What did Jesus mean in Luke 22:35-36?

WHAT DID JESUS MEAN BY HIS STATEMENT IN LUKE 22:35-36? 

By Ezekiel Kimosop

Luke 22:35-36 says "And He said to them, “When I sent you without money bag, knapsack, and sandals, did you lack anything?”

So they said, “Nothing.”

36 Then He said to them, “But now, he who has a money bag, let him take it, and likewise a knapsack; and he who has no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one."

COMMENTARY

What did Jesus imply by his statement in Luke 22:36? Did He mean that God's divine providence ceased from that point and that the disciples should squarely fend for themselves?

In the first set of instructions given under the mission of the seventy recorded in Luke 10:1-12, Jesus gave explicit commands directing that the disciples were to "Carry neither money bag, knapsack, nor sandals; and greet no one along the road" (Luke 10:4).

They were also required to seek the hospitality of the hosts that would welcome them into their homes and shake their sandles on those that rejected them.

There was clear urgency in accomplishing the mission. 

It is instructive that Jesus states in Luke 10:7 "And remain in the same house, eating and drinking such things as they give, for the laborer is worthy of his wages. Do not go from house to house."

It is significant that Jesus' primary area of missionary focus at this stage was largely limited to the Jews. Notice the similarity of this mission with the mission of the twelve disciples recorded in Matthew 10:5-26. 

So what changed in the context of the mission contemplated in Luke 22:35-36? 

Why does Jesus appear to change the rules of engagement at this point?

It is important to appreciate that the conversation in Luke 22 comes at the eve of Jesus' betrayal, arrest and eventual crucifixion. 

Jesus would shortly be leaving His disciples as His earthly ministry came to a close.

The next phase of the gospel effort would involve a hostile environment full of persecution and clampdown on the followers of Jesus who will be dispersed beyond Jerusalem. Jesus' personal presence would be dearly missed.

Jesus later appears to the disciples after His resurrection and just before His ascension and asks them to tarry in the city of Jerusalem until they are endued with power from on high (Luke 24:49). This was important for adequate preparation for what would follow.

The ascension of Jesus is described in Luke 24:50-53 and Acts 1:9-11. 

CONCLUSION

We can conclude that Jesus was painting the real picture of the burden and cost of ministry in Luke 22:36. The disciples were required to adequately prepare for the challenging effort by wisely planning and taking necessary precautions. The ministry would require mobilization of resources on a vast scale.

This does not suggest that Jesus would abandon them or that God's provision will cease the moment He returned to the Father. He was simply revealing the difficult path ahead.

In Acts 2-12, the ministry exponentially grew even as persecution abounded. The disciples were dispersed from Jerusalem and this gave rise to new ministry opportunities, including the founding of the Gentile ministry by Paul and his associates.

There was a heavy price to pay for ministry. Apostle James was martyred by Herod (Acts 12:1-2); Peter was arrested and locked up but was later released under divine intervention (Acts 12:3-19); Herod suffers violent death under God's judgment (Acts 12:20-24). 

Paul and his associates suffer a series of persecutions including imprisonments, violence, floggings (cf. 2 Cor. 6:1-10, 11:22-33).

Paul was finally martyred. His premonition is captured in his statement in 2 Timothy 4:7-8. Bible scholars say that Paul was martyred by Nero in about AD 62 and that most of the apostles including Peter died for their faith.

Despite all the obstacles and challenges, the gospel  ministries rapidly grew and spread through the ages...

The rest is history...

I believe that Jesus was reminding the disciples that the journey ahead was not for the faint hearted. 

Those who choose to serve Christ must be prepared to carry their crosses in the many dimensions in which this is required of them. Serving God doesn't come cheap. It will cost us resources, time and a toll of other personal sacrifices for which we must prudently prepare. It is a war effort. Jesus didn't mince words on that.

Let me conclude with the words of Jesus in Luke 9:23-26: 

"...If anyone desires to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me. For whoever desires to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake will save it. For what profit is it to a man if he gains the whole world, and is himself destroyed or lost? For whoever is ashamed of Me and My words, of him the Son of Man will be ashamed when He comes in His own glory, and in His Father’s, and of the holy angels." (NKJV).

© Ezekiel Kimosop 2021

Did Jesus have Brothers?

DID JESUS HAVE ANY BROTHERS?

By Ezekiel Kimosop

Does Scripture reveal that Jesus had half brothers and sisters? 

Bible scholars say that the author of the Letter of James was Jesus' half brother. This writer had borrowed heavily from the teachings of Jesus recorded in the Gospels, especially the beatitudes and the "Sermon on the Mount". This has led some scholars to conclude that he may have been closely following Jesus or had borrowed from the Synoptic Gospels. 

James was not initially listed among the disciples of Jesus perhaps because he was either young at the time or had not believed the gospel until after Jesus' death and resurrection. 

The author of the Letter of James is different from apostle James who was martyred by Herod (see Acts 12:1-2). 

Bible scholars say that Judas, another half brother of Jesus, is the author of the Letter of Jude. He is believed to have changed his name following the betrayal of Jesus by Judas Iscariot, in order to remove any possible association of his works with the wicked man. 

The names of the four half brothers of Jesus are listed in Matthew 13:55-56 and Mark 6:3.

Matthew 13:55-56 says "Is this not the carpenter’s son? Is not His mother called Mary? And His brothers James, Joses, Simon, and Judas? 56 And His sisters, are they not all with us? Where then did this Man get all these things?” 57 So they were offended at Him." (NKJV). 

Mark 6:3 says "Is this not the carpenter, the Son of Mary, and brother of James, Joses, Judas, and Simon? And are not His sisters here with us?” So they were offended at Him" (NKJV). 

Both Scriptures reveal that Jesus also had an unknown number of sisters whose names were not revealed by Scripture. The two texts of Scripture present compelling evidence that Jesus had half brothers and sisters. There is no other text in Scripture that obscures this truth. 

Interestingly, Roman Catholics claim that Jesus did not that have any half brothers or sisters by Joseph, his legal father. This claim is not backed by any explicit teaching of Scripture. 

Roman Catholic dogma teaches that Mary's womb was holy and that she could never have been intimate with Joseph after giving birth to Jesus, a claim that again cannot be substantiated or affirmed in any section of the Scripture!

They argue that the names mentioned in the two Scriptures above are for Jesus' cousins or close kinsmen. 

Some Catholic scholars say that Joseph possibly had children by another wife from a previous marriage who had died and that Mary could have taken over the maternal responsibilities for these children. 

Again these claims are not supported by any text of Scripture. 

Another hypothesis holds that Mary may have been a second wife to Joseph and the reference to the half brothers of Jesus was legitimate in that specific context. 

Still others say that Mary could have moved in with her sister upon the death of Joseph and the brothers mentioned are the children of her sister. According to Epiphanius, cited in Gill's Exposition, the sisters mentioned in the two texts above were Mary and Salome, the two daughters of Joseph from a previous marriage. 

The Bible is however silent on all those claims. 

Matthew Heynen, a Catholic Priest of the Dominican Friars order makes three assertions in support of the Catholic dogma on Mary's perpetual virginity. He argues that the two Scriptures above, read together with Matthew 27:56 could imply that the brothers mentioned were sons of another [unknown] Mary! Secondly, Heynen attempts to broaden the applications of the Greek word ἀδελφοί, for "brothers" to refer to cousins or close kinsmen. While this reference is culturally admissible in Hebrew society, the hermeneutical context of the passages in which the names of the brothers are listed appears to rule out the possibility that another Mary was contemplated by the rulers of the synagogue in Nazareth. 

Besides, the mention of only two brothers, James and Joses in Matthew 27:56 conveys two exegetical possibilities. First, that a different Mary may have been contemplated, in which case the two brothers have no connection with the half brothers of Jesus mentioned in Matthew 13:55-56; Mark 6:3 and implied in Mark 3:31-32 other than for similarity of names.

Secondly, if Mary mother of Jesus was contemplated by the author in this context, then the mention of only two brothers could have been circumstantial rather than conclusive. They may have been the only sons present during the crucifixion of Jesus. 

Notice also that Luke 24:10 mentions Mary as mother of James. Could this be the same Mary twice mentioned in Matthew 27:61, 28:1 as "the other Mary"?

The third supposition advanced by Matthew Heynen is premised on a first century narrative that claims that Mary may have made a vow of chastity before she was betrothed to Joseph and that she never intended to engage in a sexual intimacy. This is perhaps the weirdest of the three postulations advanced by Roman Catholics. If this supposition holds a grain of truth, two questions naturally arise. 

First, why was Mary betrothed to Joseph if she never intended to be intimate with him? Secondly, how does the reader reconcile the reaction and intentions of Joseph on learning of Mary's pregnancy before he received the angel's assurance in Matthew 1:18-25?

My view is that none of the three arguments by Matthew Heynen are supported by the Bible. Nothing in Scripture suggests that Joseph did not intend to sire children by Mary after Jesus was born or that both Mary and Joseph had taken a vow of chastity. Equally, nothing culturally forbade Joseph from raising children with Mary since she was his legal wife according to Jewish custom. 

Mark 3:31-32 speaks of Jesus' mother and brothers looking for Jesus, a plain reference to a family initiative. 

A number of Scriptures outside the Gospels affirm that James and Judas were Jesus' half brothers. Galatians 1:19 mentions James, one of the Jerusalem leaders, as "the Lord's brother", leaving little doubt on his identity as Jesus' half brother. 

The writer of the Letter of Jude introduces himself in Jude 1:1 as "a bondservant of Jesus Christ and brother of James". Bible scholars have identified this author as Judas, one of the half brothers of Jesus who chose to conceal his name in order to avoid any possible association with Judas Iscariot, the man who betrayed Jesus, his half brother. The only two half brothers whose roles are fairly obscure are Joses and Simon.

My view is that the arguments advanced by Roman Catholics in support of their doctrine on Mary's perpetual virginity are not consistent with the teaching of Scripture. I am persuaded by my reading of Scripture that Jesus' half brothers are as listed in Scripture in Matthew 13:55-56 and Mark 6:3 above. These brothers together with the unnamed sisters were the children of Joseph by Mary that were conceived after Jesus was born. Two of the brothers, James and Judas wrote the Letters of James and Jude, respectively.  

In Evangelical Christian tradition, Scripture is the only source for the extrapolation and articulation of legitimate Christian doctrine and instruction and any attempt at engaging extra biblical sources for the advancement of any doctrine is an exercise in futility.

© Ezekiel Kimosop 2021

Sources: 

Matthew Heynen, "Did Jesus Have Siblings?" in Dominican Friars, Province of the Most Holy Name of Jesus, 16 October 2019, https://opwest.org/did-jesus-have-siblings/ accessed 17 August 2021. 

Brothers of Jesus, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brothers_of_Jesus

Pulpit Commentary, Bible Hubb, https://biblehub.com/matthew/13-55.htm

Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges, https://biblehub.com/commentaries/mark/6-3.htm

Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible, https://biblehub.com/commentaries/matthew/13-56.htm

Why Does the Roman Catholic Bible Contain the Apocrypha Books? Are These Books Inspired by God?

WHY DOES THE ROMAN CATHOLIC BIBLE CONTAIN THE APOCRYPHA BOOKS? ARE THESE BOOKS INSPIRED BY GOD? 

By Ezekiel Kimosop 

INTRODUCTION 

The seven extra canonical books collectively referred to as the Apocrypha are Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch, First Maccabees and Second Maccabees. 

Other Apocryphal additions include:

A) Additions to Esther (Vulgate Esther 10:4 - 16:24, see rather in NAB, a Catholic translation)

B) Additions to the Book of Daniel include: 

i) Prayer of Azariah and Song of the Three Holy Children (Daniel 3:24-90).

ii) Susanna (found in Daniel 13 under the Vulgate and the Septuagint prologue)

iii) Bell and the Dragon (Vulgate Daniel 14, Septuagint epilogue) 

These books have been the subject of considerable debates throughout the church ages that have pitted the Roman Catholic Church against the Protestant Church communions who resoundingly reject the additional books and accounts as uninspired and extra canonical literature which cannot be admitted into the canon of Scripture. 

The Bible canonization process took centuries to conclude. It started in the second century and was substantially concluded in the fourth century but not without its share of controversy. 

CANONIZATION PROCESS 

During the Councils of Hippo [393 AD] and Carthage [397 AD], the Church Fathers took time to prayerfully scrutinize all religious literature at their disposal including the Apocryphal books that were written during the 400 year gap between Malachi and Matthew. 

They unanimously arrived at the decision to consider these books as uninspired literature though some held them as mere wisdom books. 

They further determined that the apostolic writings and other New Testament literature should be added to the Old Testament Scripture to arrive at the the 66 Book canon of the Bible available to us today. 

The canonization process was not that simple. Sections of the early church theologians continued to question the inclusion of some of the Scripture books including the Book of Esther and the Letter of James while others held onto the Apocryphal books. 

Interestingly, the Book of Esther was questioned by some Reformation scholars on account of the absence of a single mention of God in the writings!

However its inclusion was defended on the basis that it revealed the working of God to preserve His people in Persia. The church fathers were not convinced that the criticism on Esther was legitimate. 

The Letter of James was also questioned by the Reformation scholars including Martin Luther who referred to it as a "canon destitute of straw".  

Luther insisted that the Letter of James taught salvation by works which contradicted Ephesians 2:8-9. Luther firmly believed in salvation by faith alone. 

This claim was however established to be devoid of theological substance because James primarily taught that true faith should be evidenced by good deeds. 

Most of the early church theologians supported the decision of the Church Fathers on sealing the Scripture canonization process. 

Among leading early church theologians who rejected the Apocrypha are Jerome, Athanasius [who was an Early Church African theologian from North Africa], Cyril of Jerusalem, and others. 

Before the Council of Carthage, there was no unified canon apart from the Old Testament writings which were available in the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament Scripture written in Alexandria. 

This canon was later translated into the Latin Vulgate by Jerome. 

The New Testament apostolic writings were available to the Church and were the key sources of Early Church doctrine. 

The Roman Catholic Church later returned the Apocryphal books into their canon but they were not officially accepted as books of instruction until the Reformation period in the 16th Century when the Catholic Church insisted that the books were equally inspired. This declaration only added to widening division between the Roman Catholic Church and the growing Protestant Reformation. 

Against all reason, the Roman Catholic Church have consistently rejected any attempts at questioning the inclusion of these books in their Catholic Bible despite the obvious flaws that they contain. 

They also introduced a series of unbiblical church traditions and practices into their liturgy and worship. 

This marked a radical departure from the position taken by the Early Church councils. 

The Roman Catholic Bible is therefore extra canonical to the extent that it includes the Apocryphal literature. 

GROUNDS ON WHICH THE APOCRYPHAL BOOKS ARE CONSIDERED UNINSPIRED AND EXTRA CANONICAL 

Let us now conclude by outlining some of the key grounds by which the Protestant community finds the Apocryphal books as extra canonical. 

1) The Church Fathers determined the period of their writing as falling into the "prophetic silence" era when there was no evidence that God sent any prophets among the Jews. It is theologically accepted by Protestant theologians that no prophet spoke the mind of God between Malachi and the coming of John the Baptist as predicted in Malachi. 

2) The Apocryphal literature contain several controversial accounts, some of which were not corroborated by independent authors of their time. The authors of some of these books are largely obscure. 

3) The teachings of the Apocrypha are irreconcilable with the Old Testament Scripture concerning the revelation of God. There is no consistent correlation between the Apocrypha and the Old Testament writings. Some of the accounts found in the Apocryphal writings are inconsistent with the corresponding passages of Scripture books. 

4) Some of the characters and events described in the Apocryphal writings cannot be authenticated and neither can their authors be independently acclaimed as speaking the mind of God. 

4) The Apocryphal books teach gross unbiblical doctrines such as the doctrine of Purgatory which is advanced by the Roman Catholic Church but which is totally and manifestly inconsistent with the revelation of Scripture regarding the after life (see 2 Maccabees 12:41-46).

5) The Apocryphal books teach that God hears the prayers of the dead (Baruch 3:4) and lay claim to the pre-existence of human souls (Wisdom 8:19, 20). Protestant theological scholars consider these doctrines as heretical.

6) The Book of Wisdom 11:17 rejects the biblical doctrine of creation Ex-nihilo, that God created everything from nothing. To deny this truth is to completely misrepresent the revelation of God in Genesis 1-2.

7) It is instructive that the Jews have consistently rejected the Apocryphal books as Scripture. Jesus never quoted from a single book of the Apocrypha and neither did He affirm any of their characters yet these writings were largely available during the time of His earthly ministry. 

Jesus mentioned several Old Testament characters such as Noah, Abraham, Solomon, Job, David, but made no single reference to any of the Apocryphal characters and neither even mentioned or taught from the passage of a single Apocryphal book. 

8) Finally, there is no evidence that the Apocryphal books were taught among the Jews at the time of Christ. No writers have ever cited these literature as authority for their works and this weakens their scholarly and theological standing as reference materials for biblical scholars. 

The apocrypha must therefore be relegated to the periphery. They should be understood as ordinary religious literature which are not inspired by God and should not inform Christian instruction or church doctrine. 

© Ezekiel Kimosop 2018 

[key online reference sources: www.blueletterbible.org/faq/don_stewart/don_stewart_395.cfm 

www.carm.org/early-church-fathers-canon]

Lessons on Christian Contentment

WHAT DOES THE BIBLE TEACH ON CHRISTIAN CONTENTMENT?

By Ezekiel Kimosop

INTRODUCTION

I once watched a video clip and keenly listened to a Nigerian preacher as she lamented about the folly of the affluent people of society who amass millions in property only to leave their vast empires in the hands of people who end up squandering their hard earned fortune.

This is perhaps one glaring irony of life! 

I agree with the moral behind the story. No matter how much one accumulates on earth, they will never take their resources with them when they die.

MORAL LESSONS FROM SCRIPTURE

This brings to my mind two relevant exhortations in Scripture: 

First, Job's godly response to his tragedy recorded in Job 1:20-22 is instructive. The Bible says, "Then Job arose, tore his robe, and shaved his head; and he fell to the ground and worshiped. And he said: “Naked I came from my mother’s womb,

And naked shall I return there. The Lord gave, and the Lord has taken away; Blessed be the name of the Lord.” In all this Job did not sin nor charge God with wrong." (NKJV). 

At the instigation of Satan, Job lost all his children and his possessions. Finally, Satan struck his body with leprosy and his wife, not able to bear the affliction any further, asked him to curse God and die. Her frustrations had hit the snapping limit!

Despite his massive wealth in livestock, and the blessing of many children, Job recognized that his true worth did not consist of his material wealth or in social prestige but on the integrity of his covenant relationship with God. His humbling acknowledgement of God's sovereignty over his resources is perhaps a powerful edict on the arrogant and self conceited men of this world whose only identity lies in their riches. 

Job rightly recognized that God alone assigns and takes away riches, and indeed anything we can ever own on earth, including our very souls.

Reading on through the Book of Job, we learn that Job remained steadfast in his faith and God restored him in the end.

The second text is 1 Timothy 6:6-8 that says "Now godliness with contentment is great gain. For we brought nothing into this world, and it is certain we can carry nothing out. And having food and clothing, with these we shall be content."

This passage actually amplifies the message of Job 1:20-22. More significantly, however, is the exhortation to godly contentment for the Christian community. No matter how much we may accumulate on earth in terms of material riches or how much power we may wield in society, or honor we receive among men, our spiritual worth does not consist of all these things.

We should always distinguish between our spiritual values and our devotion to God on the one hand and the affinity to material things that will soon pass away.

Jesus warned the warring brothers in Luke 12:15 saying, "Take heed and beware of covetousness, for one’s life does not consist in the abundance of the things he possesses.”

The two brothers had asked Jesus to arbitrate between them on their dispute over the heritage that their father had left to them. One of the brothers was most likely acting unreasonably because Jewish culture clearly defined for them how the heritage should be shared among the sons. The first son received a double portion.

This incident triggered Jesus' tale on the Parable of the Rich Fool (Luke 12:16-21). This is another illustration on the folly of ungodly focus on riches. Notice the concluding statement in Luke 12:21 that says "So is he who lays up treasure for himself, and is not rich toward God.”

The problem is not about the vastness of the riches we can possess on earth. Jesus never taught that believers should take a vow of poverty or that they should abstain from riches! Far be it!

Contrary to some false doctrines taught by certain cults today, Jesus' exhortation never implied that the pursuit of earthly riches is ungodly or evil for Christians. Believers should robustly engage in enterprise and generate wealth. We require sufficient resources for our sustanance and for honoring and serving God and impacting society. 

In any case, all earthly resources ultimately belong to God (Psalm 24:1-2, 50:10)

The danger beckons when riches become the overriding object of our focus and ultimately obscure our relationship with God. Again, elsewhere in Scripture, Jesus warned that we cannot not serve God and Mammon (Luke 16:11-13). Notice that the rich fool initially started well in his personal enterprise. He grew his farming business in a legitimate way. His turning point came when he forgot about God's providence and attributed his success to his own effort. 

We should honor God for every increase in our lives by whatever description. Divine increase is not necessarily about financial growth only. There are many ways by which God gives us increase in life.

Here are a number of examples: the blessing of a job or growing business; good health; the blessing of years on earth, the blessing of children (and grandchildren), the blessing of an enduring marriage in a world in which divorce, marital conflicts and separation is commonplace.

For the young people on this page, academic progress and God's providence to the parents or guardians for school fees and upkeep is a reason for which to thank God. 

Some of our senior brethren on this page have either retired or are about to. Imagine the years that God has given us in career life and in raising our children and serving the Lord in the church in whatever capacities. That too is a reason to celebrate and glorify God.

The list is long....

One does not have to be a dollar millionaire to be grateful to God or celebrate God's blessings! For the much that the Lord has blessed us, we ought to be thankful even as we seek His provision for our needs.  This is the essence of Christian contentment. 

We should never compare ourselves with others as the people of this world often do and end up boiling with jealousy, strife and covetousness when they witness the progress of their neighbors or relatives and seek to "catch up"! 

CONCLUSION

God blesses us differently in His divine wisdom. Some of the richest men today cannot enjoy their riches because of failing health or diet restrictions.  Others worry too much about their business empires and develop mental complications.

There's always something lacking in one person that another person is blessed with. Let us therefore be grateful for what God has blessed us with even as we petition Him for more...

I recall someone who one time muttered in a sombre mood as we conversed, "kwani sisi wengine tulimfanyia nini Mungu...(what have some of us done to God to deserve the circumstances we are going through). 

None of us can deny that we have experienced unpleasant situations in life where we wondered if God is still with us. No believer is immune to earthly afflictions.

This again reminds me of Psalm 34:19 that says "Many are the afflictions of the righteous, But the Lord delivers him out of them all." 

God takes us through difficult seasons of life, all for the purpose building our spiritual integrity. He never abandons us, no matter what prevails around us. 

David proclaimed in Psalm 37:25-26 "I have been young, and now am old; Yet I have not seen the righteous forsaken, Nor his descendants begging bread. He is ever merciful, and lends; And his descendants are blessed."

Christian contentment is key to moral prudence and stability in life. We ought to embrace it to the glory of God. 

Shalom. 

© Ezekiel Kimosop 2021

Serving God with a Clear Conscience - Lessons from 2 Corinthians 5:9-11

SERVING GOD WITH A CLEAR CONSCIENCE: LESSONS FROM 2 CORINTHIANS 5:9-11

By Ezekiel Kimosop

INTRODUCTION

Today, we continue with our series through Paul's Second Letter to the Corinthians. 

During my previous series, I picked some excerpts from the preceding chapters which I found to be of interest in conveying some moral lessons to our Christian community.

In the above passage, Paul continues with the flow of thought that he had earlier commenced in 2 Corinthians 5:1-6 concerning the assurance of resurrection for believers. Paul was calming the fears that had pervaded the Corinthian Christian community concerning the hope of resurrection. We examined this passage in our previous article.

In the passage of 2 Corinthians 5:9-11, the writer introduces a new trajectory to the exhortation. He reminds believers of the importance of serving God with a clear conscience, knowing that God will judge our works and reward each of us in accordance with the diligence of our service.

PASSAGE

Here's the text of 2 Corinthians 5:9-11:

"Therefore we make it our aim, whether present or absent, to be well pleasing to Him. 10 For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive the things done in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad. 11 Knowing, therefore, the terror of the Lord, we persuade men; but we are well known to God, and I also trust are well known in your consciences." (NKJV). 

COMMENTARY

Notice that the first statement in 2 Cor. 5:9 is part of Paul's concluding remarks to his long exhortation that can be traced back to 2 Cor. 4. This brief passage should in fact be read together with 2 Cor 5:6-8 for the sake of context and flow of thought. 

Paul was initially describing the significance of the new life in Christ for those who have a covenant relationship with Him. One of the outstanding attributes of a faithful Christian is their consistency and persistence in the faith and in the service of God under pleasant and unpleasant circumstances, in season or out of season (cf. 2 Timothy 4:2).

It is instructive that on several occasions described in Scripture, Paul and his ministry associates contended for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints (Jude 1:3). They never gave up on their missionary calling despite the many afflictions they endured in soldiering for Christ. These afflictions and perils are listed in 2 Cor. 11:22-33).

Paul reminds us in 2 Cor. 5:9 that effective service to God is actuated by a clear and godly conscience towards God. Whether we are present or away from our Christian communities of context, we ought to seek God's approval in our walk of faith and this should be uppermost in our minds. 

In 2 Cor 5:10, Paul explains the reason for his previous statement. He declares that all believers will one day appear before God's throne where their works shall be tested. This assessment is described in greater detail in 1 Corinthians 3:9-15 which says in part "... each one’s work will become clear; for the Day will declare it, because it will be revealed by fire; and the fire will test each one’s work, of what sort it is. 14 If anyone’s work which he has built on it endures, he will receive a reward. 15 If anyone’s work is burned, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire..." (NKJV). 

This passage contemplates a different Day of judgment that is distinct from the one described in Revelation 20:11-15 which concerns the rest of the dead. This resurrection is distinct from the resurrection of believers described in 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18. The former group primarily consists of the wicked and those who are later martyred for their faith during the great tribulation (cf. Rev 13:11:18). 

The Bible is explicit on the justification of believers as a basis for their being sealed in Christ (cf. Ephesians 4:30). Romans 8:1 says "There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit." Our condemnation in Adam was discharged on account of our faith in Christ Jesus and the atonement in His blood. 

Paul's appeal for a clear conscience is therefore informed by his burning desire to please Christ at all times no matter where he was. Being well known to God and to men [2 Corinthians 5:11] is evidence of a clear conscience. Scripture elsewhere says "Beloved, if our heart does not condemn us, we have confidence toward God" (1 John 3:20-21).

Paul later reveals that there was a group of preachers who were hypocritical. They never served God in truth (see 2 Cor 5:13). These preachers were probably part of the radical Jews who were opposed to Paul's apostolic ministry. They had questioned the faithfulness of Paul's preaching (2 Cor 5:12) and the validity of his apostolic calling. Notice Paul's spirited defense in 1 Corinthians 9:1-2: "Am I not an apostle? Am I not free? Have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? Are you not my work in the Lord? 2 If I am not an apostle to others, yet doubtless I am to you. For you are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord."

Paul was possibly responding to the same or similar group of opponents in 2 Cor 5:13-15. Notice the import of the closing statement in v. 15.

Paul's defense of his apostolic ministry runs through the rest of the passage of 2 Corinthians 5:16-21. 

ILLUSTRATION

A friend once related to me an incident in his church congregation where a negative report was received concerning one church elder. The elder was a humble and down to earth believer whose spiritual maturity was beyond reproach. A certain single woman who lived in the same court with him within the neighborhood of the church once confided to a women's leader that the man had made advances towards her! The women's leader conveyed the report to the pastor in confidence. She was apparently shaken since she could not imagine that the elder could have have gone that low. 

The report was restricted to the elders in accordance with the authority of 1 Timothy 5:19.

When confronted with the accusations, the man vehemently denied having approached the woman in an inappropriate manner. He reported that the woman had made advances towards him on several occasions which he flatly rejected on the basis of his Christian convictions.

The man was deeply shaken by the report and he immediately opted to step aside from his position as an elder. He also declined to partake of the Lord's Table until the matter was investigated and determined.

Some elders were tasked with investigating the matter in order to establish the truth. The woman however refused to appear and testify before the elders despite several attempts to get her to do so. 

It later emerged that the woman had falsely filed accusations against the elder after he rejected her advances. The man's family lived far out of Town and the woman sought to take advantage of the man who lived in a single room next to hers during the weekdays. He would occasionally join his family at Kijabe over the weekends. 

One Christian woman who lived in the same court with the elder and who knew both parties testified before the elders that the woman had trained her eyes on the man for some time and had once sworn to "fix" him if he persisted in ignoring her. The church elders finally resolved to unanimously absolve the man of any blame. They could not find any basis for disciplining him without substantiation and corroboration of facts from the accuser and any reliable witnesses. 

Besides, this was the first accusation they had received on him. The elder however insisted that he remains in self imposed restriction to allow for a further opportunity for the woman to show up...

He sought a clear conscience...

The woman never showed up in the end and the matter was closed.

CONCLUSION

Every believer has an obligation to hold a clear conscience in their walk with God and in the fear of Him and to relate with the societies of context with this truth in mind. No matter how faithful a believer is in the walk of faith, they must bear in mind that there is a Sanballat and a Tobias who may arise up and attempt to place their moral integrity into doubt.

What is significant though is to hold a clear conscience before God in such circumstances. This is the seal of our sincerity in walking with Christ and serving Him in truth. This is not to suggest that believers can attain moral perfection on earth. This is impossible. Christ alone was and is without sin (2 Corinthians 5:21). We dwell in sinful vessels and only God's grace in Christ Jesus protects us from God's righteous condemnation. 

We should therefore not boast of our wisdom in our journey of faith but ascribe or credit all things to God's enabling grace. Pleasing Christ is a life-long preoccupation for every child of God. If we are unable to reconcile our consciences on any matter, we ought to go to the cross of Calvary and receive the cleansing of the sinless blood of Jesus Christ (cf. Hebrews 4:16). 

Where we inadvertently offend others in our walk of faith or in our service to God, we ought to acknowledge the offense promptly and seek forgiveness and reconciliation with them in the fear of God Matthew 5:23-24 says "Therefore if you bring your gift to the altar, and there remember that your  brother has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar, and go your way. First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift." (NKJV).  

Do you have a clear conscience?

© Ezekiel Kimosop 2021

What if Christ Returns Today?

 WHAT IF CHRIST RETURNS TODAY? 

By Ezekiel Kimosop

One of the most terrifying things that people in this world are unable to comprehend is perhaps the impact of Christ's sudden coming. Some of us perhaps imagine that it is an event that is centuries away or at best, an incomprehensible mystery that should be relegated to the periphery! 

Far be it! The coming of Christ is a divine calendar event that God has slated for His covenant people! It is as real as Christ's death on the cross that occurred about 2000 years ago! Every believer should be prepared for Christ's coming. It should not take us by surprise. 

Scripture says in Mark 13:32-33 "But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. 33 Take heed, watch and pray; for you do not know when the time is."

Our responsibility as God's covenant people is to heed the teaching of Scripture and to prepare for that day so that we are ready to meet with our Saviour when He is revealed upon the sounding of the last trumpet.  We should earnestly look forward to Christ's coming and long for our eternal union with Him in heaven (cf. 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18). 

No promise of Scripture perhaps brings more eagerness on the Christian community than the glorious hope of Christ's coming (Titus 2:11-14). 

I was recently preaching in one of my two primary congregations and I reminded believers that one of the marks of a biblically centred Christian community is their longing for Christ's soon return. We cannot be in Christ on the one hand and on the other, hold the things of this passing world at a greater esteem than the things of God. 

I recalled that some of our youth were planning for weddings and I could imagine how such a possibility would be processed in their minds! The imminence of Christ's return should not be a source of fear or uncertainty. It should be a motivating climax that concludes our journey of faith. Paul longed for his union with Christ, knowing too well that his martyrdom was fast approaching (2 Timothy 4:7-8). We too ought to be ready to meet our Lord. 

We all have things planned for accomplishment and that's a godly thing to do. We cannot ignore our primary things of life for as long as we are under the sun. 

Paul cautioned the Thessalonian believers to focus on their issues of daily life and avoid idleness. The Bible says in 2 Thessalonians 3:10-12 "For even when we were with you, we commanded you this: If anyone will not work, neither shall he eat. 11 For we hear that there are some who walk among you in a disorderly manner, not working at all, but are busybodies. 12 Now those who are such we command and exhort through our Lord Jesus Christ that they work in quietness and eat their own bread." 

One writer once said that we should plan as though Christ will tarry for a millennium but live as though he is coming today. How true!

In other words, we should not ignore our earthly chores simply because we consider that they no longer matter, given the imminence of Christ's return. One of my burning preoccupations today is the writing of academic papers as I look forward to completing my theological studies in due course, if Christ shall tarry. 

Now here's the million dollar question...

What if Christ shows up today? Would we be ready to meet Him in the air or would we rather that He tarries longer? 

This question is important for every believer and our response to it may largely depend on our philosophy on Christ's return. Some believers would perhaps wish that Christ tarries as they focus on certain things that they consider pertinent. I am aware that Christ's tarrying provides a window for our continued proclamation of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Matthew 24:14 says "And the gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come."

This end has to be consistent with God's divine calendar. If Christ therefore appears today or even as you read this article, God's divine calendar and clock will have struck the day and the hour, respectively, and no excuse whatsoever will be admissible for our unpreparedness.

Think about that...

© Ezekiel Kimosop 2021

Why Was Aaron Not Punished by God in Numbers 12?

WHY WAS AARON NOT PUNISHED BY GOD YET HE AND MIRIAM SPOKE AGAINST MOSES IN NUMBERS 12? 

By Ezekiel Kimosop 

We learn from Numbers 12, that Miriam and Aaron confronted their brother Moses over his decision to marry an Ethiopian woman. No explanation was given for the reaction but we can guess at first instance that the decision went against the cultural norms of the Jewish people. 

There was a heated exchange which resulted in an emotional outburst with Miriam questioning the prophetic authority of Moses. God was monitoring the exchange and was apparently angered by the manner in which the two siblings ridiculed and humiliated their younger brother who was God's chosen leader over Israel. 

Make no mistake here: God does not condone sin and punishes the erring without partiality or favor. 

The Bible records that God came down to the tent of meeting and summoned the two to appear before His presence where He rebuked and judged them.  

Miriam immediately suffered leprosy as a punishment for her deplorable conduct in questioning the authority of Moses. Surprisingly Aaron escaped punishment by a whisker! Why was he not punished yet he had apparently conspired with Miriam in confronting Moses? 

This is the mystery question that we need to examine with care. 

The Bible records that Aaron cried to Moses when he noticed that his sister was struck with leprosy, perhaps fearing that the worst would hit him too! 

Yes, both Miriam and Aaron were guilty by conspiracy and connivance in confronting and humiliating their younger brother Moses who was undoubtedly their spiritual leader! 

The two had crossed the Rubicon line when they questioned Moses' prophetic authority and asked if God spoke only through him!

While it is true that God spoke through the three siblings in diverse ways as prophet, Judge, priest and prophetess, respectively, God had divinely designated Moses as His principal representative and judge over Israel. 

No matter how much we find fault in a leader, rest assured that God was aware of his shortcomings even as He called him to ministry! No leader is perfect. 

Moses was therefore the undisputed community patriarch who doubled up as prophet and judge in Israel. He was far above his elder siblings in spiritual authority and therefore deserved to be honored as God's servant. 

Miriam and Aaron possibly took advantage of the great humility of Moses (Numbers 12:3). The fact he was their last born brother may have made things worse for him! He was Mama's boy, so to speak! 

The pecking order in sibling rivalry always plays out even in later years of life whenever family conflicts arise. However, God's divine order is greater and preeminent above our family or community order. 

Moses was three years younger than Aaron (Exodus 7:7) and if the girl mentioned in the birth of Moses in Exodus 2:1-10 is assumed to have been Miriam, then she was definitely the senior of the three siblings in terms of age. 

The three siblings from a Levite family were privileged to serve in influential leadership capacities among the children of Israel. What a great honor before God! This is the reason they should have been most humbled and grateful to God. However they were human as we are, who are often ungrateful for what God has done for us. 

Were these siblings justified in confronting Moses?

In a way, yes. Of course Moses broke the Jewish law by marrying an Ethiopian [heathen] woman and his siblings may have been justified in confronting him over that matter. 

The conflict was initially a family affair until the matter blew out of its natural tangent and God was drawn into the conflict as He sought to defend His servant from humiliation. The two siblings had no authority to question Moses' prophetic mantle. Neither of them had conferred it upon him! God alone had called Moses to serve Him. 

The Bible goes on to reveal that the anger of the LORD was kindled against them as God departed from the tabernacle after rebuking them (Numbers 12:9-11)

Notice also that Aaron showed remorse and pleaded with Moses to pray for them and this is perhaps what held back the wrath of God from hitting him! Notice his words in Numbers 12:11 where he pleads with Moses saying ".... Oh my lord! Please do not lay this sin on us, in which we have done foolishly and in which we have sinned." (NKJV) 

Some have dispute this conclusion by arguing that Aaron was a priest and leprosy could not have defiled him! I disagree. He was not immune to God's chastisement. One of the sons of Abinadab was later struck dead after he mishandled the Ark of the LORD (2 Samuel 6:3). He too was no doubt a priest! 

There can be no better explanation for Aaron being spared punishment than the fact that he was remorseful for the sinful conduct and that God graciously preserved him. 

While Aaron was guilty as charged there is strong evidence from Scripture that he may have been saved by the prayer of Moses and his remorseful heart! 

There were obvious consequences too... 

Miriam had to stay out of the camp for the period prescribed by Levitical law for a leprosy. The children of Israel were therefore forced to wait for her to recover before moving on into the wilderness of Paran (Numbers 12:15-16). 

This sinful conduct cost them seven days of their journey through the wilderness! Some transgressions are too costly and their impact is cumulative in scope. 

One may also argue that Miriam took moral responsibility as the eldest of the three siblings. As a prophetess in her own right, she should have better understood the mind of God and refrained from attacking her brother in the manner she did. 

The order in which their names appear (Numbers 12:1) has been suggested by some as indicative of Miriam's greater responsibility for the conspiracy but this is difficult to prove from the passage because God dealt with them collectively (Numbers 12:5-9).

MORAL LESSONS

There are several moral lessons we can draw from this incident regarding the appropriate manner of dealing with acts and omissions of our spiritual leaders. 

Here are four of them: 

1) Sin is contagious and ruins relationships and affects innocent people who were not originally party to it. 

This is a warning to God's people. We should realize that our actions have wider ramifications than we may care to imagine. 

2) God is foremost responsible for reprimanding spiritual leaders who are divinely under his oversight charge. Spiritual leaders are primarily answerable to God for their dereliction of duty and moral excesses. 

This however does not imply that church tribunals or any disciplinary organs would be acting unbiblically in addressing the moral excesses of spiritual leaders and even defrocking them where this is legitimate. They too are divinely charged with plenary oversight of God's ministry, provided that their mandate is exercised in good faith and within the authority of God's word. 

3) We should never ridicule or demean our spiritual leaders or bring them into disrepute even where we are convinced that they are wrong or may have sinned. God expects us to handle them with diligence knowing that they carry His mantle over His people. 

This is not to suggest that we should condone the moral excesses of church ministers or look the other way where they have sinned. An erring Christian leader should receive sanctions that are consistent with the gravity of his transgression.  

Remember that the house of Eli was judged by God for his dereliction of duty and God finally cut them off from the priesthood.

Abiathar the priest was the last to serve under the lineage of Eli until he was defrocked by Solomon for his role in the Adonijah rebellion (1 Kings 2:26-27). 

How should we handle moral conflicts touching on church leaders? 

We should apply the rule established in 1Timothy 5:19 which says "Do not receive an accusation against an elder [overseer] except from two or three witnesses."

4) We should repent immediately we are convicted of our sinful conduct. 

Remember that we are sinful people who fail the divine standards of God. There is no other cure for sin other than repentance from a broken and remorseful heart that touches the heart of God (see Psalm 51:10-17).

Aaron cried to Moses asking him to pray for them. He recognized that they had sinned against God and was deeply remorseful for the transgression. 

As a priest, Aaron knew the gravity of sinful disobedience and that God alone had the cure for the transgressions of those who stood before a priest. 

Are you remorseful whenever you sin against God or offend others or do you justify and defend your actions? 

© Ezekiel Kimosop 2021