Tagged: Pharisees Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • John T. Polk II 9:58 am on 2015-06-18 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , minorities, offended, , offensive, Pharisees,   

    6-15-2015 Ruling by “Offense” 

    The late atheist Christopher Hitchens said, “I’m very depressed how in this country you can be told ‘That’s offensive’ as though those two words constitute an argument.” Indeed, minorities rule by simply saying they are “offended” by: God, Jesus Christ, the Bible, Christians, the Church of Christ, or sin. But these are truthfully taught in the Bible. God’s blessings are on those who are not offended by them! Jesus Christ said: “And blessed is he who is not offended because of Me” (Matthew 11:6 NKJV). Jesus condemned Pharisees. “Then His disciples came and said to Him, ‘Do You know that the Pharisees were offended when they heard this saying?’ But He answered and said, ‘Every plant which My heavenly Father has not planted will be uprooted’” (Matthew 15:12-13 NKJV). Truth cancels someone’s “offense.”

    This is Johnny Polk, with “Words of Wisdom” brought to you by the Oneida church of Christ.

  • John T. Polk II 9:40 pm on 2015-04-27 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , Pharisees, , , religious teacher, ,   

    4-17-2015 “We have found the Messiah” (John 1:41) – No One Spoke Like Him 

    At age 12, Jesus “in the temple, sitting in the midst of the teachers, both listening to them and asking them questions. And all who heard Him were astonished at His understanding and answers” (Luke 2:46-47 NKJV). As an adult, the very first time Jesus taught in His home synagogue, “all bore witness to Him, and marveled at the gracious words which proceeded out of His mouth” (Luke 4:22 NKJV). No religious teacher, preacher, prophet, or leader has ever taught like Jesus did. “Then the officers came to the chief priests and Pharisees, who said to them, ‘Why have you not brought Him?’ The officers answered, ‘No man ever spoke like this Man!'” (John 7:45-46 NKJV). Does your preacher teach, “He who believes and is baptized will be saved” (Mark 16:16 NKJV). Why not? Jesus did!

    This is Johnny Polk, with “Words of Wisdom” brought to you by the Oneida church of Christ.

  • John T. Polk II 9:38 pm on 2015-04-27 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , Pharisees,   

    4-16-2015 “We have found the Messiah” (John 1:41) – Miracle Worker 

    Even “the chief priests and the Pharisees gathered a council and said, ‘What shall we do? For this Man works many signs’” (John 11:47 NKJV). If miracles prove His claim, the number and power of them is overwhelming. In one chapter of Matthew alone (the 8th) Jesus heals: a leper, a paralyzed man, Peter’s mother-in-law’s fever; cast out demons “with a word; stopped a storm on the sea; and cast out so many demons, it drowned about 2000 swine. It’s no wonder, then, that “many of the people believed in Him, and said, ‘When the Christ comes, will He do more signs than these which this Man has done?'” (John 7:31 NKJV) No one else has done the works that Jesus Christ has done. Read all about it in the Bible.

    This is Johnny Polk, with “Words of Wisdom” brought to you by the Oneida church of Christ.

  • Joshua Gulley 12:11 pm on 2013-11-23 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , John 9, Pharisees   

    One Thing I Do Know 

    In John 9, Jesus heals a blind man on the Sabbath Day. Since he had been blind since birth, what a joyous, life-changing moment this must have been, right? But unfortunately, one of the first things his newly functioning eyes witnessed was Pharisees descending upon him like hounds on a trapped coon. They had an agenda and the man and his parents knew it, so they felt like they were walking on thin ice answering their questions. To them, this wonderful gift of sight from Jesus may have appeared to be a curse at first. Typical of life–when you obtain something worth rejoicing about, there’s somebody there trying to drain all the joy out of it for you.

    About the 4th time they came to him asking him what happened, they began basically by trying to bully him into calling Jesus a sinner. His response is one of my favorite verses. It was profound in its simplicity: “Whether He is a sinner, I do not know; one thing I do know, that though I was blind, now I see.” He didn’t yet know that Jesus was the Messiah; he hadn’t been told much about Jesus at all, and he didn’t go trying to fabricate an answer. He just told them what he knew, which was enough for both parties to make a choice. Might we learn from this that we don’t have to be experts before we tell people about Jesus.

    Lord, thank You for providing the account of Jesus and this blind man. Grant us the integrity to admit what we don’t know, the courage to speak what we do, and the wisdom to let the truth guide our thoughts, words, and actions.

  • John T. Polk II 11:35 pm on 2013-06-17 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: "show of humility", , , , , , , Pharisees, , , ,   

    God and “The Pope” Agree! 

              According to the “Living faith” section C of The Huntsville Times, Friday, June 14, 2013, the article on Religion & Church News carried an item titled, “NO, I did not want to be Pope.” It was an interview from McClatchy-Tribune that quoted the 3-month-in-office “Pope” of the Roman Catholic Church, Francis, as saying: “’No, I didn’t want to be pope. A person who wants to be pope does not love himself,’ the pontiff added, in a trademark show of humility.’”  Based upon his comments, God would agree that:

    1. Since “Pope” is a Latin term for “father,” and since Jesus Christ forbade anyone using the term “father” as a term for a spiritual leader (Matthew 23:9), then God would agree that Francis should not be “pope!”

    2. Francis “didn’t want to be pope,” a position which is supposed to be the head of the Roman Catholic Church. But the Apostle Paul claimed that “the manifold wisdom of God might be made known by the church to the principalities and powers in the heavenly places, according to the eternal purpose which He accomplished in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Ephesians 3:9-11). Since God’s “mighty power” raised Jesus from the dead and “put all things under His feet, and gave Him to be head over all things to the church, which is His body, the fullness of Him who fills all in all” (Ephesians 1:22-23), then God placed Jesus Christ over His church, not a “pope!” Thus, God would agree that He didn’t want Francis to be “pope” over the church!”

    3. Francis said, “A person who wants to be pope does not love himself.” God’s Word has said that, after “the falling away,” “and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God” (2 Thessalonians 2:3-4), but whose followers would be “among those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved” (2 Thessalonians 2:10), then Francis must not “love himself” for taking the position of apostasy that God condemns! God would agree that any man who takes such a position “does not love himself” or the truth, either!

    4. Contrary to the article cited above, there is no “trademark show of humility” in anyone who opposes God, sits in God’s temple, or claims to forgive sins which only God can do (Matthew 9:1-8)! Jesus Christ condemned public displays of the Pharisees, which are remarkably like that of a “pope:” “all their works they do to be seen by men. They make their phylacteries broad and enlarge the borders of their garments. They love the best places at feasts, the best seats in the synagogues” (Matthew 23:5-6). No “pope” has ever manifested a “trademark show of humility,” while claiming to be equal with God! The real head of the church of Christ, “humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross” (Philippians 2:8). No “pope” has ever humbled himself to die on a cross for the church of Christ! God would agree that there is no “trademark show of humility” in this, or any other “pope.”

    It’s too bad the “pope” refuses to tell his followers what Jesus said would give salvation in Mark 16:16: “He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.” Will this “pope” agree with God?

    • Joseph Richardson 3:31 pm on 2013-06-22 Permalink | Reply

      Catholics do believe in Christ and are baptized (and do believe they are saved by that faith).

      • John T. Polk II 4:01 pm on 2013-06-22 Permalink | Reply

        Believing in Christ includes the fact that He is the only Mediator between God and man (1 Timothy 2:5), but why, then, do Catholics use Mary as their Mediatrix?
        “Baptism” throughout the New Testament was a “burial” (Romans 6:3-4), but what Catholics are taught that it is an immersion?
        Mark 16:16 is Jesus’ statement concerning salvation, and it is to be defined as His Holy Spirit led the Apostles to write about these factors (John 16:7-13; Jude 3), not as “Roman Catholicism” has changed its terms over the centuries. What “pope” has explained Mark 16:16 with these Scriptures?
        Thank you for reading and replying. Please tell me wherein this answer isn’t helpful.

        • Joseph Richardson 4:32 pm on 2013-06-22 Permalink | Reply

          Hi John, glad to be reading. I reckon you are a neighbor. I’ve grown up in and live in Decatur; I lived in Huntsville for a few years before I moved back here, and consider Huntsville my second home.

          Catholics definitely affirm that Christ is the only Mediator between God and man, as Scripture itself affirms. Mary is a mediator (“mediatrix” is just the Latin feminine) in the sense that she intercedes for us — in the same way we intercede for each other. That’s not the same way Christ is Mediator, in the sacred relationship between the Persons of God in the Trinity — He doesn’t just intercede; He intervenes.

          I could give you a lot of quotes, but then then would be very long. So here’s just a bit:

          There is but one Mediator as we know from the words of the apostle, ‘for there is one God and one mediator of God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself a redemption for all. ‘ (1 Tim. 2:5-6) The maternal duty of Mary toward men in no wise obscures or diminishes this unique mediation of Christ, but rather shows His power. (Lumen Gentium (Dogmatic Constitution on the Church), Second Vatican Council, 1964)

          Regarding Baptism — the Church definitely teaches that immersion is the ideal method. Infusion (pouring) has been practiced in some cases since the very beginning of the Church, probably since Pentecost itself (how else are you going to baptize 3,000 men in a day, and their families?), and continuing to other cases of necessity (being being baptized on their deathbeds and the like). Pouring didn’t really become as common as it is today until the Middle Ages (there are medieval immersion baptisteries all over Europe), but recently more and more Catholic churches are going back to immersion. The Catechism of the Catholic Church says:

          The essential rite of the sacrament follows: Baptism properly speaking. It signifies and actually brings about death to sin and entry into the life of the Most Holy Trinity through configuration to the Paschal mystery of Christ. Baptism is performed in the most expressive way by triple immersion in the baptismal water. However, from ancient times it has also been able to be conferred by pouring the water three times over the candidate’s head. (CCC 1239)

          According to the Didache, believed to be the oldest Christian document outside the Bible, possibly dated as early A.D. 60 or 70:

          And concerning baptism, baptize this way: Having first said all these things, baptize into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit (Matthew 28:19) in living water. But if you have not living water, baptize into other water; and if you can not in cold, in warm. But if you have not either, pour out water thrice upon the head into the name of Father and Son and Holy Spirit.

          I’m not sure what you mean about the Catholic Church changing its terms. But definitely, through Baptism we die with Christ and are buried and born again (Romans 6:3-4, John 3:5); we receive the Holy Spirit and become a part of Christ’s Body (Gal 3:27, 1 Cor 12:13, Eph 4:5).

    • John T. Polk II 1:38 pm on 2013-06-24 Permalink | Reply

      Joseph, you have proven my point: Nothing in the New Testament teaches Roman Catholic doctrine. You claim “Mary is a mediator” who “intercedes for us” but “not the same way Christ is Mediator.” In the New Testament, “mediator” is used of the Prophets Moses (Galatians 3:19-20) and Jesus Christ (1 Timothy 2:5; Hebrews 8:6; 9:15; 12:24), AND NOT ONCE OF MARY, OR CHRISTIANS FOR ONE ANOTHER! Roman Catholicism has had to add Mary as a Mediatrix after God finished writing the New Testament! That explains what you were not sure of when you said: “I’m not sure what you mean about the Catholic Church changing its terms.”
      All of the next quotes you used to establish RC doctrine were written after, and outside of, the New Testament, and therefore are worthless for “the faith” (Jude 3), for it was “once for all delivered to the saints” by the end of the 1st Century. It is meaningless to try to define “the faith” by quoting: (Lumen Gentium (Dogmatic Constitution on the Church), Second Vatican Council, 1964); The Catechism of the Catholic Church; (CCC 1239); the Didache; none of which are contained inside the New Testament.
      IF, as you say, “Catholics do believe in Christ and are baptized (and do believe they are saved by that faith),” then why would they not simply obey the terms of faith and baptism as described in the New Testament, without any or all of the additions of the Roman Catholic Church? “Baptism,” which itself means “immersion,” was never a sprinkling or pouring in the New Testament. Since immersion was required, the logistics involved on the Day of Pentecost were solved by the Apostles without changing “immersion” into “sprinkling;” and there is no New Testament record of any “being baptized on their deathbeds and the like.”
      By-the-way, you haven’t even begun to deal with my original premise: The office of RC “pope” has no New Testament right to even exist, nor is qualified to be the head of the church of Christ!

compose new post
next post/next comment
previous post/previous comment
show/hide comments
go to top
go to login
show/hide help
shift + esc