A Traditional "Easter" Timeline

I was surprised when I recently heard that Jesus really entered Jerusalem on Monday!  One of the arguments in support of that was, if Jesus entered Jerusalem on Monday, then there are no “silent” days, traditionally Wednesday, during the passion week.  Really!?

I thought the only question was how to fit three days and three nights between Friday afternoon and Sunday morning.  Really, it can’t be done.  That is unless one looks at the details, a few of which will be covered below.  And that is the point, look at the details.  Use the Bible to define what you believe, not just to defend what you believe.

The discussion below will cover a timeline for the week before the resurrection. Normal weekday names will be used. Sunday is the first day, then Monday through Saturday.

Let’s start on Sunday, the day Jesus rose, the first day of the week.

Wouldn’t it be nice if there was some definitive statement about Jesus rising the first day of the week so we wouldn’t have to rely on tradition and Christian practice?
How about...
“Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils.”   Mark 16:9


That seems pretty clear and there are no statements regarding Jesus rising at any other time.  In addition, the first witnesses to His resurrection saw Him for the first time on Sunday, the first day of the week.

Two of the witnesses that saw Jesus on the first day of the week were the disciples on the road to Emmaus.  The conversation that they had with Jesus helps with the time line of events.   In Luke 24:21 they made the following statement:
 “...to day is the third day since these things were done.”

Friday would be the first day, Saturday would be the second day, and Sunday would be the third day.  But one might ask, “What things?”  Jesus asked that question a couple of verses earlier and here is the response:
“...And they said unto him, Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, which was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people: And how the chief priests and our rulers delivered him to be condemned to death, and have crucified him. But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel: and beside all this, to day is the third day since these things were done.” Luke 24:19-21

The third day, three days and three nights, after three days did not start at the burial, but at the betrayal.  Why did they believe that?  Because that is what Jesus taught:
“And he began to teach them, that the Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders, and of the chief priests, and scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again.” Mark 8:31

Jesus was betrayed on Friday, right after He ate the Passover feast with His disciples.  And yes, that means that the passover was killed Thursday at the going down of the sun as it is supposed to be.  Deut 16:6. “...there thou shalt sacrifice the passover at even, at the going down of the sun,...”  The passover was killed on the 14th day of the Jewish calendar at evening.  And that means at the end of the 14th day of the month, not the beginning.  There was not a whole day for preparing the meal.  Exodus 12 is pretty clear about the timing of the events.

“And ye shall keep it up until the fourteenth day of the same month:
and the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel shall kill it in the evening.
And they shall take of the blood, and strike it on the two side posts and on the upper door post of the houses, wherein they shall eat it.  And they shall eat the flesh in that night,
 roast with fire, and unleavened bread; and with bitter herbs they shall eat it.  Eat not of it raw, nor sodden at all with water, but roast with fire; his head with his legs, and with the purtenance thereof.  And ye shall let nothing of it remain until the morning;
 and that which remaineth of it until the morning ye shall burn with fire.  And thus shall ye eat it; with your loins girded, your shoes on your feet, and your staff in your hand; and ye shall eat it in haste: it is the LORD’S passover.”  Exodus 12:6-11
Pharaoh rose up in the night, he, and all his servants, and all the Egyptians; and there was a great cry in Egypt; for there was not a house where there was not one dead.  And he called for Moses and Aaron by night, and said, Rise up, and get you forth from among my people, both ye and the children of Israel; and go, serve the LORD, as ye have said.  Also take your flocks and your herds, as ye have said, and be gone; and bless me also.  And the Egyptians were urgent upon the people, that they might send them out of the land in haste; for they said, We be all dead men.  And the people took their dough before it was leavened, their kneadingtroughs being bound up in their clothes upon their shoulders.  And the children of Israel did according to the word of Moses; and they borrowed of the Egyptians jewels of silver, and jewels of gold, and raiment:  And the LORD gave the people favour in the sight of the Egyptians, so that they lent unto them such things as they required. And they spoiled the Egyptians.  And the children of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Succoth, about six hundred thousand on foot that were men, beside children.  And a mixed multitude went up also with them; and flocks, and herds, even very much cattle.  And they baked unleavened cakes of the dough which they brought forth out of Egypt, for it was not leavened; because they were thrust out of Egypt, and could not tarry, neither had they prepared for themselves any victual.”  Exodus 12:29-39

The meal, the passover, and the people leaving of Egypt were done in haste.

Back to the event at hand.  The Bible is pretty clear that Jesus ate the Passover with His disciples.

"Then came the day of unleavened bread, when the passover must be killed."  Luke 22:7  (That would be the 14th day of the month)  

"And he sent Peter and John, saying, Go and prepare us the passover, that we may eat." Luke 22:8
"And ye shall say unto the goodman of the house, The Master saith unto thee, Where is the guestchamber, where I shall eat the passover with my disciples?" Luke 22:11
"And they went, and found as he had said unto them: and they made ready the passover." Luke 22:13  

"And he said unto them, With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer:" Luke 22:15

There is an interesting bit of information that can be found about the trials that Jesus faced Friday before the sunrise.  John 18:28 says the following:
“Then led they Jesus from Caiaphas unto the hall of judgment: and it was early; and they themselves went not into the judgment hall, lest they should be defiled; but that they might eat the passover.”
The passage from Exodus clearly states that the passover must be eaten before morning.  Anything that was left was to be burnt by morning.  Think, think, think....  If the passover was killed on Friday and the meal followed, which would be after sunset, the leaders could have been made clean in the evening, but they wanted to eat the passover at the correct time, which would have been Friday before the morning.

We are almost done.  Friday is the Passover.  Now look at John 12:1:
“Then Jesus six days before the passover came to Bethany, where Lazarus was which had been dead, whom he raised from the dead.”
The math for this one is not too hard.  Six days before Friday would be Saturday.
Then skip to John 12:12-13
“On the next day much people that were come to the feast, when they heard that Jesus was coming to Jerusalem, Took branches of palm trees, and went forth to meet him, and cried, Hosanna: Blessed is the King of Israel that cometh in the name of the Lord.”
The next day following Saturday would be Sunday.  Please read verses 2-11.  I do not see any more days mentioned.  It is curious then that a “silent” day must be added here to make Monday the day Jesus entered Jerusalem.
So what about Wednesday?  Matthew 26:1-16 and Mark 14:1-11.  Both mention “after two days is the feast of the passover” which was Friday.  That would put these events on Wednesday.  Where did I learn to count days?  Look here...
2 Chronicles is dealing with a complaint of the people against King Rehoboam.  After voicing their grievance, Rehoboam says to them, “...Come again unto me after three days. And the people departed.” 2 Chronicles 10:5.  Rehoboam gets counsel from some old men that stood before Solomon and also from his contemporaries, not surprisingly Rehoboam sided with his cronies.  What is interesting is what follows that section in verse 12 of 2 Chronicles 10:
“So Jeroboam and all the people came to Rehoboam on the third day, as the king bade, saying, Come again to me on the third day.”
"After three days = the third day.  Have we come full circle yet?  After two days then would be the second day.  So here is the timeline that many are familiar with...

Saturday - John 12:1  Six days before the passover Jesus comes to Bethany.
“Palm” Sunday - John 12:12-13; Mark 11:1-11  The next day Jesus rides into Jerusalem on a donkey.
Monday - Mark 11: 12-19  On the morrow...fig tree without fruit
Tuesday - Mark 11:20  And in the morning...fig tree dried up
Wednesday - Mark 14:1  After two days was the feast of the Passover
Thursday - Mark 14:12  The first day of unleavened bread
“Good” Friday - Mark 14:17-15:47
Saturday - the sabbath
“Resurrection” Sunday - Mark 16:9  ...and when He had risen the first day of the week...

It’s more than a tradition...

Fill or “refill” the earth? What’s a man to do?

Genesis 1:29 “And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.” KJV

There are many who question the use of “replenish” in Genesis 1:29, especially those who believe in a literal interpretation of the creation story and also believe in a young, approximately 6000 year old, earth.  Those in support are those who believe in the Gap Theory of creation.  That theory is one of many that supports an old earth.  An old earth which matches “scientific” dating of the earth.

Those who claim to have a knowledge of the original languages say that replenish simply means to fill and that this is a mistranslation of the word used for fill.  Simple enough.  If you want more explanation use a search engine on the internet.

But what if you really believe that the Bible is the Word of God and is without error as delivered to us in the English language?  Well, just go find an English version that uses the word fill instead of replenish.  Done.  Of course, other versions have their own issues.  So learn Greek and Hebrew.  But then which Greek/Hebrew version should be used?  And, if we can’t even understand classical English, what chance is there of being fluent in Greek and Hebrew?  Okay, use the earliest manuscripts.  But earliest doesn’t mean correct either, they are not written in English, and the “originals” do not exist.  One argument against the “earliest manuscripts” is that they were well preserved because no one used them due to errors or editing.  So, what’s a man to do?  Think...

Did the translators who wrote the KJV have the word “fill” at their disposal?  Obviously yes since it was used in Genesis 1:22.

Genesis 1:22 “And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.”

Why not use “replenish” here if this were a recreation?  Were there no fish in the sea?  Maybe that is why the first creation failed and God had to start over again?  Note also that the fowl were only to “multiply” and not “fill” the earth.

What is incredible is that the ocean is literally filled with life.  From the surface to the deepest depths, that can be explored with high tech equipment.  And from what we would consider “normal” temperatures at the surface to hydrothermal vents that can reach temperatures of over 300Degrees Centigrade (water boils at 100 Degrees Centigrade).  Consider the following example.

"This super-heated water then re-ascends to the center of the mid-ocean ridge and emerges as a fast jet at about 350°C.  As this hot jet mixes with cold (34–36°F [1–2°C]) ocean water, hydrogen sulfide conveyed in solution from the deep rocks precipitates instantly, often coloring the jet black. Such jets are termed "black smokers." Hydrogen sulfide is usually poisonous to life, but the specialized communities around black smokers could not live without it.  A vibrant community of bacteria, tubeworms that are unique to the geothermal vent environment, and other creatures exists around hydrothermal vents."
http://www.enotes.com/earth-science/geothermal-deep-ocean-vents

The seas are filled, not so much the earth.  Land creatures are much more temperamental.  So maybe multiply is the right word to use for the fowl.

But now the sixth day...
 

Not only was man created on this day, but also all the cattle, creeping things and beasts.  None of those were commanded to fill or multiply in the earth, but then comes man...

Genesis 1:26-28 "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.  So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth."

Why not fill?  Maybe because man was never meant to fill the earth as fish fill the sea.  If you live in a city, it may seem like man has filled the earth, but there are many places that are not inhabited.  Why not refill?  I think that assumes that something was once filled.  I think the best definition for replenish is to restore to a previous state.  Maybe filled, but maybe not.  And that is why it may be the best word to use here.

But doesn’t that support a recreation or the Gap Theory of creation?  Not necessarily.  What is to be replenished?  God gave man dominion over all the earth.  Man is it tend to it, not just consume it or destroy it.  That’s why God gave some as farmers and some as hunters.  A good farmer and a good hunter manage their resources so that there will be a harvest in the future.  They act as if their resources are in fact limited and a blessing.  In this sense, replenish is the best word to use.  If a field is cleared for food, plant it again for another harvest. replenish it.  After the fall, if a beast is taken for food, make sure that there are enough left to reproduce so that they may be replenished.

I think the same principle applies after the flood.  Take care of what there is Noah.

Genesis 9:1 "And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful and multiply, and replenish the earth."

Replenish is not a mistranslation of the word for fill.  In fact, It seems to be the most appropriate word to use for the responsibility that God gave to man as one who has dominion over all the earth.

Does anyone use the word replenish in the sense described above as applying to resources rather than to man?

I found the following during an internet search for replenish.

"Replenishing the Earth LLC (RTE) helps corporations, schools, restaurants, and institutions save money, significantly reduce waste, and replenish the earth.  What’s good for the earth is virtually always good for people.  By thinking with the end in mind, a product's lifecycle "end" can be a "new beginning" . Applying cradle-to-cradle concepts to waste management and the product choices we make, enable our precious resources to live on for generations to come."
http://www.replenishingtheearth.com/home_page.html

Is the Bible really your authority?  Search for yourselves whether these things are so...

Beginning the year with end of the year tidbits...

Since this is the beginning of the year, here are some thoughts from the end of last year...

Many people know that the last thing recorded in the Bible that Jesus said before He died was, “It is finished.”  Do you know what was the first thing he said that was recorded?  And no, it was not, “Gentlemen, start your engines!”  It was, “How is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that I must be about my Father’s business?”  He finished the work that He was do to on earth.  Of course that is not where the story ends, since He did rise again the third day according to the Scriptures and now sits at the right hand of the Father.  Yes, the story is still unfolding...

Christmas traditions.... 

First of all, Mary and Joseph were married, not just engaged, when Mary was found to be with child of the Holy Ghost.  Here is the passage from Matthew...

“Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost. Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a publick example, was minded to put her away privily.”

“Joseph her husband” is a pretty clear statement.
“Put here away” is also clear for those who have read other portions of the Bible, like...

Matthew 1:19 “Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not willing to make her a publick example, was minded to put her away privily.”
Matthew 19:7 “They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away?”
Mark 10:4 “And they said, Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement, and to put her away.”

“...before they came together...”

Yes, Mary was a virgin as prophesied.  A miracle!

There is no mention of three kings.  Yes, three gifts, but not three kings.  And why do people think that magi is a better/simpler term than “wise men?”  Isn’t an argument for newer versions of the Bible to get rid of archaic language that modern men cannot understand.  I don’t know, I think wise men is much clearer than magi.  I also think it is simply wise men who seek Jesus, not necessarily magi (magicians, astronomers, scientists, etc...)

The Star...

It was a star.  Not a comet, not a meteor, not an overlapping of celestial bodies.  And there is no mention that the star led the wise men to Jerusalem.  Here is something interesting though.  The wise men came from the east...

“Saying, Where is he that is born King of the Jews?  for we have seen his star in the east, and are come to worship him.”

Where was the star when the wise men saw it?  Could it have been in the east, as the wise men may have said?  What is the significance of that?  Revelation 22:16 reads...

“I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star.”

Where would you expect a “bright and morning star to appear?”  In the east where the sun rises.  Back to the comment about the star not leading them to Jerusalem...

“When they had heard the king, they departed; and, lo, the star, which they saw in the east, went before them, till it came and stood over where the young child was.”

The star led the wise men from Jerusalem to the Bethlehem.  Bethlehem is south of Jerusalem.  The star went before them, or led them to where the young child was.  The star stopped over where the young child was.  This was not a normal star, or supernova, or conjunction.  It was a miraculous star.  And it did not stop over the manger...

“And when they were come into the house...”

This was a time later, not the night that Christ was born...

Miracles

Have they ceased?  I witnessed a miracle recently.  25 gallon sized bags of popcorn returned $500!  How is that for a return on investment?  But wait I can explain it...
The people buying the popcorn were just generous because it was going to a good cause.  Right, and the feeding of the five thousand or four thousand...  There were probably many in the crowd that had some food and just put some in rather than taking it out.  The crossing of the Red Sea on dry land, shallow water crossing on reeds... 

God is still at work... Watch and Pray

Happy New Year!

Can women be elders in the church?

Absolutely!  I must be crazy right?  Haven’t I read the Bible?  Well, yes I have and that is why I believe what I believe.  Especially from the view point of having the Bible define my beliefs, rather than just taking what I believe and using the Bible just to defend it. There is a big difference between those two, but I will leave that to the diligent student.

So let’s take a look at why I believe what I have stated, and then the challenge is to search the scriptures to prove these things.  Individuals, not organizations, need to be convinced of what is true or not, and then take responsibility for the truths.  Yes, “the truth will set you free” and I believe can radically change the church to make it more Christlike.

Of ants and elders...

What do ants have to do with elders?  Let's take a look...

Proverbs 6:6-8  "Go to the ant, thou sluggard; consider her ways, and be wise: 7  Which having no guide, overseer, or ruler, 8  Provideth her meat in the summer, and gathereth her food in the harvest."

Nothing, right?  In the contemporary church, the elders are viewed as the leaders of the church.  And the pastor is commonly the head elder, even though many might say he is just one of the elders.  The elder who does the teaching is usually called the pastor/teacher.  If one asks what the qualifications for an elder are, he would be referred to 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1.  We are good so far.  Elders are also called overseers.   Do you see it?

The pastor/teacher elder would be like a guide, elders are called overseers, and elders are leaders or rulers.

Seems straight forward, but when I read the passage in Proverbs, I thought why the list?  Is a guide the same thing as an overseer, is a guide the same thing as a ruler, is an overseer the same thing as a ruler or a guide?  Well, maybe, but then again maybe not.

When I think of the three, I think the following...

Guide = knows the way

Overseer = makes sure everyone is moving along

Ruler = manages, protects

Who knows the way, pastors.

Pastors (Guide)

Ephesians 4:11 is the only NT reference with the term “pastor.” 

Ephesians 4:11  And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;

It's significance is that God “gave some” they are not “ordained” or appointed.  To be a pastor is a gift from God and it is not related to elder/bishop/overseer.  Yes an elder could be a pastor, but a pastor does not need to be an elder or a bishop.  And what do apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers do...

Eph 4:12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: 13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:

Jeremiah is the other place in the bible that the term “pastor” is used.  Interesting that even in Jeremiah God “give[s] pastors… .”  In this passage it also provides the responsibility of the pastor.

Jeremiah 3:15  And I will give you pastors according to mine heart, which shall feed you with knowledge and understanding.

Also in Jeremiah, it seems as though pastors bear a huge responsibility in the eyes of God for the flock.

Jer 23:1-2 Woe be unto the pastors that destroy and scatter the sheep of my pasture! saith the LORD. Therefore thus saith the LORD God of Israel against the pastors that feed my people; Ye have scattered my flock, and driven them away, and have not visited them: behold, I will visit upon you the evil of your doings, saith the LORD.

Pastors are given, and gifted, by God.  Those who are called to be pastors need to exercise that gift properly.  As with all spiritual gifts, others should recognize the giftedness and give heed.  But that is a whole other topic...

Elders (Overseer)

Never called an office in scripture.  If “elder” in the new testament refers to an office, then we might have a slight problem with…

1 Timothy 5:2  The elder women as mothers; the younger as sisters, with all purity.

Of course, in this case we say it refers to older.  But why, because it refers to younger in the same sentence?  What would be the basis for changing from older to office in any of the cases where elder/elders appear?

Maybe Titus 1:5 comes to mind?

 "For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee:..."

See "elder" it is an office.  No, this means select from the elders available those that are qualified to be in the position that Paul is referring to, which in this case is the same as 1 Timothy or that of bishop.

It seems that the term elder refers to those that are older.  Whether they are just physically older or are the spiritually older can be debated.  In either case, those who are younger are to treat their elders as fathers and mothers.  And the passages that describe an elder also contain responsibility...

Elders in Acts 20:17,28 are “overseers” 

 17 "And from Miletus he sent to Ephesus, and called the elders of the church."

 28 "Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood."

1 Peter 5:1-5 “oversight” and age

 "The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed: Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind; Neither as being lords over God’s heritage, but being ensamples to the flock.  And when the chief Shepherd shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory that fadeth not away.  Likewise, ye younger, submit yourselves unto the elder. Yea, all of you be subject one to another, and be clothed with humility: for God resisteth the proud, and giveth grace to the humble."

Bishops (Ruler)

Ordained elders (elders that are appointed to an office, put in order) are bishops.  Bishop is an office, specifically called that in I Tim 3:1 and implied by Acts 1:20 and Psalm 109:8.  

1 Tim 3:1  This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work.

Ac 1:20 For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein: and his bishoprick let another take.

Ps 109:8 Let his days be few; and let another take his office.

Ps 69:25 Let their habitation be desolate; and let none dwell in their tents.

Ps 109:10 Let his children be continually vagabonds, and beg: let them seek their bread also out of their desolate places.

And they are chosen by qualities that men can measure as outlined in 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1.  What is their purpose? 

I Timothy 3:4-5  One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity;  5  (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)

Taking care of, or ruling over, the church of God as he would his own family.

Summary

I believe a distinction can be made between pastors, elders, and bishops (ordained elders).  How might that help the church in general?  Older men and women who are spiritually mature are, and should be, respected as elders, but they might not qualify for the office of bishop.  That is reserved for men that can rule and take care of the flock.  Elders with certain specific qualifications are ordained as bishops.  The head of a household does not necessarily have to be a bishop, but he or she is by default the elder for the family and responsible for the family.  Pastors, on the other hand, can be young or older and are gifted/given by God for a specific purpose, but are not called specifically to oversee or to rule.  They are to provide direction and guidance. Pastors can be men or women.

Perhaps another way to look at this is…

Elders deal directly with the flock of God to ensure growth (overseers).  Elders become elders by the passing of time, which is given by the grace of God.  Bishops keep the flock on track and protect the flock from outside influences (rulers).  Bishops are elders that are ordained by men based on criteria given in the word of God.  Pastors provide the knowledge and understanding for the elders to perform their function (guides).  Pastors are given by God and recognized by the elders, and others, as spiritually gifted men.

Qualification for an elder is one who is physically and spiritually mature.

Qualification for a pastor is one who is called by God.

Qualification for the office of bishop…

Titus 1:5-9

5 For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee:

 6 If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly.

 7 For a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God; not selfwilled, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre; (not money/riches unjust gain, bribery  See Simon Acts 8:18-23)

 8 But a lover of hospitality, a lover of good men, sober, just, holy, temperate;

 9 Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers.

I Tim 3

3:1 ¶ This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work.

 2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

 3 Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous;

 4 One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity;

 5 (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)

 6 Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil.

 7 Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.

By the way.  Deacon is an office also.  And by the qualifications it seems as if it should be filled by elders also and not just by young men who show promise…  I would even guess that Deacons could be Bishops…

8 Likewise must the deacons be grave, not doubletongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre;

 9 Holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience.

 10 And let these also first be proved; then let them use the office of a deacon, being found blameless.

 11 Even so must their wives be grave, not slanderers, sober, faithful in all things.

 12 Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.

 13 For they that have used the office of a deacon well purchase to themselves a good degree, and great boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus.

It seems as though the deacons are the ones who reach outside the flock to minister.  Terms like pure conscience, blameless, and boldness are applied to deacons.  Whereas elders tend to those in the flock.

So what's the point?  Change the church?  Yes, but not the organization that we call "the church," but the body of Christ.  This is a call to father's and mother's and those who are elder to step up and become examples to those who are younger.  They are "elders."  And to those who are today called "elders" to serve in the office as bishop or deacon as described in the Bible by the power of the Holy Spirit.

Conclusion…

Pastors are gifted by God and may or may not be elders, bishops, deacons.

Elders are the more mature believers amd are responsible for oversight of those that are younger.

Bishop is an office, a bishop is an elder who is appointed by men to the office based on qualifications given in God’s word.  They are to rule and manage the church.

Deacon is an office, a deacon may not be an elder, but interesting enough has nearly the same qualifications.  They appear to reach outside the church.

Each position comes with great responsibility.  Individuals need to grasp hold of what those responsibilities are and live accordingly by the grace of God.  The end goal being to fear God, give glory to God, and worship Him...

God is not like an egg?

One of my first posts was titled "Defining Beliefs" and the topic I mentioned was the Trinity.  So maybe it is about time that I closed that loop?

One of the most perplexing things to me is that Christians would agree that the doctrine of the Trinity is a foundational doctrine of the true church, but at the same time will argue that there is no clear statement in the Bible that claims that God is triune in nature.  I agree that the word Trinity is not used in the Bible, but it simply means three-in-one.  Without a clear definition most scholars will point to the evidence as presented in the Bible and come to a conclusion.  But since there is no clear Biblical statement, they are assuming what they are attempting to prove, which is also known as a circular argument.  One can certainly say there is more evidence for one belief about the Trinity than another; however, which is right?  And when does a teaching become a "tradition of men" rather than sound Biblical teaching.

As a side note, look at the young earth vs old earth argument.  If one were just to rely on the secular "scientific" interpretation of the evidence, he may be compelled to believe in an old earth.  Then scripture would have to be interpreted to fit the evidence.  This results in theories like the Gap theory, Progressive theory, Day-Age theory, Framework theory, etc...  But some held fast to a literal reading of the Bible and, after close review of the evidence, found that there were incorrect assumptions and errors in the "scientific" interpretation and that the evidence actually does point to a young earth.  For further information see www.icr.org or www.answersingenesis.org.  Without a clear Biblical statement the "evidence" can be misleading.

So is the Trinity defined in the Bible?  I think so, but again, many "scholars" will disagree.  Why?  Because of "manuscript evidence." I am not a scholar and the only information that I can get on any manuscripts is online.  Even if I could see the manuscripts it wouldn't help since I do not read Greek or Hebrew or Latin, and okay, I probably struggle with English also.  So does that qualify me as a plow boy?  From what I can tell the manuscript evidence is controversial.  There are probably as many different manuscript versions as there are English versions of the Bible and scholars argue back and forth which are valid and which are not.  So I am just going to stick with the English.

Let's say the Trinity is defined by 1 John 5:7 which reads:

"There are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost; and these three are one"

Now ask yourself, why would anyone want to remove this verse from the Bible or from an early manuscript?  Is it because it is all too clear?  And if not this verse to make the claim, then what other verse.  And if there are no other verses, then what makes this such an important foundational doctrine?  And how would you deal with other verses like Rev 4:5 and Rev 5:6 which mention "the seven Spirits of God?"  Does that mean that God is really eight in one.  An eight is like a three with a mirror image....

There are two English versions of the Bible, currently in print, that have the above verse as stated above. They are the KJV and the NKJV.  Of these, only the KJV is consistent in how it addresses God.  What does that mean?  Both the KJV and NKJV and some other versions use Thee's and Thou's and you's and ye's.  There is a difference between the two, it is not just to give a reading a more "majestic" or "old english" feel.  In simple terms, the difference is that the "Thee" and its derivatives are singular, and "you" and its derivatives are plural.  Texans would say, "it is the difference between you and y'all."  But I haven't seen any versions with y'alls in it.  In the KJV, God is always referred to as Thee, Thou, Thy...  One God.

With 1 John 5:7 in hand, the claim,  one can look at all the evidence in the Bible and conclude that the Bible clearly supports that there is one God that exists as the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.

But is God like an egg, or water, or a three leaf clover.  Maybe, after all Romans 1:20 reads:

"For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:"

Of course the Bible never says that God is an egg, or water, or a three leaf clover.  Is there any other created thing that you can think of that God might be like?  How about light?  God created light on day 1 and 1 John 1:5 says...

"God is light and in Him there is no darkness at all"

Time to get a little technical.  Ever hear the term RGB?  That would be Red, Green, and Blue.  Monitors have red pixels, green pixels, and blue pixels.  From these three colors of light all the different colors can be made.  In fact, to get white, "no darkness at all," all three are set to their maximum intensity.  So when you see white, you are actually seeing red, green, and blue light combined.  Don't believe me (that is a statement not a question) prove it to yourself.  Get a magnifying glass and look at a monitor that is showing white.  Or find a paint program and go to where you can select or make colors.

Light does seem to clearly demonstrate the triune nature of God.

What is also interesting are the colors of the rainbow.  Red, Orange, Yellow, Green, Blue, Indigo, and Violet.  How many? Seven.  Like the seven Spirits of God?

The Bible defines the triune nature of God.  The Bible provides lots of evidence for the triune nature of God.  And light, a thing that was made, helps us to see and understand the triune nature of God.

You can decide which color belongs to which part of the Godhead.  But I like blue for the Father, green for the Holy Ghost, and red for the Son.  The Father is in heaven above (blue sky above), the Holy Ghost enables us to grow (green), and the Son shed his blood (red) for us.  Also, don't red things cause us to stop and think...  Red lights (well most of us), brilliant red sunsets, etc....

Be a Berean...

"These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so." Acts 17:11