2 Chronicles
2 Chronicles seems to be fairly similar to 2 Kings. They both gave a brief synopsis of each king and mentioned whether or not they obeyed the law. I did notice one difference in the last chapter today. 2 Chronicles ends with a message of hope for Israel because Cyrus of Persia announces that he will rebuild the temple in Jerusalem and let anyone who desires go back to Jerusalem. This announcement leads nicely into the next book of Ezra. 2 Kings didn't go over that, and just ended with Jehoiachin living in prison.
Luke
Luke 12:50-51 caught my attention. Jesus said "But I have a baptism to undergo, and how distressed I am until it is completed! Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but division."
First of all, the fact that Jesus was distressed until he completed his 'baptism' which I think refers to his death and resurrection. He doesn't always let us into his feelings about his task on earth. Usually, we just hear about all the wonderful things he did in ushering in the kingdom of God. But in this sentence, we find out just how much of an impact his ultimate goal had on him. It was truly difficult for him to follow through with the plan. We are privy to this struggle at one other point in scripture - his time in Gethsemane where he asks that God take 'this cup' from him, but also that God would have His will done. When we're struggling with a difficult task that God has given us, we can run to Jesus, because he certainly knows what we're dealing with.
Verse 51 is also interesting because it makes me think of another verse about peace. Luke 2:14 says "Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace to men on whom his favour rests." Jesus' birth seems to usher in peace on earth, and yet later in his ministry, Jesus says that he didn't come to bring peace. Seems like somewhat of a paradox.
However, after reading Gill's Exposition on the Bible, I have found somewhat of an answer. God came to bring peace to men (as happened with Jesus' birth), but Jesus was not going to set up a political kingdom and solve the world's problems of peace or war. So these two different verses are really talking about two different kinds of peace - God's and man's. I think God's peace toward us is much more desirable and much longer lasting!
Showing posts with label Gill's Exposition on the Bible. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Gill's Exposition on the Bible. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Sunday, May 15, 2011
We can see the kingdom of God
Luke
Jesus said in Luke 9:27 that there would be some among the disciples who would not taste death until they saw the kingdom of God. What does this mean? The kingdom of God sometimes seems to be a bit ethereal, not just in the sense that it is part of the spiritual world, but also in that it seems like we could never be a part of it until we die. But that's not the case.
The kingdom of God exists wherever God has sovereign control. In one sense, that means everything is God's kingdom. However, I think that in this context, and in most places where this phraseology is used in the bible, the kingdom of God refers to wherever people are joining in God's mission and working to extend his power in this earthly realm. We can do this through the Holy Spirit. Thus, God's kingdom probably truly started at Pentecost when the Holy Spirit came on the disciples.
I'm getting a bit of help from Gill's Exposition on the Bible for this idea, but, in Luke 9:27, when Jesus said some of the disciples wouldn't die until they saw the kingdom of God, he meant that some of them would survive until he was raised to life and they could see firsthand his true power and authority as God's Son.
Jesus said in Luke 9:27 that there would be some among the disciples who would not taste death until they saw the kingdom of God. What does this mean? The kingdom of God sometimes seems to be a bit ethereal, not just in the sense that it is part of the spiritual world, but also in that it seems like we could never be a part of it until we die. But that's not the case.
The kingdom of God exists wherever God has sovereign control. In one sense, that means everything is God's kingdom. However, I think that in this context, and in most places where this phraseology is used in the bible, the kingdom of God refers to wherever people are joining in God's mission and working to extend his power in this earthly realm. We can do this through the Holy Spirit. Thus, God's kingdom probably truly started at Pentecost when the Holy Spirit came on the disciples.
I'm getting a bit of help from Gill's Exposition on the Bible for this idea, but, in Luke 9:27, when Jesus said some of the disciples wouldn't die until they saw the kingdom of God, he meant that some of them would survive until he was raised to life and they could see firsthand his true power and authority as God's Son.
Monday, May 2, 2011
New wine in new wineskins
Key verses
Luke
I was just enlightened as to the meaning behind the new wine in new wineskins and old wine in old wineskins parable that Jesus told as recounted in Luke 5:36-39. Before now I didn't catch the connection between what he was saying and what he meant. In Gill's Exposition on the Bible, I found out that the old wine was likened to the Old Testament and the old wineskins were the Pharisees and Sadducees type of people. It's easy to see this connection when you read this paragraph of Luke with the paragraphs beforehand, but my bible has them all separated with headings.
Anyway, the new wine certainly burst the old wineskins when the Pharisees listened to Jesus but rarely accepted what he was saying. However, the disciples, who weren't as learned in the law, as well as the tax collectors who didn't pay much attention to the Old Testament, were new wineskins who readily accepted Jesus' new message of life and hope for all people.
Perhaps you already knew the meaning to this parable, but for me, today's reading was yet another lesson in reading contextually, and reading commentaries.
Follow this link to find additional commentary on Luke 5:36-39 at bible.cc.
2 Kings 13:20-21 - "Elisha died and was buried. Now Moabite raiders used to enter the country every spring. Once
while some Israelites were burying a man, suddenly they saw a band of
raiders; so they threw the man’s body into Elisha’s tomb. When the body
touched Elisha’s bones, the man came to life and stood up on his feet."
Luke
I was just enlightened as to the meaning behind the new wine in new wineskins and old wine in old wineskins parable that Jesus told as recounted in Luke 5:36-39. Before now I didn't catch the connection between what he was saying and what he meant. In Gill's Exposition on the Bible, I found out that the old wine was likened to the Old Testament and the old wineskins were the Pharisees and Sadducees type of people. It's easy to see this connection when you read this paragraph of Luke with the paragraphs beforehand, but my bible has them all separated with headings.
Anyway, the new wine certainly burst the old wineskins when the Pharisees listened to Jesus but rarely accepted what he was saying. However, the disciples, who weren't as learned in the law, as well as the tax collectors who didn't pay much attention to the Old Testament, were new wineskins who readily accepted Jesus' new message of life and hope for all people.
Perhaps you already knew the meaning to this parable, but for me, today's reading was yet another lesson in reading contextually, and reading commentaries.
Follow this link to find additional commentary on Luke 5:36-39 at bible.cc.
Monday, March 7, 2011
Speaking in parables
Mark
Mark 4:33-34 is curious:
33With many similar parables Jesus spoke the word to them, as much as they could understand. 34He did not say anything to them without using a parable. But when he was alone with his own disciples, he explained everything.
Why would Jesus specifically use parables?
Gill suggests that Jesus spoke in parables because the crowd would have up and killed him directly if he hadn't cloaked his message. William Barclay, another theologian, suggests that Jesus spoke in parables to ensure that only the devoted followers would stick around to truly find out what he was all about. My take is somewhat along the lines of Barclay's, that they wouldn't have accepted his message if he had just outright said it. So, parables make some sense! They require that the listener actually think about what was being said and work out the message that is hidden within, rather than taking the message at face value and probably forgetting about it soon after
Here is a link to sermon on Mark 4:33-34 by Charles Spurgeon (click here).
Mark 4:33-34 is curious:
33With many similar parables Jesus spoke the word to them, as much as they could understand. 34He did not say anything to them without using a parable. But when he was alone with his own disciples, he explained everything.
Why would Jesus specifically use parables?
Gill suggests that Jesus spoke in parables because the crowd would have up and killed him directly if he hadn't cloaked his message. William Barclay, another theologian, suggests that Jesus spoke in parables to ensure that only the devoted followers would stick around to truly find out what he was all about. My take is somewhat along the lines of Barclay's, that they wouldn't have accepted his message if he had just outright said it. So, parables make some sense! They require that the listener actually think about what was being said and work out the message that is hidden within, rather than taking the message at face value and probably forgetting about it soon after
Here is a link to sermon on Mark 4:33-34 by Charles Spurgeon (click here).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)