristophanes papyrus copy of Equites (The Knights), dated late first century B.C. to early first century A.D.; and extremely enough, an Egyptian document actually signed and dated by three civil servants July 24, 66.

Based on these close comparisons, Thiede concludes the three tiny fragments of Matthew chapter 26, known collectively because the Magdalen papyrus, date no later than A.D. 70. As we have already noted, both Irenaeus and Papias claim the original Matthew manuscript was at Hebrew. Obviously, the Hebrew original should have predated this papyrus Greek translation.

Gospel of Luke

Probably the least controversial author from the Gospel writers is Luke. Most agree the physician and often traveling companion of Paul, wrote the Gospel that bears his name, that is, the Gospel of Luke.

That book is really a companion volume to the book of Acts. The word what and structure of these two manuscripts indicate they were compiled by the same person. Plus they were addressed towards the same individual -- Theophilus. Luke's authorship is supported by early Christian writings such as the Muratorian Canon A.D 170 and also the works of Irenaeus inside a.D. 180.

Luke seems to be a well-educated gentile. His writings show he is fluent in Greek. At times his style even approaches that of classic Greek. Both of his books are rich in historical and geographical detail. As others have seen, this physician writes like an historian.

Luke tells us that the number of individuals had already discussed Jesus' life. However, he would prefer to set the record straight and proper the errors he present in those early reports. To split up fact from fiction, Luke conducts an individual investigation interviewing eyewitnesses and verifying oral accounts with the apostles. In his own words, he investigated from the start to write an orderly report for Theophilus so that he or she is certain of the items he had been taught. (Luke 1:3-4)

Indirect evidence suggests Luke wrote Acts in early A.D. 60's. Acts is a good reputation for early Christianity which was centered in Jerusalem. Nevertheless, there is no mention of Jerusalem's destruction which took place A.D. 70.

Likewise, nothing is mentioned of Nero's persecution of Christians inside a.D. 64, nor will it talk about the martyrdom from the three major characters in the book: James, brother of Jesus, A.D. 62; Peter A.D. 64; and Paul some time from a.D. 62 and 68.

However, Acts does inform us of the deaths of two less prominent figures: Stephen, the very first known martyr, in A.D. 36, and the apostle James, son of Zebedee and brother of John, inside a.D. 44. Based on this indirect evidence, there is need to believe Acts was composed inside a.D. 62 or earlier. Acts is an obvious continuation from the Gospel Luke. So if Acts were written by Luke no after A.D. 62, the Gospel of Luke was most likely recorded before that time, presumably in the late 50's.

Carsten Thiede talks about a codex papyrus of Luke's Gospel found at the Bibliotheque in Paris. After evaluating the original document, the papyrologist decided it had been from the first century A.D., only slightly older than the Magdalen Papyrus.

Later Embellishment Theory

Before we leave Luke, there is another item which needs to be mentioned. Skeptics, you'll recall, believe that all of those miraculous events were just fictitious inventions tacked to the original writings centuries later. Luke discredits their "later embellishment" theory.

In Acts 2:22, he quotes Peter's sermon to the Jews at Pentecost: "Men of Israel, hear me. Jesus of Nazareth was designated by God making recognized to you by miracles, wonders, and signs which God did among you thru him." Peter followed that track of: ". . . you, with the aid of wicked men put him to death by nailing him towards the cross. But God raised him in the dead . . . . God has raised this Jesus to life, and we're all witnesses from the fact . . . . God makes this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ." (Acts 2:23-24, 32, and 36)

Peter said essentially: You yourselves saw Jesus perform miracles. That wasn't just a man you crucified. That was your Lord and Christ. In addition, that Man didn't stay dead. God brought him back to life. We know that for certain. We have seen him with this own eyes; heard him with our own ears; why, we even ran our fingers over his crucifixion wounds. He's alive. And he's back!

The interesting point here is how the crowd reacts. If modern skeptics were right, that's, those incredible supernatural events never really happened, we would expect the crowd to state something to the effect: Who are you kidding? That man never performed any miracles! And he's dead. We saw him die. Forget him, Peter. Get a life of your personal.

However they didn't say that. Instead: "They were cut to the heart and said: 'Brothers, what should we do?'" (Acts 2:37) They had seen Jesus' "miracles, wonders, and signs" and Peter used that knowledge to convert those Jews to Christianity.

Another thing. Observe that Peter doesn't shy away from Jesus' resurrection. Actually, it is the focus of his speech. Remarkable is it not? Three thousand of these hearing Peter's words accepted the apostle's eye witnessed account. We read, "Those who accepted (Peter's) message were baptized and about 3,000 were put into their number that day." (Acts 2:41)

Peter, John, and Paul all made use of firsthand evidence in their writings. Peter said: We didn't constitute stories whenever we told you concerning the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. (2 Peter 1:16)

John reads: We let you know what we should have seen and heard so you may have fellowship around. And our fellowship is by using the Father and his Son, Jesus Christ. (1 John 1:3) John is referring to himself when he known the witness of Christ's death: "We know this is true, because it was told by someone who saw it happen. Now you can have faith too." (John 19:35 CEV)

Also Paul, in speaking to Festus and King Agrippa, tells them that Christ did exactly what Moses and also the prophets said he would do, that is, he suffered, died, and it was raised in the dead. Festus immediately questioned Paul's sanity. But Paul responds: "What I'm saying is reasonable and true. The king knows these things and that i can speak freely to him. I am convinced none of this has escaped his notice, because it was not done in a large part." (Acts 26:25-26)

Again, notice the reaction. The interesting thing here is what King Agrippa did not say. He didn't say: That's the craziest thing That i have ever heard of Paul. It has been my experience that dead people have a tendency to stay dead!

That is what we should would expect Agrippa to state, unless, unless he knew something out of the ordinary had place. Paul made three startling claims here: First, Jesus was the long awaited Messiah and also the fulfillment of prophecy. Second, Jesus was resurrected from the grave. And maybe more and more extraordinary, Paul himself claims to have experienced and heard the resurrected Jesus on the road to Damascus.

Amazingly enough, King Agrippa doesn't laugh at, ridicule, or get angry at Paul's "outrageous" claims. Apparently, Agrippa didn't find the remarks outrageous. He merely replies, "Do you think that in such a short time you can persuade me to be a Christian?" (Acts 26:28)

Gospel of Mark

The Gospel of Mark was most likely composed inside a.D. 50's or even the early 60's. According to early church tradition, Mark was written in Rome where Peter spent the final days of his life. Romans crucified Peter upside down inside a.D. 64.

Mark seems to have been written for a gentile audience, possibly a Roman audience. Unlike Matthew, he explains Jewish customs and translates Aramaic words for his readers. Also Mark shows a special curiosity about persecution and martyrdom - subjects of crucial importance to Roman believers of his day.

Mark's work was readily accepted, also it spread rapidly throughout Christianity. Some believe the reason it was distributed so quickly is because it originated in Rome.

A papyrus scroll fragment of Mark 6:52-53 called 7Q5 was excavated from Qumran Cave 7. "It should be dated before A.D. 68 and could easily be as soon as A.D. 50," claims Carsten Thiede.

Although the early church said Matthew was the first Gospel, many today think Mark wrote his account first. They base their judgment around the proven fact that Mark's book is shorter and far of the items he explained are available in the Gospel of Matthew.

Scholars are inclined to express it was more likely that Matthew would expand on Mark's text rather that Mark would condense and leave out parts of what Matthew wrote. Besides, all what Mark wrote supposably came from Peter.

The assumption is that one copied in the other, but independent origins are a distinct possibility. The issue remains, why would an original apostle of Christ need to rely on other people to tell him what Jesus said and did?

Both writers probably used exactly the same oral tradition for memorized accounts of Christ's sayings and actions. It is certainly inside the realm of possibility these odds and ends of knowledge had already found their way into writing before Matthew and Mark composed their Gospels. The Gospel writers arranged and shaped those commonly known stories and sayings of Jesus into the more comprehensive narratives which bear their names.

Whichever Gospel was first, there is general consensus that both Matthew and Mark appeared before Luke unveiled his Gospel. That puts the probable dates of both early compositions somewhere within the A.D. 50's. The significant point here is that the period from Jesus' death to the first three Gospels is simply too short for the introduction of myths and legends.

The virgin birth, miracles, and the resurrection counseled me there right from the start. Those "incredible" supernatural events were a complicated area of the original story.

Many saw and remembered Jesus' miracles, and also over five hundred people saw the resurrected Jesus one time. Early Christianity trusted this well known for recruiting sign ups. The apostles noticed that this resurrected miracle worker was both Lord and Christ. As Peter demonstrated at Pentecost, it was a really persuasive argument.

Gospel of John

The apostle John "the disciple whom Jesus loved" may be the author. He refers to "the disciple whom Jesus loved" six times without naming the name. He was prominent in early church, but his name isn't mentioned in this Gospel. That's one of the little oddities of his book. "The disciple whom Jesus loved" would be a "natural" if somewhat coy way of talking about himself if John were the author. Otherwise, it is impossible to explain.

The Gospel of John includes a quantity of personal eyewitness touches for example recalling the fragrance of Mary's pure nard perfume which she poured on Jesus' feet in the home at Bethany. And then there is the episode of Jesus writing in the dust with his finger once they brought him the lady caught in adultery.

C.S. Lewis points out that the significance of this "dust writing" is it has no significance. Whether it were a tale, it might be the objective of the realistic prose fiction which never actually existed before the 18th century. To quote Lewis: "Surely, the only explanation of this passage is that the thing really happened. The author place it in due to the fact he had seen it."

Two early Christian writers, Irenaeus and Tertullian, both declare that John the apostle composed this Gospel and also the internal evidence concurs. Traditionally, it has been dated around A.D. 85. More recently, some scholars have suggested an earlier date, even down to the 50's with no later than the 70's. One little bit of internal evidence is John 5:2, where John uses the present tense "is" rather than "was" for a pool close to the Sheep Gate. That implies a period before A.D. 70 when Jerusalem was destroyed.

In 1935 a little fragment from the Gospel of John was found and dated in a.D. 125. It is called the John Ryland Manuscript. One for reds quotes John 18:31-33, and the other sides shows verses 37-38. The importance of this find is difficult to overstate, because it helps you to read the traditional date of the Gospel within the first century. Before discovery, there was a movement among scholars to place the original composition date around A.D. 170.

Textual Criticism

There is an academic discipline called "Textual Criticism." When the original document is lost, textual critics compare all available copies to try and piece together what the original document probably said. Generally the more manuscripts available and also the closer they date to the original, the better. The New Testament scores well on points.

New Testament books give a insightful material for the text critic scholars to evaluate: 5,147 ancient manuscripts, over 10,000 translated scripts into Latin Vulgate, and various other translations, plus a large range of early scripture quotations through the church fathers. The majority of the variations in the copies are minor variations for example word order, spelling, grammar, or stylistic details. However, some variations really make a difference. The United Bible Societies' Greek New Testament lists 2,040 teams of word variations they think Bible translators should consider.

Does that appear to be a large amount of disagreement? Actually, it represents a very small portion of the New Testament scriptures. But the important point is that this: The unanimous opinion among text scholars remains intact; none of the disputed words affect any doctrine from the Christian faith.

Realistically that's the best Christians could hope for. The same textual criticism which analyzes all ancient text confirms the substance from the New Testament text. The ancient text experts inform us the New Testament account we've today is basically the same message the authors recorded over nineteen centuries ago.

2 notes · View notes