What Did Jesus Mean in John 15:16?

HOW SHOULD WE UNDERSTAND THE WORDS OF JESUS IN JOHN 15:16?

By Ezekiel Kimosop

John 15:16 says "You did not choose Me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit, and that your fruit should remain, that whatever you ask the Father in My name He may give you." (NKJV).

PASSAGE OUTLINE

This text is part of Jesus' address to His disciples in John 15:9-17 but more significantly, a critical portion of His message that runs through the entire chapter of John 15. 

Jesus first uses the metaphor of the Vine tree to illustrate His relationship with His followers (John 15:1-8). Jesus is the True Vine and His followers are metaphorically the branches of this True Vine. They are inextricably intertwined with Him, drawing from the nourishment of His word and the leading of His Spirit.

The second passage of John 15:9-17 outlines His relationship with God the Father which He says is founded on divine love and obedience. Jesus perfectly obeyed the Father and submitted to His perfect will concerning Him. He came as God incarnate in order to fulfill God's divine purposes through the redemption plan that was fulfilled under the finished works of the cross. 

This relationship with the Father is cascaded to His disciples and followers. They are to love one another. This is the sacrificial brotherly love that is a reflection of God's love for us. It seeks nothing in return (cf. Luke 6:27-36). 

The third passage of John 15:18-25 cautions believers about the hatred that this evil world harbors against Jesus Christ and His followers. A true follower of Jesus will face scorn, ridicule, open hostility, and persecution from the agents of Satan, the ruler of this wicked world. They should however not despair but look to Him who went before us, having suffered and overcome this world. 

The closing passage of John 15:26-27 speaks of the witness of the Holy Spirit who will be sent by the Father. His ministry will complement that of the disciples. 

Let us now turn to our Scripture text of context of John 15:16 which says "You did not choose Me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit, and that your fruit should remain, that whatever you ask the Father in My name He may give you." (NKJV). 

What did Jesus mean by this statement? 

TEXT ANALYSIS

I would propose two approaches in expositing this text. 

First, the text is anchored on the view that our response to the calling of God in Christ is an affirmation of our calling in Christ us as believers. While this is not explicitly mentioned in the text, my view is that it is inescapably implied. No one can serve God unless they are first called by God into a loving covenant relationship with Jesus Christ. Notice that Christ first chose the disciples as believers before He appointed them in ministry. 

Secondly, the passage context ties in with the gist of the statement. -  the commissioning of believers to Christian service is founded on God's love which should radiate among the disciples before it can reach out to the lost world. This can be naturally deduced from the text and the entire passage of John 15. Jesus was preparing His disciples for ministry. He knew that He won't be with them for long. It was important that they understood the joys and perils that awaited them in the ministry. 

Both dimensions are significant in outlining our relationship with Jesus Christ and our devotion and service to Him.

In our past sinful state, we had no capacity to discern the things of God and make a rational choice for obedience. When the revelation of God was proclaimed to us through the gospel, and we came to Christ, our spiritual eyes were opened and the burden of our Christian witness became more profoundly evident to us. It is instructive that Jesus first loved us and died for us while we were yet sinners [Romans 5:8). 

God therefore calls sinners through the gospel. He transforms them and assigns them to ministry. We should heed His exhortations even as we serve Him. The message of the cross is His divine instrument. It is His voice that calls for our obedience and diligence. 

In the context of the above passage, Jesus confirmed that He had called and appointed His disciples into ministry. Jesus called each disciple in person and by name. Each disciple had a specific role during Christ's earthly ministry and beyond. Their primary calling was however tied to the preaching of the kingdom message. 

These roles were later expanded as the gospel spread beyond Jerusalem. A number of the disciples were assigned missionary work even as others took on apostolic oversight responsibilities for the growing churches. Some receded into obscurity and little is known about them beyond the narratives in the Gospels. Others, such as apostle James paid the ultimate price - they were martyred for their faith (cf. Acts 12:1-2). 

A few disciples such as Matthew, Mark, Paul, John, and Peter wrote the New Testament Scriptures that are available to us today. These writings are a testimony to their diligence and enduring faith.

The final section of John 15:16 says "...that whatever you ask the Father in My name He may give you."

Why did Jesus mention this statement and what does it imply in this context? 

Jesus sought to demonstrate that there is a connection between Christian obedience and service on the one part and God's providence. His disciples would pray the Father in His [Jesus'] name and the Father would lovingly grant their petitions according to His divine will [cf. Matthew 6:9-15, Luke 11:5-13]. 

Our relationship with God is the foundation of the divine providence of God in Christ Jesus. The key issue here is that ministry can only succeed under God's divine providence. We require resources and God's enabling grace to advance the gospel effort to new frontiers. We depend on God to supply our needs in line with His will concerning us. The admonitions outlined in 1 Timothy 6:6-10, James 4:1-6 are instructive in this context. 

Jesus calls, empowers and sends His disciples. He also provides for them so that they may accomplish His divine purposes in Christ Jesus. 

Are you part of Jesus' mission team? 

What moral lesson can we learn from the lives and ministries of the New Testament disciples and apostles in the context of the words of Jesus in John 15:16?

First, those who are called to Christ are also called to Christian service. No believer is without a ministry service mantle. No matter what role or activity one is assigned in ministry, that remains their stewardship platform. Their diligence, fervency, and patience will be evaluated in that context. Every believer's work will ultimately be tested by God to determine its substance and integrity (1 Corinthians 3:5-17)

As we serve God in Christian ministry, we should be aware of God's expectations concerning our service. We should demonstrate fruit for our diligence and labor. Notice that Jesus commissioned the disciples and commanded them to bear fruit. This fruit should endure the times and should be evidenced in our consistency in our labor in the Lord. 

Secondly, we should not abuse our Christian stewardship for selfish gain. We should not seek personal acclaim for our privileged positions of ministry (cf. 1 Corinthians 4:1-2). We are all accountable to God for the discharge of our ministry calling [cf. Parable of the Talents, Matthew 25:14-30]. Instead, we should expend our resources, talents, and skills in serving God in our generation to the glory of God. 

We are today privileged to read the historical accounts of great men and women of God whose service to God remains unparalleled through the ages. The heroes and heroines whose names are listed in Hebrews 11 and other sections of Scripture are examples of those who stood out for God in their day and demonstrated that serving God in faithfulness is never in vain.

Nothing that we do for God is ever forgotten. 

The Bible proclaims in Hebrews 6:10-12 "For God is not unjust to forget your work and labor of love which you have shown toward His name, in that you have ministered to the saints, and do minister. 11 And we desire that each one of you show the same diligence to the full assurance of hope until the end, 12 that you do not become sluggish, but imitate those who through faith and patience inherit the promises." (NKJV). 

CONCLUSION

We serve God at His divine pleasure and in accordance with His divine will for us. We should therefore consider our calling in ministry [by whatever description] as a privilege for serving God with faithfulness and diligence so that the fruit of our service may impact our societies of context and glorify God. 

There is a reward for our diligence.

The Bible exhorts in 1 Peter 5:2-4: "Shepherd the flock of God which is among you, serving as overseers, not by compulsion but willingly, not for dishonest gain but eagerly; 3 nor as being lords over those entrusted to you, but being examples to the flock; 4 and when the Chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the crown of glory that does not fade away." (NKJV). 

Are you bearing fruit in your service to Christ? 

© Ezekiel Kimosop 2021

Who are the Three Men that Appeared to Abraham in Genesis 18?

WHO WERE THE THREE MEN THAT APPEARED TO ABRAHAM IN GENESIS 18?

By Ezekiel Kimosop

Genesis 18:2-5 says “Then the Lord appeared to him by [a]the terebinth trees of Mamre, as he was sitting in the tent door in the heat of the day. 2 So he lifted his eyes and looked, and behold, three men were standing by him; and when he saw them, he ran from the tent door to meet them, and bowed himself to the ground, 3 and said, “My Lord, if I have now found favor in Your sight, do not pass on by Your servant. 4 Please let a little water be brought, and wash your feet, and rest yourselves under the tree. 5 And I will bring a morsel of bread, that you may refresh your hearts. After that you may pass by, inasmuch as you have come to your servant.”

They said, “Do as you have said.”(NKJV).

PASSAGE ANALYSIS

Genesis 18:1 says “Then the Lord appeared to him by [a]the terebinth trees of Mamre, as he was sitting in the tent door in the heat of the day.”

The above text reveals that God appeared to Abraham by the terebinth tree of Mamre as he sat down in his tent door in the heat of the day and Abraham attended to them as his valued guests. This Scripture draws a number of theological questions that must be addressed at this point.

Did God appear to Abraham in the form of a human being or were the three persons angelic beings, with one being an archangel?

If these men appeared as ordinary human beings, does this imply that God revealed Himself in flesh at this point?

Was this theophany prior evidence of God’s pre-incarnate coming before Christ?

Did Abraham understand or perceive that these men were divine beings? How should the ordinary reader of Scripture construe this text?

We shall attempt answers to some of the above questions. 

Let us begin by evaluating some theological theories advanced by Bible scholars on this text.

Some Bible scholars suggest that the three men were spiritual heavenly beings, now assuming human bodies, that they might be visible to Abraham, and conversable with him.[1] The assumption here is that God has to conform to a nature that could interact with men. This view appears to be consistent with the passage context. The men were no ordinary beings even as they had the semblance of human beings.

Some have further suggested that one of the three men was the preincarnate Christ appearing in angelic form that resembled a human being. However, and in view of the revelation available in New Testament Scripture, such a theory is open to debate. My view is that no evidence in Scripture suggests that Christ had previously appeared in a separate incarnation. 

Chuck Smith considers the three characters as God coming with two angels. Could God come in person to meet a mortal on Earth? If so why would Scripture assign to Him the semblance of a human being? Besides, there are no manifest distinctions in their appearance that assign one of the men some aspects of divinity. The three appeared as ordinary folk.

However, Smith’s observation of the Hebrew salutation “My Lord Adonay” as offered by Abraham is perhaps instructive of Abraham’s discernment of the theophany [a divine visitation or appearance by God among men]. [2]

Charles Ellicott suggests that the Genesis 18 incident is a continuation of God’s visit to Abraham that commenced in Genesis 17. God affirmed His promises to Abraham that were made under the covenant of Genesis 15. It quotes a Jewish oral tradition that says that God’s visit came three days after the circumcision and that Abraham was healing from the surgery. This is difficult to tell from the text.

God demanded the circumcision rite in Genesis 17 as a mark of His covenant relationship with Abraham and his descendants. However, the purposes and contexts of the two visitations recorded in Genesis 17 and 18, respectively, appear to be distinct from each other and this should not escape the reader’s attention.

Notice that in Genesis 17, God appears to Abraham in a form that the Bible does not describe. Was this another angelic appearance similar to the one of our passage context or was it a separate theophany? 

Genesis 17:3 says “Then Abram fell on his face, and God talked with him”. This is perhaps evidence of Abraham’s worship and reverence of God. He may have rightly discerned that he was in God’s holy presence and made obeisance. 

Albert Barnes recognizes that while God chose to appear in human form, this does not suggest that God only manifests Himself in a way that is rationally consistent with human faculties. 

I agree with this theological assessment of the theophany of Genesis 18. God is incomprehensible. He cannot be limited to a given way of manifestation and His appearance as a man or an angelic being does not diminish or obscure His divine essence.

Genesis 18:2 says “So he lifted his eyes and looked, and behold, three men were standing by him; and when he saw them, he ran from the tent door to meet them, and bowed himself to the ground.”

The fact that the three men appeared to Abraham, conversed with him and ate the meal offered to them confirms that they were properly possessed of human essence at this point. Nothing suggests or implies that their appearance was accompanied by any divine essence or glory. This theophany is perhaps a foreshadow of Jesus’ coming in the flesh as God incarnate many centuries later. Jesus led an ordinary life but unlike men, Jesus was conceived of the Holy Spirit and was/is without sin (2 Corinthians 5:21).

Ellicott’s Commentary posits that one of the three men was “the angel of Jehovah,” who came as the manifestation of Deity to Abraham, and the other two were his companions, commissioned by him afterwards to execute judgment on the cities of the plain. It adds that the three were a pointer to the Holy Trinity in the Godhead. It however rejects the notion that the three were actual members of the Trinity represented in human flesh. 

I concur with this view.

Jamieson Fausset observes that the manner in which the three men were received by Abraham suggests that the visitors were of extraordinary stature.[3] Abraham did more than a customary welcome. The very low bow and the choice of a calf was instructive of highly valued guests. If the exhortation of Hebrews 13:2 is accepted as a reference to Abraham’s case, we can infer that Abraham was perhaps unaware of the identities of the three men at the point that they appeared to him in Genesis 18:1-2. His discernment of the men however widened as he engaged them.

Genesis 18:3-5 says “and said, “My Lord, if I have now found favor in Your sight, do not pass on by Your servant. 4 Please let a little water be brought, and wash your feet, and rest yourselves under the tree. 5 And I will bring a morsel of bread, that you may refresh your hearts. After that you may pass by, inasmuch as you have come to your servant.”

They said, “Do as you have said.” (NKJV).

This passage primarily describes Abraham’s act of hospitality towards the three men. This was consistent with Middle Eastern culture of Abraham's day. It was customary to treat strangers with kindness. It also reveals Abraham's personal character as a hospitable person.  

Some scholars have singled out Abraham’s reaction as he served the men as evidence that the men were possibly of strange complexion. Notice that Abraham stood by them under the tree as they ate (Genesis 18:8). This action is believed to be largely inconsistent with Middle Eastern culture where the host ate with his guests. It is however difficult to tell what exactly informed Abraham’s conduct at this point. Were these men of rare complexion and countenance?

Notice further that in the conversation of Genesis 18:9-10, the three men asked about the whereabouts of Sarah, Abraham’s wife. God of course knew exactly where she was! However, cultural concerns perhaps kept her from coming close to the strangers.[4]

One of the three men, speaking in the first person, says “I will certainly return to you according to the time of life, and behold, Sarah your wife shall have a son.” (Genesis 18:10). This is definitely God’s authoritative voice conveyed under incredible circumstances and this is perhaps the reason Sarah laughed within herself in disbelief (Genesis 18:12). She was well beyond child bearing age. God in His divine omniscience noted Sarah’s unbelief and confronted it (Genesis 18:13-15). Sarah came to realize that God’s divine eyes illuminated the thoughts of the heart [cf. Jeremiah 17:9-10]. This is true of us too. Nothing is hidden from God, not even the deepest secrets and emotions of our hearts.

Of more significance, however, is the fact that God, in Abraham's context, demonstrated that He alone can beat the biological clock because He is the author of life. Nothing is impossible with God. By His immeasurable grace, God determined to give Abraham a son by his wife Sarah despite her barrenness and advanced age.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

So, who were the three men that appeared to Abraham in Genesis 18?

In conclusion, we can summarize the key lessons of our study of the above passage as follows:

First, the three men were angelic/heavenly beings who took on human form. One of the three may have been an archangel who was God’s principal messenger. God could not have come in His divine glory because no mortal could behold God in the fulness of His glory and live. God proclaims to Moses in Exodus 33:20, saying, “You cannot see My face, for no man shall see Me and live.”

Secondly, Abraham did not immediately appear to discern the identity of the three men until they conversed with him and finally revealed their identity. It is possible that Abraham’s discernment continued to grow as the strangers engaged him in a conversation. The more we engage with God in devotion and in the study of His word, the more we grow in the knowledge and discernment of Him (cf. Psalm 1; Ephesians 4:11-15).

Thirdly, the three men were not the three members of the Holy Trinity in human form. One of the men however appeared to possess some divine essence, speaking in the first person as God. However, the first conclusion above rules out the possibility. Nothing in the passage indicates that the members of the Trinity took on human form.

Fourthly, it appears that God revealed Himself to Abraham through an unnamed archangel. He was accompanied by two angels who were sent to destroy the city of Sodom. It is instructive that the wickedness of this city was earlier mention in Genesis 13:13. 

God therefore appeared to Abraham in a manner that could only have been described in detail by Abraham himself. Unlike Daniel’s experience with God’s archangel, Gabriel, in Daniel 8-9, God concealed this critical information from us.

Finally, the revelation of the imminent destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah confirms that the men were indeed God’s angels on a mission. 

God often used angels to deliver messages to His people and to execute His divine judgment on the wicked. He also sent angels to protect, rescue and guide His people (cf. Exodus 32:34, 33:2, Numbers 20:16; Judges 6:12, 21-22, 13:20; Acts 12:5-19).

On account of Abraham’s covenant relationship, God chose to reveal His mission to him. The angels were on their way to Sodom for a divine mission. We can safely conclude that the men contemplated in Genesis 18:22 are the two angels that are later mentioned in Genesis 19:1. This confirms that the third man who remained with Abraham was possibly God’s archangel who commanded the mission.

When God disclosed to Abraham that the angels were on their way to destroy Sodom, Abraham was disturbed because Lot, his nephew with whom he had parted ways in Genesis 13 dwelt there! 

Genesis 18:32-33 reveals that there were less than ten righteous men in the city of Sodom. Lot, his wife and his two daughters were the only souls that God graciously sought to spare and the four were asked to flee out of the city as God rained brimstone and fire on it (Genesis 19:23-25).

Genesis 19:15-17 says, “When the morning dawned, the angels urged Lot to hurry, saying, “Arise, take your wife and your two daughters who are here, lest you be consumed in the punishment of the city.” 16 And while he lingered, the men took hold of his hand, his wife’s hand, and the hands of his two daughters, the Lord being merciful to him, and they brought him out and set him outside the city. 17 So it came to pass, when they had brought them outside, that he said, “Escape for your life! Do not look behind you nor stay anywhere in the plain. Escape to the mountains, lest you be destroyed.” (NKJV).

CONCLUSION

The Bible may not have expressly stated or revealed with absolute certainty the identities of the three men but knowing their mission and the context in which they appear to Abraham, my view is that we can attempt a theological construction of their identity without necessarily violating the word of God or drawing abstract assumptions.

Scripture is open to interpretation and Scripture interprets Scripture. 

Of course our answers (or attempts thereat) may not conclusively resolve the mysteries behind difficult passages of Scripture but we should draw some theological principles for our moral application from the study of a passage of Scripture. 

The above passage, like any other section of Scripture, was definitely intended to be read, understood and applied by the reader. 

Shalom

References

[1] https://www.blueletterbible.org/Comm/mhc/Gen/Gen_018.cfm

[2] https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/csc/genesis-18.html

[3] https://biblehub.com/commentaries/genesis/18-2.htm

[4] Abraham and Sarah’s Hospitality in Theology of Work Project, https://www.theologyofwork.org/old-testament/genesis-12-50-and-work#abraham-and-sarahs-hospitality-genesis-181-15

© Ezekiel Kimosop 2021

Does the Bible Forbid Cremation of Bodies?

 

DOES THE BIBLE FORBID CREMATION?

By Ezekiel Kimosop

Cremation is traditionally identified with Eastern societies, majorly among the Hindus. It is however an increasingly common method of disposing human bodies in contemporary society. Even among sections of conservative African societies that traditionally bury their dead. Some Christians choose cremation for a number of reasons including cost and privacy.

The Jews and other ancient Middle Eastern societies buried their dead. Jesus Himself was buried in a borrowed grave. Some African societies including sections of the Nilotic people did not bury their dead. They simply discarded the bodies in sacred burial places, leaving them at the mercy of wild animals!

Does the Bible expressly or impliedly forbid cremation? Would a believer violate Scripture if they expressed their wish to be cremated upon death? Should Christians be buried rather than cremated?

These are legitimate questions that inform a healthy conversation on this topic.

Genesis 3:19 says

"In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread

Till you return to the ground,

For out of it you were taken;

For dust you are,

And to dust you shall return."

Some consider the above text of Scripture as evidence that burial rather than cremation was intended by God for His covenant people. This Scripture however speaks of the origin of the physical or material nature of the human body and its earthly destiny upon death. My view is that whether the believer's body is cremated or buried in a grave, it ultimately returns to the dust, the very place Scripture contemplates above!

The human body bears the consequences of the curse of Adam! The Bible teaches that flesh and blood shall not inherit the kingdom of God. The heavenly bodies are therefore distinct from physical bodies that would ultimately decay.

What do we learn from Genesis 3:19? 

The theological context of the above Scripture can be distilled from the passage of Genesis 3:1-24 which is dedicated to the Fall and judgement of Adam and Eve and their expulsion from the Garden of Eden. It speaks about the origin of the Fall through the disobedience of the woman and the man in Genesis 3:1-7 and the divine consequence that followed in Genesis 3:8-24.

When we read Genesis 3:19 in its passage context, we discover that it cannot serve as an authority on Christian burials. It speaks about man's destiny in his fallennes.

The New Testament Scriptures do not convey any explicit doctrine on Christian burials even though some passages of Scripture such as 1 Corinthians 15 appear to presuppose burial in line with Jewish and Greco-Roman cultures.

The Bible reveals that a believer who dies in Christ awaits the resurrection of the dead in Christ (1 Thessalonians 4:13-17). It is therefore immaterial how the body was disposed of. Even if the believer's body is cremated or perishes in the sea or is dissolved in sulphuric acid or other chemical agents as happened in Nazi death camps during Hitler's Third Reich, this will never affect the eternal destiny of the believer. The believer will be raised to life, and will adorn a glorified body at the sounding of the last trumpet! 

1 Corinthians 15:42-43 says in part: "...the body is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption. It is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness, it is raised in power." 

The sowing here is a metaphorical reference to the burial of the believer. This is historically consistent with Jewish and Greco Roman thought.

One cannot perhaps help but imagine that believers in societies that traditionally bury the dead may consider the cremation scene repulsive because of cultural concerns. Similarly, the Hindu Christian would perhaps cringe at the notion of a burial being carried out in the place of their traditionally established method of disposal of their dead through cremation!

My view is that burials and cremations should be governed by the exigences of culture and should not necessarily inform Christian doctrine. The Bible does not expressly forbid or condemn cremation. Christian burial is however an established practice, historically.

I am therefore hesitant to teach that Genesis 3:19 speaks against cremation or that it is an authority on Christian burial as the sole method for the disposal of human bodies. My view is that while burial is a decent and environmentally healthy method of disposing human bodies, the Bible does not expressly teach that a believer must be buried in the ground. 

What happens to those who died in the sea?

Revelation 20:13 says: "The sea gave up the dead who were in it, and Death and Hades delivered up the dead who were in them. And they were judged, each one according to his works."

This confirms that those who perished in the sea will be raised to life during the final judgement. The souls of those who have died in Christ will also be raised from whatever location they lie including the sea! 

Burials and cremations are therefore informed by established cultural practices and traditions throughout human civilizations. They do not affect the believer's destiny in Christ. 

2 Timothy 4:6-8 reveals that the believer's soul is preserved by God upon death. No matter what happens to their body, their assurance of eternal life will never be lost. 

Shalom 

© Ezekiel Kimosop 2021

Does a Church Minister Possess God's Grace?

DOES A CHURCH MINISTER POSSESS GOD'S GRACE? CAN THE MINISTER RELEASE GOD'S GRACE UPON BELIEVERS?

By Ezekiel Kimosop

INTRODUCTION

This question was raised by a member on the L & D WhatsApp forum on 19th August 2021. He sought to understand if a church minister or pastor possesses God's grace and if he can rightfully assign God's grace to believers or to his congregation or whether God's grace is exclusively vested in God.

What is God's grace? 

The Bible speaks of God's grace in a number of contexts. In its base meaning, God's grace refers to underserved favor or mercy. 

In the context of the redemption works for the cross, God's saving grace is understood as God's unmerited favor. 

God's grace is evident in that the sinner receives God's pardon by reason of his faith in Jesus Christ. It is by God's grace that the condemnation in Adam is graciously lifted from the sinner (cf. Romans 8:1-2). 

In another context, especially in ecclesial salutations, grace is understood as wishes for God's blessings in the general sense. If this context is contemplated, then the pastoral benediction is in order. 

In order for a preacher or minister to release God's grace in person [assuming that ever happens] it is imperative that they must be possessed of it.

Does a preacher possess God's grace? We shall answer this question at the conclusion of the article.

ANALYSIS/EVALUATION

In the Old Testament Scripture, we find the priestly benediction by which God commanded the priests to proclaim blessings to His people. 

Numbers 6:22-27 says "And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying: 23 “Speak to Aaron and his sons, saying, ‘This is the way you shall bless the children of Israel. Say to them:

24 “The Lord bless you and keep you;

25 The Lord make His face shine upon you,

And be gracious to you;

26 The Lord lift up His countenance upon you,

And give you peace.”’

27 “So they shall put My name on the children of Israel, and I will bless them.”

Noticed that three times, the Lord's name is invoked by the priestly benediction, leaving no doubt as to the source of the blessing (vv. 24-26).  

This rules out the notion that the blessings of God's people emanate directly from the priest or preacher. God confirms in the above passage that He is the ultimate source of blessings (see Numbers 6:27). 

For the purpose of Biblical context, we shall  also examine statements of New Testament Scripture texts that are relevant to this question and draw a conclusion.

In a number of Pauline Letters, the apostle proclaims God's grace upon his hearers under circumstances that can be understood as his apostolic wishes upon them. 

Does the Bible reveal that God's grace is innately vested in apostles pastors or bishops? 

First things first. Let us first do a brief survey through the relevant texts of New Testament Scripture.

Here are examples of Scripture that speak into this question:

Romans 1:5-6 says "Through Him [Christ] we have received grace and apostleship for obedience to the faith among all nations for His name, 6 among whom you also are the called of Jesus Christ."

This Scripture confirms that God's grace was extended to believers through Jesus Christ.

Besides, a typical Pauline salutation in Scripture reads as follows: 

"Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ."

(See 1 Corinthians 1:3; Ephesians 1:2; Philippians 1:2; Colossians 1:2; 1 Thessalonians 1:1).

Other Letters of New Testament Scripture convey a minor variation to the above salutation in that they introduce mercy into the template statement that saying: "Grace, mercy, and peace from God our Father and Jesus Christ our Lord." (1 Timothy 1:2 and 2 Timothy 1:2; Titus 1:4)

The Letter of Philemon resumes the first template statement (Philemon 1:3). 

1 Peter 1:3 says "Grace to you and peace be multiplied." This is repeated in 2 Peter 1:2.

Jude 1:2 says "Mercy, peace, and love be multiplied to you." It appears that Jude and Peter adopt a similar salutation.

None of the two sets of salutations noted above [or anything similar to them] can be identified in the Letters of Hebrews, James, 1, 2, 3 John and Revelation. 

CONCLUSION

Having sampled through the Scriptures, we can confidently conclude that God's divine grace  comes from [and is exclusively vested in] God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ. 

Accordingly therefore, my view is that no person, not even a church minister, can possess or purport to convey God's grace in person other than by prayerfully wishing others God's grace in their prayers or salutations/greetings. 

If the apostles of Jesus Christ can reveal this truth in their writings of Scripture, it would be a total misrepresentation of Biblical truth for anyone to purport to possess or convey God's grace in person. 

My concluding view is that no minister, pastor, or Bishop is in possession of or can personally convey or release God's grace at will. We must petition God for His grace and His divine blessings.

God's grace is exclusively vested in God alone. We receive it exclusively from Him and at His divine discretion.

© Ezekiel Kimosop 2021

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]