July - Reading 22

Thanks Aaron -

Our Scriptural reading for 7/22 is:

Luke 12:13-21

2 Thessalonians 2:13-17

Psalm 147

2 Chronicles 25-27

May God bless the reading of His Word.

 

Good evening –

A pattern has been established in the Chronicles now that we have gotten into the “bad” kings of Judah. The Chronicler cites the positive acts of the kings first and shows the reflection of blessing as a result. Then in the second half of his account for each of these reigns, he will cite the negative acts performed by these monarchs and the consequences of these acts. We see this cycle in all three chapters of today’s readings. For example, Amaziah listens to the prophet in verse 25:10 and thus claims victory over the men of Seir. However, in verse 20 he refuses to listen to God and is thus defeated by Israel. In organizing the writings of these chapters in such a way, the Chronicler clearly shows the theology behind the success or the failures of the Judean Kings.

In our reading of Luke the Parable of the rich fool sums up the Christian view towards materialism. This reflects clearly the passage in Matthew 6:19-20 which puts into perspective where true riches lay:

2Thessalonians 13 brings us back to the concept of election. For other references to this concept you can check Collosians 3:12, 1Thessalonians 1:4 and Ephesians 1:4. Verse 14 shows us that election, though from eternity, happens during a lifetime as God calls us through the Gospel. The remainder of this passage shows us the necessity to stand firm on our teachings to preserve our election into the Body.

May God bless you

- Clint

 

Clint

Is there a predominantly held Baptist interpretation of 2 Thessalonians 2:15.

15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.(KJV)

It would seem to me that you would need an extra-biblical reason to deny the teachings of this verse but even with all this time on the board I still don't have a clear understanding how Baptists interpret scripture.

Thanks

 

Hi BAC -

It's been a while. I wondered if you were still with us.

I don't know about a "predominate" interpretation, but in the past year or two I have seen this verse thrown out by the Catholics and papist to defend the authoriy given to tradition by the Catholic church.

In Albert Barnes' Notes on the New Testament published in 1885, he offers this rebuttal:

I hope this answers your question.

[ July 23, 2003, 01:35 PM: Message edited by: Clint Kritzer ]

 

Yes, althouugh Mr. Barnes understands the passage he refuses to accept it because of his own man-made traditions.

His position is too biased to accept or conceive of one Authoritative Church, so he says we have know way of receiving what came from the apostles and that the Traditions that have been recorded by the fathers of the church from the first century onward don't fit well with his man-made Bible interpretations therefore we must not hold to Tradition despite scripture explicitly telling us to do so.

Looking forward to tommorows discussion on

2 Thessalonians 3
6 Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us.

 

Clint

BTW thanks for the welcome back, I have been lurking a little bit. Initially I tried to comment more but had to make some choices on how to allocate the little free time I had. And chose other ways to serve the Lord and my family. Unfortunately the giving up sleep time approach and actively participating in this forum only worked for a week or two. I truly admire your perseverence in doing this almost every day.

Wasn't quite sure about your use of the term papist it seems outside your normal character. The term papist began as a derogatory term/insult for Catholics sort of like the N**** word for blacks. However I gladly wear the name for those who choose to call me by it.

God Bless

Dennis

 

Dennis -

My sincere apologies as I misused the word. After a quick look at the dictionary I recognize my mistake. I would have been better to use the term "Catholic sympathizers" or some similar remark. No offense was intended. You have always been quite polite to me as well, though I hope that would have no bearing on how I treated another.

- Clint

p.s. - I considered posting another commentator's view of the cited Passage but it reads much the same way.

 

Sunday School lesson 11/21/04 - continued

Luke 12:13-21 The Rich Farmer

At this point in the narrative a man spoke up from the crowd asking Jesus to arbitrate an inheritance dispute between him and his bother. To fully understand what was transpiring here, we must know some of the Mosaic Law concerning inheritance and the traditional role of rabbis in the Jewish society.

The Torah addresses the issue of inheritance fairly often making provisions for daughters, near kin, clans, and brothers, but always stressing that the double portion go to the first born male. Despite the many specifications, however, material gain through inheritance would cause disputes - an issue all too many can relate to in the modern day. For the Jews, the religious leaders held the same authority over such civic matters as they did over spiritual and therefore it became the place of recognized teachers to settle these disputes.

So this man from the multitude calls to Jesus for a judgment in the matter between him and his brother over their inheritance. Jesus, however, rejects the office being thrust upon Him. His ministry was not about accumulating wealth on this earth. Instead he taught that man's energies should be spent on the pursuit of higher values. Possessions do not equal life in Jesus' teachings. In this Passage the word "covetous" is synonymous with "greed".

To demonstrate His point, Jesus tells a Parable of a man who had more than he knew what to do with. The character is introduced to us as already "rich." Thus, the abundance in his harvest served to increase his wealth. This set before the man a dilemma: what should he do with the excess? To answer the question, he does not seek the counsel of God or man but he begins a conversation with himself.

"What shall I do" was the question that the rich man asked himself. He possessed more than he needed and he must now decide what to do with that which he does not need. As the man converses with himself he constantly refers to all belonging to him. It was "my crops," "my barns," "my grain," "my goods." As he reaches his egotistical resolution, however, he goes one step further and says "take rest, my soul." This phrase demonstrates how self-centered the man was. He failed to acknowledge his soul as belonging to God along with all the material things he had. The man was a poor steward of that which God had given him. Rather than fill empty stomachs, the man decided to fill new, empty barns.

The man soon learns that the one thing he does not possess is what his greed would supply for: the many years. Instead, God, Who had supplied everything else, did not supply these. Instead, the man died and another man, possibly another fool, became the owner of all that the man had stored and cherished.

 

Our Scriptures for 7/23 are:

Luke 12:22-34

2 Thessalonians 3:1-5

Psalm 148

2 Chronicles 28-29

 

Our Scriptures for 7/23 are:

Luke 12:22-34

2 Thessalonians 3:1-5

Psalm 148

2 Chronicles 28-29

 

Our Scriptures for 7/23 are:

Luke 12:22-34

2 Thessalonians 3:1-5

Psalm 148

2 Chronicles 28-29

 

Our Scriptures for 7/23 are:

Luke 12:22-34

2 Thessalonians 3:1-5

Psalm 148

2 Chronicles 28-29

 

Our Scriptures for 7/23 are:

Luke 12:22-34

2 Thessalonians 3:1-5

Psalm 148

2 Chronicles 28-29