# What is Paul talking about?



## gordon 2 (Jun 5, 2016)

1 Corinthians 10-4  And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.

What is Paul talking about here?  When he says, that the spiritual Rock that followed the Hebrews was Christ?

Why is Rock in caps?


----------



## Israel (Jun 6, 2016)

gordon 2 said:


> 1 Corinthians 10-4  And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.
> 
> What is Paul talking about here?  When he says, that the spiritual Rock that followed the Hebrews was Christ?
> 
> Why is Rock in caps?


My very brief excursion into research of Greek texts tells me there is no usage of upper and lower case. Nor punctuation.?!


----------



## Israel (Jun 6, 2016)

This is what your question provokes then, for me. What is the "thing" that is introduced into a place that causes to seek an elevation of a thing where it was not found before? To stress, as it were, by some purpose, for some purpose to another, the greater import of "that thing".

"No longer on this mountain nor in Jerusalem..."


Have we fallen in love with our own Hosannas? Rocks and stones do no less.


----------



## gordon 2 (Jun 6, 2016)

Psalm 18-2

The LORD is my rock and my fortress and my deliverer, My God, my rock, in whom I take refuge; My shield and the horn of my salvation, my stronghold.

I just found this this morning. Paul is equating Jesus with God the Father or Yahve? Also one other  language translates this "rocky outcrop" and not so much a single rock--which is where you would find to drink in the desert I am told. (  for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them).

And Isreal, yes " our own Hosannas".


----------



## hobbs27 (Jun 6, 2016)

Ephesians 2:20 
And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;


----------



## Israel (Jun 6, 2016)

gordon 2 said:


> Psalm 18-2
> 
> The LORD is my rock and my fortress and my deliverer, My God, my rock, in whom I take refuge; My shield and the horn of my salvation, my stronghold.
> 
> ...



What follows is sobering to a drinker.

But with many of them God was not well pleased: for they were overthrown in the wilderness. (an then on with specific examples...and explanation "to us/for us" to be found in beholding _their_ fall)

Whether it be the natural provision unrecognized of grace, or (perhaps more severe) spiritual provision not gratefully embraced, it might speak to both men.
The natural man puffed up in his possessions is no more nor less imperiled than the "spiritual" man bloated with revelations. (One could make the case he is yet carnal, I suppose)
This is sobering.

Shortly afterwards Paul speaks of the man who is rich in spiritual gifts and understands all mysteries, but has not love. Sobering.
The man of faith able to move mountains, but having not love. Sobering.
The great philanthropist...even to the giving of his own body...but having not love. Sobering.

It would almost seem there is nothing to be "had" that can be shown of any merit...except the having of that which is not able to be seen or exploited before men, for men. Sobering.

Who then can recognize the rock? For all these "other things" though each abounding in Christ, if taken in part, become less than useless to the whole. They might even, in their part, work to effect the hiding of the whole to that man.

And no man in heaven, nor in earth, neither under the earth, was able to open the book, neither to look thereon.
And I wept much, because no man was found worthy to open and to read the book, neither to look thereon.


What then is whole is hidden, even from a brother "like John" until he be revealed.

Just how does a man "love the Lord?" What can be rendered to _the man who has everything_? Holds all. Sees all. Knows all. 

What could anyone add...but their need?
Need that kills all it touches.


And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;


I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of CensoredCensoredCensoredCensored and of death.


That's good news for man. Even..._if only the man_ who knows he kills all he touches.


----------



## gemcgrew (Jun 7, 2016)

gordon 2 said:


> 1 Corinthians 10-4  And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.
> 
> What is Paul talking about here?  When he says, that the spiritual Rock that followed the Hebrews was Christ?
> 
> Why is Rock in caps?


It identifies Christ(Deuteronomy 32:15, 2 Samuel 22:2,3, Psalm 95:1, Isaiah 32:2, Matthew 16:18).

The entire Bible has only One concern, Christ.

"And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself." Luke 24:27

"Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures," Luke 24:45


----------



## RH Clark (Jun 7, 2016)

gemcgrew said:


> It identifies Christ(Deuteronomy 32:15, 2 Samuel 22:2,3, Psalm 95:1, Isaiah 32:2, Matthew 16:18).
> 
> The entire Bible has only One concern, Christ.
> 
> ...




Everything or almost everything in the OT points to Christ. Even the poles that held the linen fence around the temple in the wilderness pointed to Christ. They were made from incorruptible wood, had a goat's hair rope with a brass nail only driven half way in the ground. The Goat's hair represented the raiment of the prophet. The brass represents suffering, like the brass serpent on the pole which Moses lifted in the wilderness also represented Christ. The nail half way in represents the burial and resurrection. 

Many things point to Christ. There were three gateways into that temple in the wilderness separating the inner and outer court, and then the opening into the holiest of holies. Those three openings or door ways were called "The Way", "The Truth", And "The Life". This is why John nearly swooned when Jesus told them he was The Way, The Truth, and The Life. He was telling them that he was the way into the holy place of God using some of their most revered symbols.


----------



## gordon 2 (Jun 7, 2016)

RH Clark said:


> Everything or almost everything in the OT points to Christ. Even the poles that held the linen fence around the temple in the wilderness pointed to Christ. They were made from incorruptible wood, had a goat's hair rope with a brass nail only driven half way in the ground. The Goat's hair represented the raiment of the prophet. The brass represents suffering, like the brass serpent on the pole which Moses lifted in the wilderness also represented Christ. The nail half way in represents the burial and resurrection.
> 
> Many things point to Christ. There were three gateways into that temple in the wilderness separating the inner and outer court, and then the opening into the holiest of holies. Those three openings or door ways were called "The Way", "The Truth", And "The Life". This is why John nearly swooned when Jesus told them he was The Way, The Truth, and The Life. He was telling them that he was the way into the holy place of God using some of their most revered symbols.



Interesting how you put this. Many would say the opposite. People used the OT symbols to explain Christ after the fact because they had no other spiritual references in their culture.


----------



## RH Clark (Jun 7, 2016)

gordon 2 said:


> Interesting how you put this. Many would say the opposite. People used the OT symbols to explain Christ after the fact because they had no other spiritual references in their culture.



The OT is Christ concealed, the new is Christ revealed. Look at the spotless lamb slain for sin that couldn't even have a single black hair ,representing the sinless Christ. 

Even the law was given to prove to men that they couldn't be righteous by their works. The law was never given as a means to please God. It was given to reveal sin and to show men that they couldn't keep God's perfect law. When they couldn't keep it they would have to look to the sacrifice to make them right with God, thus leading them to recognize the need for the ultimate sacrifice of the Lamb of God. That's why the law said that to break any law was the same as being guilty of all. God didn't want men thinking a high percentage of law keeping would be good enough.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 7, 2016)

RH Clark said:


> The OT is Christ concealed, the new is Christ revealed. Look at the spotless lamb slain for sin that couldn't even have a single black hair ,representing the sinless Christ.
> 
> Even the law was given to prove to men that they couldn't be righteous by their works. The law was never given as a means to please God. It was given to reveal sin and to show men that they couldn't keep God's perfect law. When they couldn't keep it they would have to look to the sacrifice to make them right with God, thus leading them to recognize the need for the ultimate sacrifice of the Lamb of God. That's why the law said that to break any law was the same as being guilty of all. God didn't want men thinking a high percentage of law keeping would be good enough.



I agree, the Rock fulfilled the Law.  

Paul said "and such were some of you but you were washed."


----------



## Israel (Jun 8, 2016)

Artfuldodger said:


> I agree, the Rock fulfilled the Law.
> 
> Paul said "and such were some of you but you were washed."



Bless you Art.
The smiting of the Rock/rock comes when we forget.
Makes me remember what part is assigned to man in the sacrifice...God's sacrifice.


----------



## gemcgrew (Jun 9, 2016)

RH Clark said:


> The OT is Christ concealed, the new is Christ revealed.


I disagree. The message is the same in the OT and the NT. The message is Christ.

"Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad."


----------



## RH Clark (Jun 9, 2016)

gemcgrew said:


> I disagree. The message is the same in the OT and the NT. The message is Christ.
> 
> "Your father Abraham rejoiced to see my day: and he saw it, and was glad."



So you think Christ is as easy to see in the OT as in the new? Do you think the Israelites knew their spotless lamb for sacrifice was a representation of Christ? Do you think they knew that when Moses lifted up the serpent on the brass pole in the wilderness it was a representation of Christ on the cross?


----------



## Bama4me (Jun 9, 2016)

RH Clark said:


> Even the law was given to prove to men that they couldn't be righteous by their works. The law was never given as a means to please God. It was given to reveal sin and to show men that they couldn't keep God's perfect law. When they couldn't keep it they would have to look to the sacrifice to make them right with God, thus leading them to recognize the need for the ultimate sacrifice of the Lamb of God. That's why the law said that to break any law was the same as being guilty of all. God didn't want men thinking a high percentage of law keeping would be good enough.



Don't quite think it's that simple... your assertion would lend itself to concluding "people didn't have to attempt to obey the law in pleasing God".  The teaching of Malachi 3:6-13 indicates that indeed God would be pleased when the hearts of the people would lead them to obey His commands regarding tithing.

I DO agree that the Law did teach people that no law from God can be perfectly obeyed.  However, there was FAR more to it than that.  The Law of Moses was a system that was designed to preserve a lineage for the Messiah.  In the Law, we see laws restricting intermarriage with people of other nations and other ideas related to "keeping yourself pure from the world".  It was a code that was designed to both govern and spiritually guide the COI.  In other words, there were some important functions the Law provided... it wasn't just as a "type/antitype".


----------



## Bama4me (Jun 9, 2016)

gordon 2 said:


> 1 Corinthians 10-4  And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.
> 
> What is Paul talking about here?  When he says, that the spiritual Rock that followed the Hebrews was Christ?
> 
> Why is Rock in caps?



I think the "rock" idea is important to the context.  These Corinthians were toying around with idolatry during the Christian age.  The COI are cited as an example of God's judgment against those turning to idolatry.

IMO, the reason Christ is mentioned is for comparison.  The "following" of Christ and the "rock" idea showed that even in the days of the OT, Christ was providing for the people of God.  Though the Father seems to be the predominant Godhead member during OT times, Paul clearly says Christ was present and involved also.

The point seems to be this... "Don't think because you enjoy the presence and provision of Christ that you can't fall into idolatry and be punished.  The COI enjoyed Christ's presence and provision ALSO and were punished for their actions."  Verse 11... "these things are an example".


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 9, 2016)

When was Paul's mystery revealed in the Old Testament?


----------



## gordon 2 (Jun 9, 2016)

Bama4me said:


> I think the "rock" idea is important to the context.  These Corinthians were toying around with idolatry during the Christian age.  The COI are cited as an example of God's judgment against those turning to idolatry.
> 
> IMO, the reason Christ is mentioned is for comparison.  The "following" of Christ and the "rock" idea showed that even in the days of the OT, Christ was providing for the people of God.  Though the Father seems to be the predominant Godhead member during OT times, Paul clearly says Christ was present and involved also.
> 
> The point seems to be this... "Don't think because you enjoy the presence and provision of Christ that you can't fall into idolatry and be punished.  The COI enjoyed Christ's presence and provision ALSO and were punished for their actions."  Verse 11... "these things are an example".



I happen to agree with your view. ( Paul was not OSAS, in my opinion.) And I will not quarrel over my opinion.  But yes, I think you are correct about the context. Thanks.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 9, 2016)

RH Clark said:


> So you think Christ is as easy to see in the OT as in the new? Do you think the Israelites knew their spotless lamb for sacrifice was a representation of Christ? Do you think they knew that when Moses lifted up the serpent on the brass pole in the wilderness it was a representation of Christ on the cross?



I think some people see everything as always being as God never changes. Therefore what some see a types or mirrors, they see as actually Christ. Not that I'm explaining this very well but another example is Israel. They see Israel as always being the Church even in the Old Testament. The promise has always been to Abraham and his Seed. Seed/Christ/Church. I agree that the Word tells us it has always been about Christ. I'm not sure that means God has always been in that mode or that that mode was always present.

This was why I asked of Paul's mystery revealed. Has the Rock always been? Even to the Gentiles who were once without hope and God? If so then what was Paul's mystery revealed in Romans 11? Maybe the Rock was always available even in the Old Testament and maybe the Church has always been Israel even in the Old Testament. Perhaps Paul only revealed this "always being" way to us.

From a Trinity standpoint Jesus was actually present and providing in the Old Testament. From a Oneness standpoint it was God the Father who provided in the Old Testament and God the Son provided in the New Testament. It is now God the Holy Spirit providing since God the Son has returned to Heaven. Interesting concepts on how we all see the same thing yet differently.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 9, 2016)

Rock?

1 Peter 2:4-5
As you come to Him, the living stone, rejected by men, but chosen and precious in God’s sight, 5you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.

Stones as foundations and cornerstones are used a lot in scripture.


----------



## Israel (Jun 10, 2016)

What a remarkable place, where spirit flourishes in the death of the flesh.


----------



## gemcgrew (Jun 10, 2016)

RH Clark said:


> So you think Christ is as easy to see in the OT as in the new? Do you think the Israelites knew their spotless lamb for sacrifice was a representation of Christ? Do you think they knew that when Moses lifted up the serpent on the brass pole in the wilderness it was a representation of Christ on the cross?


With the eye of faith? Of course.


----------



## Israel (Jun 10, 2016)

Something was put to death in the creation. In the very first act of it.
As men say "that's going to leave a mark".


----------



## gemcgrew (Jun 10, 2016)

Israel said:


> What a remarkable place, where spirit flourishes in the death of the flesh.


The rotting of the flesh is a welcome relief.


----------



## Israel (Jun 10, 2016)

To one a fragrance of life to life...to another...


----------



## hummerpoo (Jun 10, 2016)

Israel said:


> Something was put to death in the creation. In the very first act of it.
> As men say "that's going to leave a mark".



As in all endeavors,  the ethereal cannot be duplicated by the corporeal;
therefore,
the exaltation of the corporeal is corruption of the ethereal.


----------



## gordon 2 (Jun 10, 2016)

hummerpoo said:


> As in all endeavors,  the ethereal cannot be duplicated by the corporeal;
> therefore,
> the exaltation of the corporeal is corruption of the ethereal.



Up until today I thought that matrimony's malaise these days was a problem with mostly one sex. I now change my mind.  It is a problem of both sexes, but each one comes to it differently. 

So Solomon! Hark!  Despite. Your songs'! The fragrances! 

"I am the rose of Sharon, and the lily of the valleys."

Despite the protest of my first wife, Solomon your songs are not corruptions... I do still hold to that. Hark!


----------



## hummerpoo (Jun 10, 2016)

I also thought of the romantic relationships, although corrupted in their description, as exemplary.


----------



## RH Clark (Jun 10, 2016)

gemcgrew said:


> With the eye of faith? Of course.



With the eye of faith, they would have understood the cross. Had they seen Jesus in their religion and history they would have known and understood him. They of coarse did not.


----------



## hobbs27 (Jun 10, 2016)

RH Clark said:


> With the eye of faith, they would have understood the cross. Had they seen Jesus in their religion and history they would have known and understood him. They of coarse did not.



He passed every test they threw at Him...yet they had no king but Caesar.


----------



## gordon 2 (Jun 10, 2016)

hobbs27 said:


> He passed every test they threw at Him...yet they had no king but Caesar.



Do you think that all the Christians would pass the "second coming" test?  Like the jews, some did, some would, some not.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 10, 2016)

gordon 2 said:


> Do you think that all the Christians would pass the "second coming" test?  Like the jews, some did, some would, some not.



I know this isn't what you are looking for but I've oftened wondered who has failed this test;

Matthew 25:35-36
 35For I was hungry and you gave Me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave Me something to drink, I was a stranger and you took Me in, 36I was naked and you clothed Me, I was sick and you looked after Me, I was in prison and you visited Me.’

Maybe this was a time when we had to do certain things to get into the Kingdom, before the "Age of Grace."
If the "way" switched from the Kingdom to Grace.


----------



## hobbs27 (Jun 10, 2016)

gordon 2 said:


> Do you think that all the Christians would pass the "second coming" test?  Like the jews, some did, some would, some not.



Yes I believe they did!


----------



## gemcgrew (Jun 10, 2016)

RH Clark said:


> With the eye of faith, they would have understood the cross. Had they seen Jesus in their religion and history they would have known and understood him. They of coarse did not.


Of course they did. By "they", I am referring to them who had the Spirit of Christ within them.


----------



## hobbs27 (Jun 10, 2016)

RH Clark said:


> With the eye of faith, they would have understood the cross. Had they seen Jesus in their religion and history they would have known and understood him. They of coarse did not.



What about Peter, John, Paul, the men of Galilee on the day of Pentecost? 

 Those were the true Israel, the rejecters of Christ were apostate Israel.


----------



## RH Clark (Jun 10, 2016)

gemcgrew said:


> Of course they did. By "they", I am referring to them who had the Spirit of Christ within them.



So you think the disciples understood that Jesus was the sacrificial lamb and they understood his dying on the cross? They certainly didn't act as if they understood.


----------



## RH Clark (Jun 10, 2016)

hobbs27 said:


> What about Peter, John, Paul, the men of Galilee on the day of Pentecost?
> 
> Those were the true Israel, the rejecters of Christ were apostate Israel.



I'm not saying they rejected Jesus as the Christ. I just don't think they understood the implications of his sacrifice or the OT representations of that sacrifice in their religion. Even though Jesus continually tried to explain his mission they seemed to be taken by surprise and dismayed by his crucifixion.


----------



## gordon 2 (Jun 10, 2016)

RH Clark said:


> I'm not saying they rejected Jesus as the Christ. I just don't think they understood the implications of his sacrifice or the OT representations of that sacrifice in their religion. Even though Jesus continually tried to explain his mission they seemed to be taken by surprise and dismayed by his crucifixion.



Ok. I follow now. Yea. If it had not been for the resurrection Christians might not exist.


----------



## Israel (Jun 11, 2016)

gordon 2 said:


> Ok. I follow now. Yea. If it had not been for the resurrection Christians might not exist.


I trust you are being facetious.


----------



## Israel (Jun 11, 2016)

hummerpoo said:


> As in all endeavors,  the ethereal cannot be duplicated by the corporeal;
> therefore,
> the exaltation of the corporeal is corruption of the ethereal.



Yes!
At least in the sense of our minds...no? For we might agree that the true cannot be corrupted by our perceptions...as it remains immune to the poverty of our conceptions, regardless of what we might think. And...(LOL)...it is this that drags us forward, upward; compels, impels, propels away from darkness to light. 
The true is incorruptible. So, even the sensing of the corruptible (as Gem noted) becomes for us a welcome impetus...all things used of God...for God's purpose...even stink.
Ahhh...canaries in coal mines. We perish...smelling a thing (always bearing about in our bodies the dying of the Lord Jesus...)
But it remains for us...whose nose alone is perfect? Who alone discerns all the hidden thoughts and intents? No man, even of himself, especially of himself...knows (nose) himself. We are all inured to "our own" odor. We die...and yet, are raised, by the resurrection.
What a perfect way!
One brother I recently spoke with said this..."if the creature would be exalted, it cannot come (rightly, in truth) without a corresponding exaltation to just measure of the Creator." (not verbatim)

What man is so jealous of God's name and place that at the sound of man taking his stand upon man might say "of these stones God is able to raise up children of Abraham!"?


Ahhh that precious, oh so precious cutting away, a full paring of all, an ax laid to root, that our hope be in God...through Christ...alone.


----------



## gordon 2 (Jun 11, 2016)

Israel said:


> I trust you are being facetious.



No! Many of the disciples could not understand that Jesus was put to death, nor did they understand that on the third day our Lord would return to life.

Many if not all of the disciples seem defeated to me post the cross. As some of the Jews did not understand the ministry of Jesus, still at this point some of disciples did not--especially that it is recorded that Jesus had to teach them with scripture what had happened--AFTER- the resurrection. I think this is what RH is suggesting  at least in part.


These same dudes that had to put their hands in the wounds of our Lord, because they still had a hard time to understand, were the same dudes that witnessed to our parents as the Church. The resurrection and scripture held them together as an embryo of the Church until Pentecost  and the Paraclete seeded them individually and as the Church with new life.

Maybe. Kinda?


----------



## Israel (Jun 11, 2016)

gordon 2 said:


> No! Many of the disciples could not understand that Jesus was put to death, nor did they understand that on the third day our Lord would return to life.
> 
> Many if not all of the disciples seem defeated to me post the cross. As some of the Jews did not understand the ministry of Jesus, still at this point some of disciples did not--especially that it is recorded that Jesus had to teach them with scripture what had happened--AFTER- the resurrection. I think this is what RH is suggesting  at least in part.
> 
> ...




I stumbled at the word "might".

And Jesus saith unto them, All ye shall be offended because of me this night: for it is written, I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered.


----------



## gordon 2 (Jun 11, 2016)

Israel said:


> Yes!
> At least in the sense of our minds...no? For we might agree that the true cannot be corrupted by our perceptions...as it remains immune to the poverty of our conceptions, regardless of what we might think. And...(LOL)...it is this that drags us forward, upward; compels, impels, propels away from darkness to light.
> The true is incorruptible. So, even the sensing of the corruptible (as Gem noted) becomes for us a welcome impetus...all things used of God...for God's purpose...even stink.
> Ahhh...canaries in coal mines. We perish...smelling a thing (always bearing about in our bodies the dying of the Lord Jesus...)
> ...



Let me be honest, if only to purge.  It seems to me that this focusing on the stench and the wasting away of the "flesh corruptible" is a focus of the glass half empty in the salvation of the individual. It is somehow akin to  the individual believer being as the generations post Egypt and  all their anxieties on their rest in their land of milk and honey--but as in the individual Christian in this case.

So what is the the glass half full? A focus outward and upward, not inward and downward. The fragrance of Him in our rest we minister universally as the Cross overwhelming the individual focused neurosis with expanding hopes in the dignity of the flesh. 

Perhaps we side step the thorns to capture the Sharon roses even in our present Kingdom much as our Lord wore his thorny crown to capture us and wash us with his universally delightful fragrance. Such is my glass half full, to be honest.

Maybe.


----------



## Israel (Jun 11, 2016)

Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away: and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 11, 2016)

RH Clark said:


> I'm not saying they rejected Jesus as the Christ. I just don't think they understood the implications of his sacrifice or the OT representations of that sacrifice in their religion. Even though Jesus continually tried to explain his mission they seemed to be taken by surprise and dismayed by his crucifixion.



Didn't they see the coming Messiah as more of a physical King? They thought salvation was more of saving physical Israel? 
Now the real message of why Jesus was truly coming was in the Old Testament, but it was hidden.


----------



## gordon 2 (Jun 11, 2016)

Israel said:


> Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away: and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit.




Yep! He purgeth it!


----------



## gordon 2 (Jun 11, 2016)

Artfuldodger said:


> Didn't they see the coming Messiah as more of a physical King? They thought salvation was more of saving physical Israel?
> Now the real message of why Jesus was truly coming was in the Old Testament, but it was hidden.



I would agree Art. And it was especially hidden or hard to understand to people (sinners) who were not born again or  not being nurtured by the Holy Spirit with focus on a loving God. The collective conscious of the Jews at the time when Jesus walked in Palestine was formed by many years of ups and downs politically and religiously as a people, plus they were under roman ( pagan) occupation. One can easily assume, that for many with responsibility for the people,   that old time religion was  seen as good enough for them under their present circumstances.


----------



## Israel (Jun 11, 2016)

gordon 2 said:


> Yep! He purgeth it!



Looks like persimmon?


----------



## gordon 2 (Jun 11, 2016)

Israel said:


> Looks like persimmon?



It is. Same fruit. Often labeled Product of Isreal at my food store. 

See Sharon Plain in Isreal. Also, I think that possibly there is another fruit, from the rose hip family ( wild rose) , that looks more like a kiwi that is also called Sharon fruit.


----------



## RH Clark (Jun 11, 2016)

gordon 2 said:


> Let me be honest, if only to purge.  It seems to me that this focusing on the stench and the wasting away of the "flesh corruptible" is a focus of the glass half empty in the salvation of the individual. It is somehow akin to  the individual believer being as the generations post Egypt and  all their anxieties on their rest in their land of milk and honey--but as in the individual Christian in this case.
> 
> So what is the the glass half full? A focus outward and upward, not inward and downward. The fragrance of Him in our rest we minister universally as the Cross overwhelming the individual focused neurosis with expanding hopes in the dignity of the flesh.
> 
> ...



 I agree 100%! All the "woe is me, I'm just a dirty sinner", thinking is still just a wallowing in the flesh. It's really no different than the man who elevates himself as greater than his fellow man. Both are earthly and flesh minded.

In the focus on Christ, a man completely looses himself. He no longer knows where he ends and Christ begins. All things have become new, and all things are of God. 2 Cor.5:17. Paul said it best in his letter to the Galatians. Paul doesn't sound to me as a man focused on how much his flesh stinks.

Galatians 2:20King James Version (KJV)
20 I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.


Paul laid out the same principal out in Romans. Forget your dead flesh. Stop focusing on it and get your attention on the new man created in Christ.


Romans 6:4-11King James Version (KJV)

4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.

5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:

6 Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.

7 For he that is dead is freed from sin.

8 Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him:

9 Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him.

10 For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God.

11 Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Pay close attention to verses 10 and 11. Paul is telling you that Jesus died to sin ONCE and then he lives unto God. He says LIKEWISE, just as Jesus died once, you die once to sin and then live for God!

Stop being flesh minded and sin minded. When I say that the flesh minded think I'm saying stop sinning. What I'm really saying is to stop having all your attention on your flesh. Stop with the "I'm just an old sinner" mentality! You were an old sinner, but now you are a new creation, created in righteousness, in Christ Jesus! You can't be both!  The best way to stop sin in your life is to awake unto righteousness and see yourself as one with Christ. As long as you see yourself as an old sinner, you will act like an old sinner, and always struggle to be righteous by how you act in your flesh. Righteousness is by faith in Christ, not by works of the flesh.


----------



## RH Clark (Jun 11, 2016)

gordon 2 said:


> No! Many of the disciples could not understand that Jesus was put to death, nor did they understand that on the third day our Lord would return to life.
> 
> Many if not all of the disciples seem defeated to me post the cross. As some of the Jews did not understand the ministry of Jesus, still at this point some of disciples did not--especially that it is recorded that Jesus had to teach them with scripture what had happened--AFTER- the resurrection. I think this is what RH is suggesting  at least in part.
> 
> ...



Yes, that is what I am talking about. That's why I said Christ is concealed in the OT. He is there, everywhere, but at the time Jesus walked among them the disciples did not see Jesus as the spotless lamb. They did not see him as the serpent on the brazen pole. They did not understand what Jesus must do and how it was to be accomplished.


----------



## gordon 2 (Jun 11, 2016)

RH Clark said:


> Yes, that is what I am talking about. That's why I said Christ is concealed in the OT. He is there, everywhere, but at the time Jesus walked among them the disciples did not see Jesus as the spotless lamb. They did not see him as the serpent on the brazen pole. They did not understand what Jesus must do and how it was to be accomplished.



We have the vantage of The Kingdom in outlook--an all spiritual kingdom. They did not, but in hindsight they had a history of the mix of both a spiritual and earthly kingdom. They had the historical house of David, Solomom et al. They also knew division with a king  in the North and one in the South and worse. They knew of zealots political and spiritual.

And then there was Mary and Elizabeth.


----------



## gemcgrew (Jun 11, 2016)

RH Clark said:


> So you think the disciples understood that Jesus was the sacrificial lamb and they understood his dying on the cross? They certainly didn't act as if they understood.


Some understood more than others.
Some didn't believe anything Jesus had to say about anything.
None were autonomous in their understanding.

God is All-Knowing.

I do not trust in my understanding or my knowing of Christ. I trust that Christ knows me.

"My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me"


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jun 11, 2016)

I think Paul was the first to mention Jesus being a sacrifice for sins. Then after this was revealed by Paul, Peter & John taught it.

Peter taught the resurrection.


----------



## Israel (Jun 12, 2016)

Artfuldodger said:


> I think Paul was the first to mention Jesus being a sacrifice for sins. Then after this was revealed by Paul, Peter & John taught it.
> 
> Peter taught the resurrection.



I think you mean John the Baptist. Of men, that is? At least as to sacrificial lamb.

Though Simeon saw things...

“Lord, now you are letting your servant depart in peace, according to your word;  for my eyes have seen your salvation  that you have prepared in the presence of all peoples,  a light for revelation to the Gentiles, and for glory to your people Israel.” And his father and his mother marveled at what was said about him.  And Simeon blessed them and said to Mary his mother, “Behold, this child is appointed for the fall and rising of many in Israel, and for a sign that is opposed  (and a sword will pierce through your own soul also), so that thoughts from many hearts may be revealed.”


----------



## Israel (Jun 12, 2016)

gemcgrew said:


> Some understood more than others.
> Some didn't believe anything Jesus had to say about anything.
> None were autonomous in their understanding.
> 
> ...



But now, after you have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn you again to the weak and beggarly elements, to which you desire again to be in bondage?

As though he corrects himself (or is corrected) in mid sentence.

My sentence has indeed seemed long, but to be corrected in the midst of it, ah...it changes everything. "God knows" may be the greatest relief a man may discover in all his seeking to know.


----------



## Israel (Jun 12, 2016)

"we have no King but Caesar" shortly translated means "we'll take _anybody_ over this guy..."


----------



## hummerpoo (Jun 13, 2016)

Israel said:


> Yes!
> At least in the sense of our minds...no? For we might agree that the true cannot be corrupted by our perceptions...as it remains immune to the poverty of our conceptions, regardless of what we might think. And...(LOL)...it is this that drags us forward, upward; compels, impels, propels away from darkness to light.
> The true is incorruptible. So, even the sensing of the corruptible (as Gem noted) becomes for us a welcome impetus...all things used of God...for God's purpose...even stink.
> Ahhh...canaries in coal mines. We perish...smelling a thing (always bearing about in our bodies the dying of the Lord Jesus...)
> ...



Yes; when I said “in all endeavors”, that which I failed to adequately communicate was the thought that the principle was true on both levels: that which is ethereal within creation (of man’s mind), and that which is ethereal to creation (of God).   Long ago I read a quote from an architect stating that “the concept of a design was first diminished/corrupted when a line was drawn on paper”; such is all creation of man.  Yet, in the spirit of a man is placed a true concept of his Creator, which is first diminished/corrupted when interpreted by the mind of the man.  Is it any wonder that men fail when attempting  to relate to each other that which is twice corrupted.

That we can trust that truth which is known of the Spirit by the spirit, even when viewed through the corruption of the imperfect mirror, is indeed the power shared which energizes our being and validates the promise that we will see clearly.


----------



## Israel (Jun 14, 2016)

I fed much today of your wonderful architect.
I'd read your post this am...before work. It helped me in ways I didn't know I would need.


----------

