John 21:18 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, When thou wast young, thou girdest thyself, and walkedst whither thou wouldest: but when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wouldest not.
John 21:19 This spake he, signifying by what death he should glorify God. And when he had spoken this, he saith unto him, Follow me.
https://youtu.be/hKB_bQbmiNo 1st Peter
.No money for the healing
.3 words for love in Greek
.We are the letters
.See the Lexington and the great Bayfront view of Corpus Christi
Correction- On the video I mention the healing of a leper [verses below] and say Elijah healed him. Actually it was Elisha- his protégé’
PAST LINKS [verses below]
I add sections like this on the videos/posts because when I review the videos if I mention a teaching- like Logos- Nero- Orthodoxy- etc.- then I simply cut and paste my old teachings on the subject.
I add the WP links because if I quote from a bible book- like Corinthians- I simply link my entire teaching- commentary- from the past- instead of re-writing new notes.
(835)ROMANS 7:1-4 Paul uses the analogy of a married woman ‘don’t you know that the law has dominion over a person as long as he is alive’? If a married woman leaves her husband and marries another man she is guilty of breaking the law of adultery. Now, if her husband dies, she is free to marry another man. The act that freed her from sin and guilt was death! Every thing else in the scenario stayed the same. She still married another, she still consummated the new marriage. But because her first husband died, she has no guilt. I always loved this analogy. For years I wondered why these themes in scripture are for the most part not ‘imbedded’ in the collective psyche of the people of God. We have spent so much time ‘proof texting’ the verses on success and wealth, that we have overlooked the really good stuff! Now Paul teaches that we have been made free from the law by the ‘death of our husband’ [Jesus] so we can ‘re-marry’. Who do we marry? Christ! He has not only died to free us from the law, he also rose from the dead to become our ‘husband’ [we are called the bride of Christ]. Paul connects the death and resurrection of Jesus in this analogy. Both are needed for the true gospel to be preached [1st Corinthians 15]. Notice how in this passage Paul emphasizes ‘the death of Christ’s body’. The New Testament doesn’t always make this distinction, but here it does. In the early centuries of Christianity you had various debates over the nature and ‘substance’ of God and Christ. The church hammered out various decrees and creeds that would become the Orthodoxy of the day. Many of these are what you would call the ‘Ecumenical councils’. These are the early councils [many centuries!] that both the eastern [Orthodox church] and western [Catholic] churches would all accept. Some feel that the early church fathers and Latin theologians [Tertullian, Augustine and others] had too much prior influence from philosophy and the ‘forensic’ thinking of their time. They had a tendency to describe things in highly technical ways. Ways that were prominent in the legal and philosophical thinking of the West. Some of the eastern thinkers [Origen] had more of a Greek ‘flavor’ to their theologizing [Alexandria, named after Alexander the great, was a city of philosophy many years prior to Christ. This city was at one time the center of thinking in the East. That’s why Paul would face the thinkers at Athens, they had a history in the east of Greek philosophy]. Well any way the result was highly technical debates over the nature of God and Christ. The historic church would finally decree that Christ had 2 natures, Human and Divine. And that at the Cross the ‘humanity of Jesus’ died, but his ‘Deity’ did not. I think Paul agreed by saying ‘we are free from the law by the death of Christ’s Body’ here Paul distinguishes between the physical death of Jesus and his Deity. Note- actually, Augustine would be in the same school as Origen. Alexandrian.
My approach to these types of debates is I’m what you would call Ecumenical- I believe that Catholics, Protestants, Orthodox- and all the other ‘churches’ that profess Christ- I believe they are all Christian.
Now you might say ‘well John- doesn’t everybody?’ Actually no- many of the most knowledgeable Apologists do indeed go after the other groups. Quite often you will have a strong protestant defender [usually from the Reformed faith] that will really hit the Catholic church- in my view- too hard.
While it is true that historically Catholics and Protestants have differences- I have often found that Many ‘average’ Catholics/Protestants are not really aware of the real differences- they often have very limited perspectives about the ‘other side’ and these limited ideas [often wrong] seem to stay with the people- for most of their lives.
One example- the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception- what is it?
The teaching became Official- only in the last 2 centuries of the Catholic church- though it was held by many- it finally became official in the last 2 hundred years [ 1854 for the Immaculate Conception- 1950 for the Assumption of Mary doctrine].
The doctrine teaches that the Virgin Mary- Jesus Mom- was born ‘without the taint of original sin’. Now- what does that mean?
Some Protestants think the Catholics teach that Mary was ‘sinless’ in the same way Christ was sinless.
Actually- that’s not the official doctrine [see- it’s important to know the official teaching when we engage like this]. The actual teaching- that has the churches Imprimatur on it- is that Mary WAS A SINNER- just like the rest of us- but in order for Jesus to have been born from a pure vessel- that the actual work of the Cross- Redemption- it was applied to Mary ‘ahead of time’.
Yes- the official teaching is that Mary ‘was saved’ from her sin- just like the rest of us- thru the Cross. The difference is the forgiveness that came to Mary- came to her before she was born- yes- the teaching does teach that Mary was born ‘without sin’ but not like Jesus was without sin- but she was ‘without sin’ because her salvation was applied ahead of time- way ahead of time- before she was born.
Okay- do Protestants believe in this teaching? No. But is it ‘so way out of line’ to the point where we should view our Catholic brothers and sisters as ‘non Christian’ because of it? No- not in my view.
Plus- many Catholics don’t even realize that this is what the doctrine teaches- many think it is talking about the birth of Jesus- being born without sin- by the act of the Holy Spirit descending upon the Virgin Mary and Mary conceiving.
No- this is what we call ‘The Virgin birth- conceived by the Holy Ghost’. Jesus being born from a virgin with no earthly father.
This is not the Immaculate Conception.
So right here alone [trust me- there are many more examples that I could give] Both Catholics and Protestants usually get the doctrine wrong- yet they remain divided their whole lives- over something that they are not even right about.
So I have found this type of stuff to be a problem while striving for Christian unity- and many Christians prefer to see the ‘other side’ in a negative light- and will continue to view them that way- till they die.
I always feel bad when I lose a friend from the site- sometimes you can’t help it [other times it is my fault!] but sometimes it’s because we have views about things- strongly held views- and when others hold to a different view- well we try and avoid them.
One day I received a Friends Request- to my surprise- it was from a young Catholic priest- I did not know him but he must have read a few posts of mine and liked them. He often gave me Thumbs Up comments on the posts- and at times would tell me he loved the posts.
Most were my Theology/Church history posts.
Often times Catholics and Protestants can agree and enjoy these types of studies. I love studying and teaching on the Church Fathers and early Christian history- and these sources all have a very strong Catholic flavor to them- so I see my fellow Catholics as being a part of a long tradition of Christian history.
Many famous converts to the Catholic Church [Bishop John Newman- converted from the Anglican Church] convert because they read the Church Fathers- and when you read them- it’s obvious to see the catholic nature of the early church in these men’s writings.
So anyway I was very happy to have a Catholic priest as one of my ‘on line students’ [and honored].
But one day- during one of my studies [covering one subject for a month or so] to my surprise I saw he was gone [yes- the dreaded block]. I thought- geez- wonder why?
I realized it was right in the middle of a study I did on Islam- and while I was doing the posts- I was also going thru a study on Islam- by the same guy who teaches it to the U.S. govt. – yes- it was a prof. [I think named Espinoza?] who teaches Islam to our govt. employees [sort of like a tolerance type thing].
Though the teacher was Catholic- yet he was VERY much pro Islam- I mean to the point where I had to reject some of the stuff he was saying- and finish the study from my own education on Islam.
At one point- he taught that the spread of Islam thru out the world had a wonderful- liberating effect on all the women in the lands where Islam spread. I mean it was so obvious that the man had no idea what he was talking about [in this area] that I realized he was not a good source [this happens every so often].
And it was more troubling that this was the guy Obama picked to teach Islam to our govt. employees [don’t get me wrong here- he teaches our govt. workers- not to convert them- but more of an informative type thing- just like you would teach any other course about sexual harassment- or whatever].
Anyway- in one of my posts while teaching on my site- I did refer to Mohamed as ‘the prophet’- now- I don’t receive Mohamed that way myself- but because I was teaching some Muslims who did recently join the site- well I used the title in this way.
I think that might have been the ‘last straw’ for my student/priest- he ‘went on Pilgrimage’ right after that post.
Okay- today’s point is we all should try our best to be ‘tolerant’ that is- we should give people as much grace/mercy as possible- but at the same time we also need to be honest about the Christian faith.
Yes- as Christians we believe salvation comes thru Christ- he was not just ‘one religious leader among many’ no- we believe he is the Way- the Truth- the Life/light- no man comes to the Father- but by him.
Sometimes we do our best not to offend- we might even go out of our way to receive people- other religions and systems that are not Christian- that’s okay- I have Muslim and Jewish and all types of friends- I’m glad they are my friends!
But we also have to be honest about our beliefs- and every now and then that might- just might- earn you a BLOCK.
On today’s video- I attempted the impossible- to tell the story of ‘everything’ in 1 hour.
Ok I bit off more than I could chew.
It took 2 hours [the next video ‘history of the world- part 2’ will finish it].
But- to sum up today’s video.
Gematria- a common use at the time John wrote- which gives each letter of the Hebrew alphabet a numerical value.
Nero Caesar[ 1st century emperor] equals 666.
STUFF HE DID;
1-Made people worship him- as God [2Thessalonians 2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
2Thessalonians 2:4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.]
2-Castrated a boy- named Sporus- then married him.
3-Put tar on Christians- set them on fire and used them as human torches.
Nero ruled as emperor and persecuted the early church- his rule led up to the destruction of the Jewish temple in a.d. 70.
The predictions Jesus gave to his apostles about the destruction of Jerusalem and a great time of wrath [or tribulation] can indeed be seen as having happened during the 1st century.
Many people believed Nero to be the fulfillment of the anti-Christ that the New Testament speaks of.
John the apostle wrote that ‘anti-Christ’ were those who denied Jesus- at the time of his writing [1st century].
John- who wrote Revelation- said ‘the mind that has wisdom’ will figure out who he is talking about.
John sent this letter to actual Christians living in the 1st century.
You would expect that the readers of the letter would have some clue to who he was talking about.
As we go thru Revelation- my intent is not to cover [and debate] all the various views on all the verses in this book.
I simply show you this view [which I think is about the best one out there] Because we live in a day where many of the ‘end times’ teachings seemed to be consumed with a future leader [a famous preacher just prophesied ‘the anti-Christ is here’ the other day] who is still to come-
And that this will set off a cascade of events [most see these events as prophesied in Revelation- and sort of see it as a play book].
So- it is quite possible that the anti-Christ was Nero-
And yes- we live in a wicked world- and sure- we might/will continue to see men ‘rise’ and do wicked things.
But when Paul and John wrote- in the first century- warning the believers about a wicked ruler who would do bad things-
I think it would have been a disservice if he were speaking about a leader- who would not show up- until at least 2 thousand years later.
BELOW- I pasted some various views here- just to give you a flavor of the different ways Christians view some of these things.
At the end I also added some of the passages I talk about on the video.
Here’s a quote from St. Augustine- an early Christian leader- referring to the verse I pasted from 2nd Thessalonians-
“Some think that the Apostle Paul referred to the Roman empire, and that he was unwilling to use language more explicit, lest he should incur the calumnious charge of wishing ill to the empire which it was hoped would be eternal; so that in saying, ‘For the mystery of iniquity doth already work,’ he alluded to Nero, whose deeds already seemed to be as the deeds of Antichrist. And hence some suppose that he shall rise again and be Antichrist. Others, again, suppose that he is not even dead, but that he was concealed that he might be supposed to have been killed, and that he now lives in concealment in the vigor of that same age which he had reached when he was believed to have perished, and will live until he is revealed in his own time and restored to his kingdom. But I wonder that men can be so audacious in their conjectures” (De Civitate Dei, XX.19.3).
I pasted this from another site-
In both ancient Greek and Hebrew, letters also represented numerals (as they do in Latin), their values assigned according to the order of the alphabet, alpha and aelph, for example, having the numerical value of 1. By adding these values, words could be represented as the sum of their numbers. This literation of numbers and numeration of letters was known as isopsephism by the Greeks and gematria by the Jews (which, in cabalistic practice, has been used to interpret Hebrew scripture). If the Greek spelling of Nero Caesar (Neron Kaisar) is transliterated into Hebrew (nrwn qsr), the numerical equivalent is 666.
What is curious, however, is not so much that 666 can be decoded to signify Nero but that the name of the emperor is encoded in this particular number, especially since it could have been represented more readily in other ways. If “Nero” is retained in Greek, for example, the numeration would be 955 or, if “Neron,” 1005; in Hebrew, then 256 or 306, respectively. It only is when the words are transliterated into Hebrew that the numeration adds up to 666 (nrwn qsr, 50 + 200 + 6 + 50 + 100 + 60 + 200). Even so, this is an alternate spelling, a letter in “Neron” being transliterated (nrwn instead of nrw) but not in “Caesar” (qsr instead of qysr), although these forms do appear in both the Talmud and a contemporary Aramaic scroll from Qumran. It is intriguing, therefore, that 666 encodes the name of Nero in Hebrew when Revelation, itself, was written in Greek.
One should appreciate, too, that there were no numbers in Greek or Hebrew and that the “the number of the beast” was not presented as a figure but as letters of the alphabet or written in full. That is to say, it was not expressed as “666” (indeed, discrete Arabic numerals would not be invented for another five hundred years) but as the numerical values of the three letters representing 600, 60, and 6.
For Watt, the significance of 666 is that its expression in Latin is the sequential Roman numerals DCLXVI, which parallels but is the antithesis of the “Alpha and Omega” that John uses to characterize both Christ (22:13) and God (1:8, 21:6). As the Deity represents the beginning and end, so the Antichrist is a reversal of the first and last, D (500) preceding I (1). To phrase this another way, 666 (or rather DCLXVI) signifies the Antichrist because that number signifies Nero, and Nero—who was a matricide, proclaimed his divinity on Egyptian coins as the “Savior and Benefactor of the World,” and the first emperor to persecute the Christians—signifies the Antichrist. Indeed, the procurator of Judea (c. AD 60) refers to Nero as “my lord” (kyrios), the same title applied to Jesus (Acts 25:26).
If the Latin (rather than the Greek) spelling “Nero Caesar” (above) is transliterated into Hebrew (nrw qsr), the final “n” in Neron being omitted (and its corresponding value of 50), the name computes as 616, which is the number indicated in the oldest surviving copy of the New Testament (the fragment illustrated below). If, instead, “Neron Caesar” is correct, it may be that the Latin was transcribed incorrectly, perhaps because the copyist realized that this transliteration did not equate to 666 and so omitted the letter, which changed the sum to 616.
Still, each digit of 666 is one less than seven, the perfect number, and such mathematical play may have tended to establish 666, rather than 616. Regardless of the number, Nero is the only name that can account for both 666 and 616, which is the most compelling argument that he, and not some other emperor, such as Caligula or Domitian, was intended. Too, for the number to have any significance for a reader of the first century AD, it would have to refer to a contemporary historical figure.
Writing a century later, Irenaeus is the first church father to comment on the number of the beast, although he apparently was ignorant of what the number actually encoded. Nor is he correct in assuming that John’s vision occurred “almost in our day, towards the end of Domitian’s reign” (Adversus Haereses, V.30.3; a tradition repeated by Eusebius in his Ecclesiastical History, III.18.3, and by the church fathers), which is to say sometime before AD 96, when the emperor was assassinated and just a few years before John himself died of old age. Rather, his presumed banishment to Patmos (where Revelation was written) seems to have occurred almost thirty years earlier, toward the end of Nero’s reign and before the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70, which John otherwise would have mentioned.
For Irenaeus, 666 was correct. The Antichrist “sums up in his own person all the commixture of wickedness which took place previous to the deluge….and also sums up every error of devised idols since the flood” (V.29.2). The flood came in the six hundredth year of Noah and the golden image set up by Nebuchadnezzar (who Shadrach, Meshach, and Bednego refused to worship) was sixty cubits high and six cubits wide (Daniel 3:1ff). This being the case and “this number being found in all the most approved and ancient copies….I do not know how it is that some have erred following the ordinary mode of speech, and have vitiated the middle number [L] in the name, deducting the amount of fifty from it, so that instead of six decads they will have it that there is but one” (V.30.1).
Nero, too, was the sixth emperor, counting from Julius Caesar (as did Suetonius, for example, and Josephus, cf. Antiquities of the Jews, XVIII.2.2, where Tiberius is identified as the third). “And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth. And there are seven kings: five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come” (Revelation 17:9-10). Of these emperors, it is Nero who had been “wounded to death” but “his deadly wound was healed” and he still lived (13:3)—Nero redivivus.
St. Jerome-“As for the Antichrist, there is no question but what he is going to fight against the holy covenant, and that when he first makes war against the king of Egypt, he shall straightway be frightened off by the assistance of the Romans. But these events were typically prefigured under Antiochus Epiphanes, so that this abominable king who persecuted God’s people foreshadows the Antichrist, who is to persecute the people of Christ. And so there are many of our viewpoint who think that Domitius Nero was the Antichrist because of his outstanding savagery and depravity.” (St. Jerome – Commentary on Daniel; notes on Daniel 11:27-30, — BAKER BOOK HOUSE Grand Rapids 6, Michigan 1958)
Some will suggest that the book of Revelation was written only for those living at the time, and that 666 most probably applies to Cæsar Nero, who ruled Rome from 54 to 68 A.D., rather than someone from latter centuries. This point of view, which suggests Revelation had an immediate application to the first century, is known as preterism. So, just how is Nero linked to 666?
Preterists take Nero’s name, Nero Cæsar and transliterates the Latin into Hebrew. An “n” is added to conform with the Hebrew spelling and usage of Nero’s name, in a manner similar to the Greek adding an “s” (i.e., Jeremias, Jonas, etc.). Other names in scripture where the adding of an “n” may be seen are Abaddon, Apollyon, and Armageddon. Once Hebraicized, the Latin Nero Caesar becomes “nrwn qsr,” which when using the numeric equivalent of the letters, then adds up to 666 as follows:
Nun = 50
Resh = 200
Waw = 6
Nun = 50
Qoph = 100
Samech = 60
Resh = 200
An example of this spelling has been recently discovered in one of the Dead Sea scrolls. If you use the same process, but without the added “n” the result is 616. Interestingly, some early manuscripts have 616 rather than 666, but even scholars such as Irenæus [A.D. 120-202] attribute the 616 to only a copyist error (Against Heresies: V, xxx) “this number  being found in all the most approved and ancient copies” [of the Apocalypse] and asserts that “men who saw John face to face bearing their testimony” [to it – 666].
The Seventy Weeks of Daniel Nine
by Prof. David J. Engelsma
I. The Premillennial Interpretation
A. Who they are
1. They are those who teach that in the near future Jesus will return to set up an earthly kingdom in Palestine for a thousand years.
2. They teach that the literal nation of Israel will then accept Him and be His special people as they were in the Old Testament.
3. They derive their name, premillennialists, from their doctrine of a literal millennium, before which the Lord returns (pre means “before;” millennium means “1,000 years” and is taken from Revelation 20).
B. They hold that the 70 weeks of Daniel 9, the whole prophecy, is exclusively for national Israel, the Jews
1. Nothing here for the church at all.
2. They appeal to the fact that it is “my people Israel” and literal Jerusalem that Daniel has been praying for.
3. They point to verse 24, where “thy people” is literal Judah and “thy holy city” is Jerusalem.
C. They explain the 70 weeks as a definite period of time
1. Not literal, for a literal interpretation would take the period as 490 days—a little more than a year.
2. A week, in the prophecy, is a week of years, they say.
3. 70 weeks, therefore, is 70 periods of 7 years, or 490 years.
D. Their breakdown of the 70 weeks, taken as 490 years
1. The starting–point, according to the text, is the “going forth of the word to restore and to build Jerusalem” (v. 25).
a. Premillennialists differ as to when this is.
b. Some say that it is Cyrus’ decree that Judah could return to Canaan; others refer to Darius’ permission to build the temple (cf. Ezra 6); others refer to Artaxerxes’ letter of Nehemiah 2:8.
c. It is important to them to establish the starting–point exactly, so that their definite period of 490 years comes correctly.
2. There are 69 weeks from that date to Messiah Prince (v. 25): “seven weeks and threescore and two weeks” = 69 weeks).
a. On the basis of 1 week = 7 years, a period of 483 years.
1) At this point, premillennialism has a problem and its attempt to solve the problem has resulted in many huge books of dates and numbers.
2) The problem is that it is difficult to get 483 years between a command to rebuild Jerusalem and “Messiah.”
a) Cyrus decreed Israel’s return in 537 B.C.—this is the best date for the going forth of a command to build Jerusalem, but it leaves too many years intervening before Messiah, and is therefore unacceptable to the premill.
b) So, many date the period from 445 B.C., the date of the letter of Artaxerxes of Nehemiah 2; they then carry the 69 week-period (483 years, on their view) to some late (arbitrary) date in the life of Christ.
c). This 69-week (or 483-year) period is divided into two parts, 7 weeks and 62 weeks (v. 25).
1) The 7 weeks, or 49 years, is the time of the actual rebuilding of Jerusalem, ending, roughly, at the time of the conclusion of the Old Testament Bible.
2) The 62 weeks, or 434 years, is the long period between the Testaments, up to some point in Christ’s life. (Some say His baptism; others, His triumphal entry.)
3) It is their view of the 70th week, however, that is the most important aspect of the premill interpretation of the passage and that lies at the very heart of the premill doctrine of the last days.
c. The last week, a definite period of 7 years, is still future.
1) It does not follow the 69 weeks.
2) Between the 69th week and the 70th week lies the nearly 2,000 years of our present age.
3) In the future (from our standpoint), the 70th week of verse 27 will occur.
a) At the end of the present age, the church will be raptured out of this world into the air and Antichrist will arise. (The “he” of verse 27 is supposed to refer to the Antichrist of the future.)
b) For 3? years, or ? of the 70th week, he will make a covenant with Israel, restored to the “Holy Land” of Palestine.
c) Suddenly, “in the midst of the week” (v. 27) he will begin persecuting Israel.
d) For 3? years, national Israel is persecuted—this is supposed to be “the great tribulation” of the Bible.
e) At the end of the 70th week, Jesus will return to destroy Antichrist, save Israel, and set up the millennial kingdom for 1,000 years, during which He reigns with national Israel from Palestine.
f) The importance of this interpretation of the seventy weeks and especially, of the 70th week for premillennialism is evident: this gives them the huge gap (or parenthesis) between the first advent of Christ and the supposed period in the future when Christ shall deal again with national Israel, the gap during which Christ gathers a church.
II. The Correct, Scriptural Interpretation
A. In opposition to the premill view, there are two basic objections as a whole
1. First, they can give no proof that the weeks are definite periods of 7 years each.
a. Often, the premill is quite dogmatic about this, but wrongly.
b. The fact is that nowhere in Scripture does the term week mean “7 years.”
2. Secondly, the passage does not indicate in any way that the 70th week is separated from the preceding 69 by a huge span of time.
a. If you think of it, this is a very bold bit of eisegesis (reading into a passage something that is not by any stretch of the imagination there).
b. To be sure, the 70th week follows the 69th, but at once.
B. Positively, what the 70 weeks are
1. Gabriel tells Daniel of one period of 70 weeks. Literally, it is 70 “sevens” (the Hebrew word for week). 70 is a symbolical number.
a. The premill will object to our taking the number symbolically; he will insist that it be taken literally.
1) Our reply to the premill is: “Do that. Take it literally. Then you have a period of 490 days.” But the premill does not want to take it literally, for he wants to make it 490 years.
2) In addition, we point out that prophecy of the 70 weeks is given to Daniel as a vision (v. 23: “consider the vision”). A vision is characterised by symbolism.
b. Seven is the number of the covenant of God with His people; 10 is the number of fullness. 70, therefore, symbolizes the fulfilment of the covenant of Jehovah, the covenant with Abraham and his seed.
c. The 70 weeks are the period of time from the command to rebuild Jerusalem to Jesus Christ, as the period of the fulfilment of the covenant. In this period, the covenant (7) will be fulfilled (10).
1) Understanding the70 weeks is not a matter of computing dates and figures.
2) We are basically uninterested in juggling dates and figuring calendar years.
3) That it happens to be about 575 years is irrelevant.
2. This one period of 70 weeks ends in an event in which, according to verse 24, six things are realized, the finishing of transgression, etc.
. All of these occur during the first advent of Christ Jesus (from His Incarnation through His resurrection and ascension).
a. The 70-week period terminates in the first advent of Christ, so that the whole period is from our standpoint past, not at all future.
3. The breakdown of the 70 weeks in detail:
. The period begins with the going forth of a command to build Jerusalem (v. 25).
1) This is the decree of Cyrus that Judah may return to Canaan in 537 B.C.
2) See Isaiah 44:28 and Isaiah 45:13.
3) This was a crucial juncture in Israel’s history and a wonderful manifestation of God’s faithfulness.
a) Israel is desolate, doomed.
b) God then, amazingly, orders Cyrus to give Israel deliverance, life from the dead.
a. 69 weeks takes us to Christ Jesus, “Messiah Prince” (v. 25).
1) This period is divided into two parts: 7 weeks and 62 weeks.
2) The 7 weeks are the period of the troublous building of Jerusalem.
a) Under Zerubbabel, Ezra, Nehemiah.
b) This takes us to about the time of the end of the Old Testament canon.
3) The 62 weeks are the period between the testaments.
4) The 69 weeks takes us up to “Messiah Prince.”
a) The premills argue over which event in the life of Christ is meant.
b) It is natural to understand verse 25 to refer to the coming of Messiah, that is, His birth.
(1) When Jesus was born, “Messiah Prince” appeared.
(2) “Where is he that is born King of the Jews?” the wise men asked, at the occasion of Jesus’ birth.
c) The 69 weeks, therefore, extend from Cyrus’ decree to the birth of Jesus.
b. Then, the 70th week follows, the “one week” of verse 27.
1) It is the period of the life and work of Jesus Christ that belongs to His first advent, inclusive of the resurrection, ascension, and perhaps, the outpouring of the Spirit.
2) The period of Jesus’ ministry was the 70th week, the period of the fulfilment of the covenant (7×10).
4. Objections against this interpretation of the 70th week by the premill.
. Basically, there are two objections; both concern verses 26-27.
a. First, the premill points out that Messiah is cut off after the 69th week (v. 26) and before the 70th week (v. 27): the same thing, he says, is true of the destruction of the city by the people of the prince.
1) The latter, all agree, refers to the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans under the general, Titus, in A.D. 70.
2) The premill argues that both the death of Jesus and the destruction of Jerusalem occur before the 70th week, not in it, according to the passage.
b. In close connection with this first objection, the premill maintains that verse 27 (“he shall confirm the covenant”) refers to the Antichrist and to a covenant which he will make with Israel at the end of the world, when the 70th week will finally come.
c. Our answer to these objections:
1) It is true that the death of Messiah comes after the 69th week (v.26); it is not the case however, that the text says that it occurred before the 70th week.
2) The one who confirms the covenant in verse 27 is not Antichrist, but Christ: He does this, not in the future, but in the past (from our present standpoint).
5. The truth of verses 26-27:
. The cutting off of Messiah and His having nothing (as it is in the original Hebrew) is the crucifixion of Jesus.
a. This occurred in the 70th week, which 70th week is the “one week” of verse 27; it is exactly the death of Messiah that makes that week the 70th week, that is, the week of the fulfilment of God’s covenant.
b. The first part of verse 27 refers to the Messiah, Jesus:
1) The meaning of verse 27 will be clearer from a more faithful translation than that given in the King James version: “And he shall confirm the covenant with many, one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and upon the wing of abominations [is] the one making desolate and unto completion and it is determined it shall be poured out on the desolate.”
2) It is Jesus the Messiah who confirms God’s covenant, “one week.”
3) It is Jesus the Messiah who puts an end to all Old Testament sacrifices and oblations by His one sacrifice of Himself on the cross in the midst of the 70th week (cf. Heb. 10).
4) If one asks concerning the rest of the 70th week, it is that which belongs to the first advent of Jesus following His death, namely, the period of His resurrection, ascension, and the outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost. One could make a good case, on the basis of the passage, for the contention that the end of the 70th week is the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. It was then that the new covenant as the fulfilment of the old covenant was definitively manifested.
c. Proof of this interpretation, as opposed to that of the premill:
1) It is exegetically incorrect to make “he” in verse 27a to refer back to “prince” in verse 26, and thus to come to the conclusion that the reference is to Antichrist.
a) The fact is that the subject of the phrase in verse 26 is not “the prince,” but “the people of the prince,” that is, the Romans who destroyed Jerusalem in A.D. 70.
b) The one, main subject of the entire prophecy is “Messiah Prince” and it is, therefore, to Him that “he” refers in verse 27a.
2) Verse 27 speaks of someone confirming a covenant.
a) The premill explains this to mean that the Antichrist will, in the future, make a covenant with the nation Israel.
b) But as the King James Version shows, verse 27 does not use the Hebrew word that means “make;” rather, it uses a word that means “to confirm;” the reference is not at all to the making of a new covenant but to the confirming of an already existing covenant.
(1) Jesus, “Messiah Prince,” did exactly this by His first advent: He confirmed the covenant with many.
(2) The covenant is God’s covenant with Abraham and Israel, the covenant Israel violated, as Daniel bitterly lamented in his prayer, the covenant which Daniel nevertheless besought God to keep.
(3) Jesus did confirm this covenant by His death and in the conformation revealed it in its full reality as including not only the elect of the Jews but also of the Gentiles.
6. In conclusion:
. The 70 weeks are fulfilled in the first advent of Jesus.
a. The covenant of Jehovah has been confirmed—for the many elect of all nations.
b. All of the blessings of the covenant, the benefits mentioned in verse 24, have been obtained by Messiah and are now freely dispensed to God’s people.
c. We and all believers live in the enjoyment of that fulfilled covenant and its spiritual blessings, in the new dispensation.
III. Another Interpretation
Another interpretation of the 70 weeks given by some Reformed amillennialists is the following. The 70 weeks are the entire period from the command to build Jerusalem to the second advent of Christ, including the present age. From Cyrus’ decree to the first advent is 7 weeks; from the first advent to the appearance of Antichrist in the future is 62 weeks; the 70th week is the brief period in the future during which Antichrist will reign and which ends with Christ’s return. The interpretation is possible because of another possible reading of the last part of verse 25. It is possible to translate the last part of verse 25 as follows: “… unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks; and threescore and two weeks the street shall be built again” etc. According to this translation, the building of the street and the wall, during the 62 weeks, is symbolic of the gathering of the church in the new dispensation.
This interpretation is wrong for the following reasons:
1. Like the view of the premills, this interpretation supposes that verse 27a (“he shall confirm the covenant”) refers to the Antichrist. Everything said above against the premill explanation of verse 27 holds against this explanation.
2. It does injustice to the plain meaning of the last part of verse 25. By the building the street and the wall of Jerusalem in troubled times, Gabriel does not refer to the gathering of the church but to the literal rebuilding of Jerusalem after the return of Judah from captivity.
3. The most serious and obvious error of this interpretation is its distortion of the statement in verse 26 that Messiah shall be cut off and have nothing. According to this interpretation, this has to be the destruction of the church by Antichrist at the end of the world (“after threescore and two weeks …”). In fact, the text is speaking of the cutting off of the Messiah personally, that is, Jesus’ death on the cross.
4. The translation of verse 25 is correct as we have it in the King James Version. Contents:
I. The Premillennial Interpretation
II. The Correct, Scriptural Interpretation
III. Another Interpretation
I mention on the video how God revealed himself to Samuel thru his voice- and I have been teaching about the Logos recently.
God’s word comes first- then the ‘flesh’ the actual outworking of what he wants to do-
Hebrews 11:3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
John 1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.
John 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
Samuel is an important figure in the nation at this time- because he will be the one to anoint the first 2 kings that Israel has- Saul and David.
God was willing to start speaking to his people again- but there would be a cleansing first.
The prophet Amos said ‘woe to you who ae looking for God’s day- asking ‘why is God not speaking anymore’.
Because there’s usually a reason his communication is cut off from his people- and that’s because his people are not hearing [hearing in the bible is not simply ‘hearing’ but it means you obey what is said] him anymore.
Yet- if we want to hear his prophets again- see his miracles- then that entails repentance on our part.
For many years Eli’s wicked sons were ‘doing ministry’ and the things they were getting away with seemed a common practice.
All the people knew it was wrong- they despised ‘the church’ because bad stuff was going on.
Yet- that’s just the way things were.
But then God had a vessel for his voice- a prophet- dedicated by a passionate mother- who kept her vow.
Much like the Virgin Mary- when the angel appeared to her- she said ‘so be it’.
God needs willing people- then he too will speak again.
Yes- we too can hear his voice- and the word of the Lord won’t be ‘scarce’.
1Samuel 11:1 Then Nahash the Ammonite came up, and encamped against Jabeshgilead: and all the men of Jabesh said unto Nahash, Make a covenant with
But- to sum up today’s video.
Is the biblical account of creation accurate?
We read that God made everything- by speaking.
Is this even possible- or some silly fable?
Over the history of time we read the story of the Jewish people- their trials and failures.
That’s the majority of the history of the Old Testament.
They believed the story in Genesis- while others questioned whether or not all things actually had a beginning point.
In time- we see the rise of the Greek philosophers- during what we call the intertestamental period [the 400 years between Malachi and Matthew].
These thinkers were looking for the answer to these questions- and the Greek word they used to describe this answer- was LOGOS- which is the Geek word- for WORD.
Then we had the appearing of Christ in the 1st century- and the apostle John calls him the LOGOS.
That’s the same word that the Greeks were looking for- John says ‘we have found him’.
Remember- this is Jesus Christ- the living Word.
Ok- over time we had the great movements of history- the Renaissance- the Reformation- the Enlightenment- the scientific revolution- the industrial revolution.
Most scientists believed that all creation was eternal- so- for them- the answer to ‘everything’ was- it was always there.
In the 20th century we had the great breakthroughs of Einstein- and we call one of them the Big Bang theory- meaning- all things did not always exist.
They had a beginning point- which we call the point of singularity.
Ahh- now we are back to ‘where did it all come from- if at the start- there was nothing’.
Yes- ‘In the beginning God spoke’.
So- at the end of the story- of everything- we find the answer at the beginning.
In the beginning God spoke-Yes- the early followers of Jesus called him by this name- THE WORD.
And science and logic show us that all events need a cause [even the ‘event’ of creation].
So- this history of the world- recorded in the scripture- was true all along!
1886- DIVINE LOGOS
Okay- just read Isaiah 65- one chapter left.
These past few weeks I have been going thru the last 15 or so chapters of the book.
There are lots of great themes to do- maybe I’ll take a pic of the verses I wrote down and hung up here in my study.
I also wanted to engage in a conversation on the Divine Logos.
Well yeah- maybe a little scholarly sounding- but my goal has been to ‘upgrade’ our level of teaching.
When I say ‘our’ I’m talking generally about the present day church in America- and the obsession with ‘the now’.
That is ‘what do I get out of this- monetarily?’
Yeah- that’s the rave of the day.
So- every so often I do my best to walk the other road- to give the other side of the coin.
So- a few weeks ago I was at my daughter’s house- we usually have the whole family over for the b-days and stuff.
And my kids like playing those word games.
So they bought some game- don’t remember the whole name- but part of the name had LOGOS in it.
I just quipped ‘you do know what that means’?
Now- I kid around so much- sometimes they have a hard time believing me- like ‘sure- you’re making it up’.
No- for real!
Logos means WORD.
It’s the Greek language- which the New Testament was written in- and it simply means WORD.
My 2nd oldest said ‘I should have known that’.
My oldest daughter- Bethany- just turned 27- Becky is a couple of years younger.
They both have degrees from A&M University here in Texas- top notch school for sure.
So that’s why Becky ‘should have known it’.
Anyway- this word is a favorite in the writings of the apostle John.
In both the gospel and his 3 little letters [1st, 2nd and 3rd John] he uses this term to describe Jesus.
‘In the beginning was THE WORD and the word was with God…’
That’s the Greek word- Logos.
It should be noted that the early Greek philosophers had a concept much like this.
All the way back to the time of Plato- Socrates and Aristotle [around 500 years before Christ] the Greeks were speaking about a universal principle- some type of ‘unifying theory’ that would be the basis of all knowledge.
They spoke about this principle as THE LOGOS.
So- some of the critics of Christianity did use this as a criticism of the church- they say ‘see- the disciples were just making stuff up- borrowing themes that were already there’.
Do they have a point?
A point- maybe- but that’s all.
In the letters of John we also read him refuting a cult of the day- called Gnosticism [Gnosis is the Greek word for knowledge. They believed that they had secret knowledge that the others did not have. A modern twist on this is sometimes referred to as Revelation Knowledge- it’s a form of this ‘special knowledge’ idea that existed in the early days of the church.]
An off shoot of this group were called the Docetists.
These guys were pseudo Christians- they held to some form of Christian belief- but denied the true faith of the church.
They taught that Jesus was ‘a phantom spirit’ that is- they denied what we refer to as the incarnation.
That God became man in the person of Christ.
John was one of the youngest disciples- and he also outlived the others.
His writings are probably the oldest in the N.T. [Revelation]
So- he was around long enough to refute the growing philosophical challenges to the church.
So- putting all this together- when John said Jesus was the Divine Logos- he was not ‘stealing’ that idea from the earlier Greek philosophers who were indeed looking for a Logos principle.
No- he was saying ‘look- we- the followers of Christ- have found the thing you were looking for all the time- he is the Wisdom- the Logos of God’.
Okay- I haven’t read John in a long time- nor have I ever studied Greek.
But- I do have a Greek lexicon [a book that gives you the Greek word before it was translated into English].
And back ‘in the day’ when we were young believers- seeking to learn the faith- these were the basic tools of the trade.
But today- well- the tools are motivation- success stuff.
Learning how to invest- make a buck [or 2] – how to ‘create your world’.
Yeah- we really don’t have time for all that silly stuff like the Logos.
After all- it’s all Greek to me.
Yeah- I know.
Note- Do me a favor, those who read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read them on. Thanks- John. Don’t forget to scroll down on the timeline [Facebook] – I have posted lots.
Note- Please do me a favor, those who read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read them on. I deal with issues at times that it would be beneficial for some of you to download and save the file from the Word Press link. This creates a permanent record. The on-line videos are only good if sites are not hacked- which has happened in the past. Thanks- John.#
FEW MORE DAYS-
John 3:16 Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he laid down his life for us: and we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren.
John 3:17 But whoso hath this world’s good, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him?
https://youtu.be/ybBoVjrFH8o John- Bobby- Crow- Frankie
https://youtu.be/6ngj0xj8y9k Mary- Crow- Bobby- Frankie- Noah [see the rescue dog on this one]
[links- verses at bottom]
JOHN- BOBBY- CROW- FRANKIE- [Tuesday 8-16]
Just did an off the cuff talk- I talked a little from John 13- how Jesus washed the disciples feet.
He showed us how to serve one another.
You will hear 2 people singing on the video- You’ll have to watch to see who ‘we’ are.
It’s interesting- when I turn the camera on- the guys know ‘oh it’s ministry time’.
There’s no real ‘hey- we are doing ‘church’ type thing’.
But they themselves get into the mood.
Right after the video a girl in Timmons got sick- and Bobby came and asked me if we could pray for her.
Then after a little while- he came back out ‘John- that other lady heard us praying for so and so- and she asked if we could pray for her too’.
This went on for a little while- Booby prayed some- I did as well.
Bobby then said ‘John- we could have filmed this too’.
He saw it all as us ‘doing ministry’.
And there was no effort on my part- I actually have not been feeling well- could barely keep my eyes open- very drained.
Yet I really did not do anything- it came from the guys.
After Timmons I spent a few hours with Mike and Danny- and Mike shared lots of good insights- how he learned that even when he lived on the streets-
He said it was important to not view himself as homeless.
He held jobs [I used to see him cooking at the local restaurants].
And when he got off work- he had a spot- under the bridge overpass- and he slept there.
Mike told me he viewed it as ‘camping’- like when he was in the boy scouts.
That he would daily go to the store- get stuff to cook on an outdoor portable stove.
Then get up early- eat breakfast where he worked.
And when he was short on cash- as a cook/dishwasher- he would eat the untouched food others left.
But he told me he learned to survive- and not see himself as homeless.
That he had to come to the understanding that he was responsible for his life.
That he could not blame others for his situation [Mike has been ‘homeless’ on and off for the many years I have known him- and he has almost always had a job- or 2- during all that time].
He also takes the local community college courses.
I learn from their stories- I see it as an important part of the ministry- for everyone to see the insights my friends have
MARY- CROW- BOBBY- FRANKIE – NOAH [Friday- 8-19]
I wasn’t going to film today- but right at the end I felt I should.
I really liked what Mary said- I’ve known Mary for years- never really talked to her.
But as you can see she has an interesting story.
Frankie sings good- he was just outside- hanging out.
At one point he was praying in tongues- so I wanted him to sing the song for you.
I spent a few hours talking to the guys before we filmed.
These are just regular days for many of my friends- some are not sure where they will be sleeping for the night.
Others have spots- outdoors- where they will stay.
I’m not saying they ‘like it’- but you would be surprised how many of my friends have been doing it for years.
Yes- some struggle with addiction- and others- I think you can tell at times- do have mental health issues.
But God even speaks thru them.
Maybe the purpose of me sharing these videos is to simply ‘humanize’ the plight of the homeless.
Maybe some of you have never really met a ‘street person’- as you can see- some are smart- some are funny- they even laugh at my jokes! [Well- maybe because they know it will guarantee them a cigarette? Even though my jokes are very funny].
Ok- hope you enjoy these simple ‘snippets’ of life on the street-
God bless all.
John 13:1 Now before the feast of the passover, when Jesus knew that his hour was come that he should depart out of this world unto the Father, having loved his own which were in the world, he loved them unto the end.
John 13:2 And supper being ended, the devil having now put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon’s son, to betray him;
John 13:3 Jesus knowing that the Father had given all things into his hands, and that he was come from God, and went to God;
John 13:4 He riseth from supper, and laid aside his garments; and took a towel, and girded himself.
John 13:5 After that he poureth water into a bason, and began to wash the disciples’ feet, and to wipe them with the towel wherewith he was girded.
John 13:6 Then cometh he to Simon Peter: and Peter saith unto him, Lord, dost thou wash my feet?
John 13:7 Jesus answered and said unto him, What I do thou knowest not now;
2Kings 5:9 So Naaman came with his horses and with his chariot, and stood at the door of the house of Elisha.
2Kings 5:10 And Elisha sent a messenger unto him, saying, Go and wash in Jordan seven times, and thy flesh shall come again to thee, and thou shalt be clean.
2Kings 5:11 But Naaman was wroth, and went away, and said, Behold, I thought, He will surely come out to me, and stand, and call on the name of the LORD his God, and strike his hand over the place, and recover the leper.
2Kings 5:12 Are not Abana and Pharpar, rivers of Damascus, better than all the waters of Israel? may I not wash in them, and be clean? So he turned and went away in a rage.
2Kings 5:13 And his servants came near, and spake unto him, and said, My father, if the prophet had bid thee do some great thing, wouldest thou not have done it? how much rather then, when he saith to thee, Wash, and be clean?
2Kings 5:14 Then went he down, and dipped himself seven times in Jordan, according to the saying of the man of God: and his flesh came again like unto the flesh of a little child, and he was clean.
2Kings 5:15 And he returned to the man of God, he and all his company, and came, and stood before him: and he said, Behold, now I know that there is no God in all the earth, but in Israel: now therefore, I pray thee, take a blessing of thy servant.
2Kings 5:16 But he said, As the LORD liveth, before whom I stand, I will receive none. And he urged him to take it; but he refused.
2Kings 5:17 And Naaman said, Shall there not then, I pray thee, be given to thy servant two mules’ burden of earth? for thy servant will henceforth offer neither burnt offering nor sacrifice unto other gods, but unto the LORD.
2Kings 5:18 In this thing the LORD pardon thy servant, that when my master goeth into the house of Rimmon to worship there, and he leaneth on my hand, and I bow myself in the house of Rimmon: when I bow down myself in the house of Rimmon, the LORD pardon thy servant in this thing.
2Kings 5:19 And he said unto him, Go in peace. So he departed from him a little way.
2Kings 5:20 But Gehazi, the servant of Elisha the man of God, said, Behold, my master hath spared Naaman this Syrian, in not receiving at his hands that which he brought: but, as the LORD liveth, I will run after him, and take somewhat of him.
2Kings 5:21 So Gehazi followed after Naaman. And when Naaman saw him running after him, he lighted down from the chariot to meet him, and said, Is all well?
2Kings 5:22 And he said, All is well. My master hath sent me, saying, Behold, even now there be come to me from mount Ephraim two young men of the sons of the prophets: give them, I pray thee, a talent of silver, and two changes of garments.
2Kings 5:23 And Naaman said, Be content, take two talents. And he urged him, and bound two talents of silver in two bags, with two changes of garments, and laid them upon two of his servants; and they bare them before him.
2Kings 5:24 And when he came to the tower, he took them from their hand, and bestowed them in the house: and he let the men go, and they departed.
2Kings 5:25 But he went in, and stood before his master. And Elisha said unto him, Whence comest thou, Gehazi? And he said, Thy servant went no whither.
2Kings 5:26 And he said unto him, Went not mine heart with thee, when the man turned again from his chariot to meet thee? Is it a time to receive money, and to receive garments, and oliveyards, and vineyards, and sheep, and oxen, and menservants, and maidservants?
2Kings 5:27 The leprosy therefore of Naaman shall cleave unto thee, and unto thy seed for ever. And he went out from his presence a leper as white as snow.
Luke 17:11 And it came to pass, as he went to Jerusalem, that he passed through the midst of Samaria and Galilee.
Luke 17:12 And as he entered into a certain village, there met him ten men that were lepers, which stood afar off:
Luke 17:13 And they lifted up their voices, and said, Jesus, Master, have mercy on us.
Luke 17:14 And when he saw them, he said unto them, Go shew yourselves unto the priests. And it came to pass, that, as they went, they were cleansed.
Luke 17:15 And one of them, when he saw that he was healed, turned back, and with a loud voice glorified God,
Luke 17:16 And fell down on his face at his feet, giving him thanks: and he was a Samaritan.
Luke 17:17 And Jesus answering said, Were there not ten cleansed? but where are the nine?
Luke 17:18 There are not found that returned to give glory to God, save this stranger.
Luke 17:19 And he said unto him, Arise, go thy way: thy faith hath made thee whole.
[I quote from 1st Peter on the video- I was going to add the quotes- but instead I’ll just recommend for you to try and read the book this week]
21 As for me, this is my covenant with them, saith the LORD; My spirit that is upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed’s seed, saith the LORD, from henceforth and for ever.
1Peter 1:13 Wherefore gird up the loins of your mind, be sober, and hope to the end for the grace that is to be brought unto you at the revelation of Jesus Christ;
1Peter 1:14 As obedient children, not fashioning yourselves according to the former lusts in your ignorance:
1Peter 1:15 But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation;
1Peter 1:24 For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away:
1Peter 1:25 But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you.
1Peter 2:19 For this is thankworthy, if a man for conscience toward God endure grief, suffering wrongfully.
1Peter 2:20 For what glory is it, if, when ye be buffeted for your faults, ye shall take it patiently? but if, when ye do well, and suffer for it, ye take it patiently, this is acceptable with God.
1Peter 2:21 For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:
1Peter 2:22 Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth:
1Peter 2:23 Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously:
1Peter 2:24 Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.
1Peter 4:1 Forasmuch then as Christ hath suffered for us in the flesh, arm yourselves likewise with the same mind: for he that hath suffered in the flesh hath ceased from sin;
1Peter 4:2 That he no longer should live the rest of his time in the flesh to the lusts of men, but to the will of God.
1Peter 4:3 For the time past of our life may suffice us to have wrought the will of the Gentiles, when we walked in lasciviousness, lusts, excess of wine, revellings, banquetings, and abominable idolatries:
1Peter 4:4 Wherein they think it strange that ye run not with them to the same excess of riot, speaking evil of you:
1Peter 4:5 Who shall give account to him that is ready to judge the quick and the dead.
1Peter 4:12 Beloved, think it not strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try you, as though some strange thing happened unto you:
1Peter 4:13 But rejoice, inasmuch as ye are partakers of Christ’s sufferings; that, when his glory shall be revealed, ye may be glad also with exceeding joy.
1Peter 5:1 The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed:
1Peter 5:2 Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind;
1Peter 5:3 Neither as being lords over God’s heritage, but being ensamples to the flock.
1Peter 5:4 And when the chief Shepherd shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory that fadeth not away.
1Peter 5:5 Likewise, ye younger, submit yourselves unto the elder. Yea, all of you be subject one to another, and be clothed with humility: for God resisteth the proud, and giveth grace to the humble.
1Peter 5:6 Humble yourselves therefore under the mighty hand of God, that he may exalt you in due time:
1Peter 5:7 Casting all your care upon him; for he careth for you.
1Peter 5:8 Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour:
1Peter 5:9 Whom resist stedfast in the faith, knowing that the same afflictions are accomplished in your brethren that are in the world.
Moreover I will endeavour that ye may be able after my decease to have these things always in remembrance. Peter
Note- Please do me a favor, those who read/like the posts- re-post them on other sites as well as the site you read them on. I deal with issues at times that it would be beneficial for some of you to download and save the file from the Word Press link. This creates a permanent record. The on-line videos are only good if sites are not hacked- which has happened in the past. Thanks- John.#