Who Was Peter?

We think we know him. The lead disciple, a fisherman known as one of the sons of thunder. Instrumental in the formation of the early church, he was a man both passionate and fallible. But, do we really know him? True to our very human nature, we assume; we jump to conclusions. Rarely do we stop to consider what it is we think we know.

This study comes from Luke 22: 31-32. In verse 31, Jesus said something to Peter that he had, in all likelihood, not stopped to consider. Jesus said, “Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat:”

I ask, how might Peter have been 'sifted' had Satan got his wish? What is the thing about sifting? It is a process by which the whole has those parts removed that are most important to the sifter. The remainder is discarded or otherwise negated.

What we see in this is that Peter, the man we thought we knew, had within his nature a mixed bag of characteristics. Some things about Peter were for Jesus, some things for the devil. To know that Peter had such a mixed nature is to know that all of us have such a mixed nature. Peter was '50/50' – he could have gone either way.

At this point, human nature adjusts its thinking about Peter, saying, “well, yeah. He was a man.” Such adjustable reasoning serves only to rationalize the assumptions we have already jumped to. If the reader will look above, he or she will notice that the previous assumption about Peter included as much of his future state as it did his present state. And now, human nature would include new data into its old assumption.

Between the original assumption and the adjusted assumption, the latter is more nearly correct. Should we think that human nature is completely settled in this new, more nearly correct assumption, new sets of data would only garner new adjustments – anything but being proven wrong.

That is a flaw in human nature, a nature that Peter shared. He too was not want to be proven wrong. He thought he was who and where he should be. We are the same. We are comfortable and settled in who and what and where we are – therefore, it is not we that must be adjusted, but the assumption.

Already, we see that what we thought we knew about Peter, and indeed about ourselves, can change in the blink of an eye – can change and yet, somehow, remain the same. We think we are all that, but we are not. We thought Peter was the lead disciple, a mover, and shaker in the early church, a martyr. Peter pretty much thought the same thing.

Jesus followed one startling and disturbing revelation with another. He said to Peter in verse 32, “But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren.”

New data: Peter, the disciple, the passionate leader of the early church, the humble yet uncompromising martyr – he still needed to be 'converted'. I repeat, he still needed to be converted. Let's take a quick look at the significance of that one word.

The definition goes like this: To modify so as to serve a different function. To turn to another or a particular use or purpose; divert from the original or intended use. To change in character; cause to turn from an evil life to a righteous one. What was Peter's original or intended use – fodder for Satan? When we look at the Peter we think we knew, what do we see – someone who still needed to be converted from evil? Someone who had not yet been converted to righteousness?

What of the rest of us? Are we not in the same boat as Peter? We share the same fallible human nature. All of us jump to conclusions. Even as Peter heard the words of Jesus, he jumped to a conclusion: 'Oh, I'll follow you anywhere, even to the cross'.

Maybe, if we did not make such incomplete assumptions, we would not have to make so many embarrassing adjustments later on.

Two Verses -- 29 and 30

These two verses speak of a kingdom given. We will investigate the nature of this kingdom. We will examine the extended kingdom to know if it is the same as the original or different. These are the verses from the King James version of the Bible:

“And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me; that ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.”

In the first place, God has a kingdom and sits on a throne. We ask, what kind of king are we talking about, and what type of kingdom does this kind of king have? Jesus gave us the answer to the first half of this question. In John 4:24, Jesus informs us that, “God is a spirit.” It stands to reason that a spiritual God has a spiritual kingdom. That kingdom includes the very solid and corporeal reality we all know so well.

It has always been difficult to reconcile the spiritual and corporeal realities. Jesus said this about the two realities in John 3:6, “That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.” On the surface of things, that leads reason to assume that the two realities are separate. We inquire here if anything or anyone can be spiritual and corporeal at the same time.

There is a dawning awareness of truth. It stands as such: a spiritual God has an only begotten son, but that son is a man. Here, we study the nature of that corporeal being. We find an answer to our seeking in Matthew 1:20, “But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.”

See the above quote from Jesus in John 3:6, “ . . . that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.” Now, the developing awareness of truth stands as such: a spiritual God had an only begotten son who was both spiritual and corporeal. He was born of the flesh, therefore he was flesh. He was born of the Spirit, therefore he was spirit. It was to this hybrid spirit/flesh son that the Father appointed a kingdom. Now we have to ask, what was the nature of the appointed kingdom?

Was it a hybrid Kingdom? Well, of course, it was. The Father's spiritual kingdom included the world and everything in it. Why should not the Son's kingdom be the same? It appears that the spiritual and corporeal realities are joined at the hip, or they are joined in an eternal dance in which the Spirit leads. The worldly concept of Yin and Yang is that of opposites bound eternally in the union wholeness – in other words, the opposites are not two, but one.

So Jesus was appointed a kingdom. Are there similarities to the kingdom he appoints his disciples? Jesus said, “I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me;” There is an apparent similarity. The kingdom is an extension, and it was appointed the disciples by Jesus just as it was appointed Jesus by God, “that ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom . . .”

The kingdom of Christ is in and is a part of, the kingdom of God. Please refer to the following Biblical verses: Matthew 26:64, Mark 16:19, Hebrews 10:12, and 1Peter 3:22. Christ is on the right hand of God in God's kingdom; the disciples are on the right hand of Christ in Christ's kingdom.

The kingdoms are not separate kingdoms. The disciples do not travel from a separate kingdom to the kingdom of Christ to eat and drink at his table in his kingdom. The kingdoms are all joined. The kingdoms are one kingdom, and while they are spiritual and spiritually governed, they include our corporeal world with its diminutive worldly kingdoms of man.

From their appointed kingdom, which is part of the kingdom appointed to Christ, which in turn is part of the bigger picture of the kingdom of God, these spiritual/fleshly disciples, (after the manner of Christ, who was both of the Spirit and of the flesh) will sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel. There are questions we must ask at this point.

First and foremost is this: are the tribes of Israel both spiritual and worldly? Do the disciples each represent one of the tribes, either literally or spiritually? Have the tribes evolved into something greater than tribes – such as nations or nationalities? Are all of them even still around; weren't ten of the tribes altogether lost – or did they, rather, merge with, and ultimately become one with other ethnicities? Finally, could the twelve tribes be twelve types of spiritually evolved humans? So much to think about.

In closing, let me just answer the fourth question with a verse from the book of Acts. Paul said to king Agrippa in Acts 26:6-7, “And now I stand and am judged for the hope of the promise made of God unto our fathers; Unto which promise our twelve tribes, instantly serving God day and night, hope to come.”

And again, from James 1:1, “James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.”

Obviously, to the those in the know back in the day, all twelve tribes still existed. Ten tribes did not disappear from the face of the earth, neither must they be reinvented. In a hybrid kingdom that is part of the bigger kingdom of God, which must always include the corporeal with the spiritual, twelve men born of the Spirit, will be responsible for the twelve tribes of Israel. These twelve tribes, or nations, may be both corporeal and spiritual. How will they be judged? I looked up the meaning to the word judge and found that, among the ordinary synonyms, the word judge has one interesting and telling synonym that I wish the reader to consider – that synonym for the word judge is the word 'gather'.

One Verse -- 28

In this study, I want to deal with one verse only and one thought. Luke 22:28 has Jesus telling his disciples this, “Ye are they which have continued with me in my temptations.”

He said that to all twelve of his disciples, even the one who betrayed him. As far as we know, they were the only ones present at the last supper.

The statement is enigmatic and stands without support from other verses. What could Jesus have possibly referred to by the expression “my temptations?” Obviously, it was an ongoing issue. If the disciples had “continued” with Jesus in this regard, they were always with Jesus when Jesus was tempted. They knew each one of the temptations.

That fact alone opens to us the possibility that at least some of the disciples were present when Jesus was tempted by Satan in the wilderness. They witnessed Jesus fasting for forty days. As we know, that temptation was written down – but where are the rest of the temptations?

Some of you reading this may recall a movie titled 'The Last Temptation of Christ'. My point in this is that temptations are real and must be dealt with in real ways. We must know for certain how the word was used by Jesus. If, for example, Jesus referred to something as a temptation in a purely euphemistic sense – well, that changes everything.

Synonyms for the word euphemistic include 'mild', 'understated', 'indirect', 'neutral', 'evasive', 'diplomatic', 'inoffensive', and 'polite'. If Jesus used the word 'temptations' as a substitute for another concept, that makes for a needle-in-a-haystack scenario for those of us seeking the truth.

On the other hand, if Jesus lived a life in which he daily overcame some temptation or other, why did not the writers of the gospels present us with these temptations? Why did they not name them and show us just how Jesus won each battle? It is possible, of course, that time, itself, has altered the direction from which we approach the word. What if, originally, ( by which I include culturally-inclusive applications) the word implied a test or particular objective rather than the daily failings of human nature?

Here, I am thinking along the lines of the twelve labors of Hercules – feats so difficult as to seem impossible. Surely, raising the dead, rising from the dead, walking on water, and such other similar exploits would qualify in this regard. One has to acknowledge that since there was a perpetual fame associated with the actions of Jesus, there must be a real reason for the fame.

It cannot be chalked up to the simplicity of uneducated peasants. I am pretty well educated, but I have to say, if I saw someone raise the dead or cure uncurable diseases with just a touch and a word, I too would be just as amazed. To see the things that Jesus did – that would astound anyone.

No one denied the things he did, not even his enemies in the Sanhedrin. Pharisees did not deny the impossible things he accomplished. Sadducees did not deny his amazing feats. Rulers did not refute his deeds or fame. In all, the only thing that his enemies did in that regard was to suggest he performed his mind-blowing feats by a power other than God.

When we look at the impossible things that Jesus was able to accomplish, how far can we take the list? How about a fish with a coin in its mouth? How about walking through a mob intent on stoning him? How about holding a conversation with Moses and Elijah? How about feeding thousands with next to nothing? How about calming the storm?

Admittedly, Jesus did amazing things. Were these 'labors' to be accomplished? Such things are easy to see, but are there other labors that might pass us unnoticed? How about changing the mind of a mob intent on obeying the law by stoning a woman caught in adultery? That mindset was self-justifying, not to mention sanctioned in written law. Such men could stone sinners with one hand tied behind their backs. They probably dreamed about stoning sinners.

We may also view the verbal battles Jesus won against the religious authorities in the sight of vast crowds as labors of a sort. If these were the temptations, they were indeed presented by the gospel writers. They are clearly, plainly and adequately presented.

This Do In Remembrance Of Me

Luke 22:7-20 describes the last supper up to the cup after the meal. Sunday school will teach you this is the broken body of Christ and the new testament in his blood. They get that from the text; it was, after all, what Jesus told his disciples.

Many people look at the last supper without consideration for the fact that the last supper was the Passover. Many people read what Jesus said in verses nineteen and twenty, about his body and his blood, without a thought for the many things he did not say.

Jesus asked so little for himself, but he did ask this one thing in verse nineteen. He asked of them, and of us, to “do this in remembrance of me.” He did not ask us to sculpt statues or paint pictures of him. He did not ask to have additional holidays instituted on his behalf. He asked one thing only – that the Passover be observed.

The Passover was and is a celebration of deliverance. It was observed, unchanged, from the time of Moses to the time of Jesus. It was the same every year. An unblemished lamb was slain and eaten. The blood of the lamb was applied to the delivered and was the sign by which they were spared from the penalty of death.

What we must notice about the last supper is that it was not described as containing a lamb. The main fair was bread and wine. There was an obvious shift in symbolism; Christ became the lamb. He became the sign through which men are to be spared the penalty of death. Yes, instead of death, those to whom his blood is applied are to find deliverance and new life.

His suffering was foreshadowed in the symbol of the Passover bread while his blood was foreshadowed in the symbol of the Passover wine – produced via crushing. The symbols did not commence in the last supper, but were existent in the preceding appellations: 'bread of life' and 'true vine'.

If therefore, the Lamb of God took on the symbols of bread and wine, it behooves the seeker to know just how these items figured into the Passover.

The Matzah, or unleavened bread, was central to the meal as not everyone was able to eat lamb. The matzah was also known as the 'bread of affliction' and was meant to represent a life without sin. The Passover meal, as I understand it, contained a stack of unleavened bread (at least three) each separated from the other by a napkin. The middle loaf was the one to be 'broken' at the meal. One might easily see the significance of the middle loaf in a stack of three as an indicator of Jesus' order in the Trinity.

I have taken information from https://www.neverthirsty.org/bible-qa/qa-archives/question/what-is-the-meaning-of-the-passover-foods/ and recommend you read the full article. This what the article says about the unleavened bread: “The most significant part of the Seder meal occurs when the Yachatz is picked up after the Karpas (parsley dipped in salt water) is eaten. The Yachatz is a single pouch containing three Matzah. The single pouch symbolizes unity. The middle Matzah is then removed, broken in half, and wrapped in a cloth. This is called the Afikomen. Jewish tradition says that the three Matzahs represent the Jewish people, the priests, the Levities, and the people. Jewish tradition does not know why the middle Matzah is broken. They do not know when this part of the Seder was established. However, for Christians the symbolism is obvious. The Yachatz represents our one and only God and the three Matzah represent the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. The breaking of the middle Matzah symbolizes the punishment and death of Jesus Christ. It is important to note that Matzah is stripped and has holes. One-half of this broken Matzah is then wrapped and put away until just before the third cup. This symbolizes Jesus’ burial and resurrection on the third day. The Passover Seder is a great reminder of what Jesus Christ did for all of us. We can be delivered from the bondage of sin when we believe in Jesus Christ and ask Him to forgive our sins. ”

The cup of wine mentioned in Luke 22:20 was the final of four cups throughout the meal. The article goes on to list them in this manner:

Cup of Sanctification. It symbolized Israel’s deliverance from being under the burdens of the Egyptians.

Cup of Deliverance. It symbolized Israel’s deliverance from their bondage.

Cup of Redemption. It symbolized God’s promise to redeem Israel from with an outstretched arm.

Cup of Praise. It symbolized the fact that God took the Israelites to be His people.

As to whether Jesus drank alcoholic wine or grape juice, that is still hotly debated. Psalm 104:15 seems to reference alcoholic wine when it states, “And wine that maketh glad the heart of man,” but one must know that natural wine back in those times only reached an alcoholic state of three to four percent. His adversaries also accused Jesus of being a winebibber, which would also suggest an alcoholic content.

However, as concerns the Passover, there is a contention that since they had no leaven in the bread, they would have no leaven in the wine. The natural fermentation of wine in those times was accomplished only from the sugars in the grape. No leaven was added. It is supposed that that new wine was grape juice only, but there is no indication that new wine was fresh from the vat or no more than a day old. There are words from the original texts of Greek and Aramaic that support wine as unfermented juice. Let the reader judge for him or herself.

The Passover significance of the bread and the wine are clear enough. Jesus asked that we eat the Passover bread of affliction and life and drink the Passover wine of praise with him in mind. He was the lamb of God; his body was the middle loaf of matzah, broken on the cross. His blood was the new testament poured out to release us from the penalty of death. Thus, we belong to Christ and to God. We are given a kingdom by Christ as Christ was given a kingdom by God.

It is a Passover of spiritual symbols that brings us to our promised land. Jesus asks that we partake of this spiritual Passover in remembrance of him.

The Thing About Leaders

Let's talk about Judas for a moment, and I take this from Luke 22:1-6. Judas was one of the twelve. When the twelve were sent out two by two to preach and heal, Judas was one of them. In the power of Christ, he healed the sick and preached the good news.

Judas was not always bad. He believed in God and the kingdom and the law. He was a zealous Jew with high hopes – and possibly, he was also a zealot like Simon Zealotes. So, what is it that we see in Judas? My answer is dashed hopes and shifting allegiances.

It is in Luke 22:3 that we find this information about Judas, “Then” (note the importance of the word 'then') “entered Satan into Judas surnamed Iscariot, being of the number of the twelve. ” Judas changed. Did everything change about Judas? No. Judas, perhaps in the mindset of fellow-apostle Simon Zealotes, decided that Jesus was not going to do anything about Rome as hoped.

After all, the hoped for Messiah was supposed to be a liberator of the Jewish people and a king of the Davidic line. If there was to be a Jewish king, there was no room for Rome. Rome had to be removed – and that is exactly what people looked for in a savior.

The thinking might have been that if Jesus was not going to remove Rome, he stood in the way of those who would.

When your hoped for Messiah fails your expectations, what power do you fall back on? Shifting alliances. For a Jew like Judas, that would have been the Sanhedrin. They were the religious leaders of Israel established by the commands of God. If Judas, who seemed to walk freely among them, was at all influenced by the concerns of the Sanhedrin, then Jesus not only stood in the way but actually made the Roman problem worse.

Speaking of leaders, these verses in Luke paint a clear picture of the very nature of leaders in general. The arrangement between the Sanhedrin and Judas stipulated that Judas was to find a way and a place for them to arrest Jesus, as verse six states, “in the absence of the multitude.”

Why was this the arrangement? We find the answer to this question in verse two. The leaders “feared the people.” One does not have to go far to see parallels in other leaders. In our present day, we see leaders who redirect manpower, resources, and authority in efforts to keep the people from panicking or rioting. The bald fact is that leaders fear the people.

The Sanhedrin wished to kill Jesus – and quite frankly, that does not seem very holy or righteous for representatives of God. The question has to be asked, was Judas of the same mind? Many will say no. The very fact of his suicidal remorse suggests that he only sought to have Jesus arrested and placed on the sidelines. Judas may have been less complicit in the murderous intent of the leaders than in the plans of the zealots.

An array of motives have been attributed to Judas. Some suggest he was in cahoots with Jesus to achieve the crucifixion that would effect the salvation of man. Some suggest Judas came to the conclusion that Jesus was not the answer to the Roman dilemma. Whatever his motives for betrayal were, I think they were not to see Jesus killed.

Yet, two matters place Judas in the league of leaders. One was his familiarity with the leaders. Two was his service for hire. Had he worked for them before? Was he a relative of one of the council members? Had they played him, using his passion for Israel against him? We may never really know the answers to these questions.

And then, we must also ask this. Do the motives of the Sanhedrin really matter? To be concise, it all boils down to three facts. Judas betrayed Jesus to the Sanhedrin, who wanted him dead, and had they not feared the people, they would not have manipulated laws in a mockery of trial but would have murdered him in broad daylight.

Look to Yourselves

Luke 21:34-36 says it – no one is responsible for you but you. Each of us is responsible to look to him or herself – to try hard and succeed or do nothing and fail. These verses are no parable with hidden meanings, they are plain words from the very Son of God.

He says this to all of us: “And take heed to yourselves, lest at any time your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting, and drunkenness, and cares of this life, and so that day come upon you unawares.”

A modern English translation goes like this: 'Pay careful attention to yourselves, in order to avoid a mindset that exaggerates the importance of being satisfied, of overindulgence, or undue attachment to the things of this temporary life, insomuch that you become unaware of your own doom.'

Nobody is going to do it for you – you are on your own.

This is what the very Son of God said about the coming day of judgment: “For as a snare shall it come on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth.” In other words, no one will be exempt from that day. If you think your salvation exempts you, think again. Christ has this to say to those who think that way: “Watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the Son of man.”

Said another way, 'All these things will definitely happen. If you want to escape them and stand before the Son of man, you must make sure you are worth it.' Prayer and vigilance are your only ticket.

The “snare” of those final times will catch people doing what they always do. Why do animal snares baited with food catch animals? It is because their very animal nature will not pass an opportunity to eat.

What is the nature of man? Even the religious share that human nature. We are conditioned to think along the lines of human nature. We go to church for an hour on Sunday, but we run home to watch the game on TV. We want a new car. When it comes to spending our hard-earned cash, we are very concerned that we get all our money can buy, and no skimping on quality – that will just not do.

Paying our bills occupies our thoughts. Going to the theater for a new movie, or eating out, or unwinding at a bar – these are the mousy little thing that will get us ensnared. We want our fair share. Some of us want more than our fair share. God forbid that anyone should stand between us and the things we try so hard to obtain.

History proves human nature, even among the religious, is all too willing to war and kill for the things it thinks it deserves. Look at all the protests and terrorism in our present day – how quickly willing people resort to violence over matters that are actually quite meaningless.

Anyone who really desires not to be caught in the snare must work especially hard not to be swept along in the tide of human nature. When the ship comes in, will you have a ticket, or will you be a part of the raging tidal beast racing toward that tiny piece of cheese – and personal doom?

Point-Counterpoint

Luke 21:22-32 is the focus of this study. We are still within the parameters of the end of the world as described by Jesus. The warnings are still directed toward the Apostolic who adhere to the instructions of Christ and the laws of God.

We take this point from verse 22: “For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled.” What is he talking about? He is talking about a sign of the times. The sign is Jerusalem compassed with armies. The admonition is to flee from and avoid the city at all cost. Seeing this sign means one thing in particular, namely that “the desolation thereof” is near.

At this point in the study, we should have three questions. The first question is, 'the vengeance of who'? The second question is, why don't I know 'all the things that are written' about this important event? As a sign of the times, finally, what kind of event are we really considering?

The sign is a generational event. By that, I mean that the event is intended for a particular generation of the chosen. The event is vengeance against the godly. It is an evil perpetrated by the peoples and nations of the world. Much is written about this animosity the worldly have against the chosen people of God. Of things written, there is a starting point, and it is found in John 8:44, “Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.”

The natural continuation of the starting point may be found in Matthew 21:38, “But when the husbandmen saw the son, they said among themselves, This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and let us seize on his inheritance.” It works outward in layers from the starting point, like ripples in a lake when a stone disturbs the still surface. The next layer reaches the faithful servants of the master. This comes from John 15:20, “Remember the word that I said unto you, the servant is not greater than his lord. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept my saying, they will keep your also.”

The ripples reach as far into the future as those who have kept the sayings of the original disciples. This we find in Luke 21:23 and 24, “But woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck, in those days! For there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon this people. And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.”

The ripples reach all of us. We are the same in our persecutions as the original apostles who became martyrs. We are the same as the Israelites of 70 AD. We are in the same boat as the master, and we carry our cross in no less real terms. It is a generational thing, and what must be understood about a generation is its perpetuity.

When in Luke 21:32, Christ said, “Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled,” he included with himself, the worldly Israel (the chosen people of God through the law), the apostles who bridged the gap, and the spiritual Israel (the chosen people of God through faith.) We are, all of us, “This generation.”

Within the parameters of 'this generation', the “times of the Gentiles” wax and wane. They are the counterpoint to the times of the chosen. The end time of the Gentiles harbors great evils for the chosen – count on it. We see it coming in Luke 21:25 and 26, “And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations,” (all of these occurring in the same end time of the Gentiles) “with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; Men's hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.”

It is indeed bad news that the powers of heaven shall be shaken, but they are shaken in the time of the Gentiles, which is never a permanent condition. That time alternates with the time of the chosen, in which the powers of heaven grow strong and stronger still. All of the times are like a pendulum swinging back and forth, and if the coming time of the Gentiles is the last, then there is good news among the bad.

We know, even in the beginning of bad times; we look ahead and see clearly. The pendulum will swing again – one last time. Jesus said this in Luke 21:28, “And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.” At the end of the last time of the Gentiles, this will happen, as foretold by the son of God in Luke 21:27, “And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.”

'They' refers to the Gentiles; we already see him.

The Apostolic Type

From generation to generation, the Apostolic type carries forward with each conversion to faithful dedication. Are you the type? If you are, then every teaching, every warning that Christ ever made to his disciples is equally applicable to you.

I want to approach two specific verses from Luke 21 – verse 15 and verse 19. In his warnings of the future to come, Christ painted a clear picture of the people he addressed.

From verse 15, we get the point that the disciples and apostles, so warned of a dire fate, are in fact spiritually enhanced individuals. Jesus told them, “I will give you a mouth and wisdom” that will be essentially irresistible. It will be a wisdom in spoken word that the unenhanced will find compelling if not overpowering.

Now, the unenhanced believe they too have wisdom. They rest in their science of bare facts and figures, of math and measurements, of empirical physical evidence as set apart from the purely spiritual and mental aspects of reason and logic. Yet, it is the mental, that is to say, the spiritual, aspects of reason and logic that the apostolic type shall be enhanced with.

Sadly, the mouth and wisdom that will enhance many, is no guarantee of individual success. Just the opposite, in fact, as the outsmarted and outwitted will find avenues to persecute the righteous through lies if not through laws.

I have expressed in earlier works how wisdom is the trump card that beats book smarts. First, comes knowledge – that is the basic level. The next level up from knowledge is understanding. Many people have knowledge, yet fail to attain understanding. The top level is wisdom, trumping both knowledge and understanding. The enhancement given to the Apostolic type is a thing not guaranteed to academics even after years of study.

The enhancement is no mere fact or list of trivial information that an individual may trot out. Rather, it is the very nature of the Godly spirit placed in each and every man. In some of us, the tap is turned on and the water flows. In certain others, the tap is tightly closed. Some go so far as to remove the handle entirely. It is a choice and a followed path that leads to the enhancement. As I am want to say, this particular path is only open to those who are open to this particular path.

The enhancement is not meant for a peaceful life, but for a life embroiled in worldly woe. It is the perfect counterpart to the worldly mindset, ensuring that the truth and authority of God are present in every age. Our type may be assured of resistance if not outright persecution. We are called upon to persevere.

Many people cannot fathom the leap from worldly to spiritual. There is a worldly, a national Israel found in the nation of Israel and in the religion of Judaism. There is a spiritual Israel found in the Christian faith and in the walk of the apostolic. There is a spiritual individual and mindset which is an upgrade from the worldly mindset. That being said, the truth of the matter is that the worldly mindset is that same spiritual mindset, but with the tap tightly closed and the handle removed.

Man is a hybrid. He is half physical and half spiritual. All spirit is God, whether it is rightly used by some or wrongly used by others. The worldly mindset cuts its own spiritual legs off for the sake of willful independence. The worldly mindset, for all its science and measurements, is a crippled creature of disfigured proportions. Man has sought separation from God so desperately that he uses the word 'soul' to reference the spiritual aspect of himself that he has sought to be rid of.

From the beginning, the word 'soul' was a word that pointed to the hybrid nature of man. We have this usage found in Genesis 1:7, “And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.” It has to be said; it must be understood and known with all surety that man “became” a living soul. Man was man before the spirit was introduced. God is spirit; God is life itself and truth, truth being everything that actually is.

The breath of life is the spirit of God. A soul, then, is exactly the combination of those two elements – physical man, of the dust of the ground, with the additive of the spirit of God, equals the hybrid of the living soul.

And so, I come to the second verse in Luke 21 that details the clear portrait of the Apostolic type. We get this from Luke 21:19, “In your patience possess ye your souls.” That is the same thing as saying, 'persevere in body and mind' except for the curious connotation of the word “possess.” A host is 'possessed' by something or someone other than the host. Here, I am thinking that the hybrid (body plus spirit) is possessed by the enhancement.

In the Apostolic type, the whole persona of the living soul is possessed and redirected by the persona of Christ. Christ is God in man; Christ in man is still God in man. As we know, Christ very effectively dealt with all naysayers, leaving them unable to respond to the wisdom in his words. We also know that his spiritual wisdom, received from God, was perceived as a threat by the worldly mindset.

Two Worlds, Two Types

Luke 20:34-36 presents Jesus' answer to a complicated question meant to trap him in religious technicalities. See below.

“The children of this world marry and are given in marriage: But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage: neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.”

This is how his answer breaks down:

Two opposing types:

This world and that world – one already obtained, the other to be obtained.

Those who are or are not given and those who do or don't receive the given in marriage.

Of the higher type (accounted worthy):

The children of the resurrection are equal to the children of God.

The children of God are equal to the angels – who are no longer bound to the wheel of life and death.

The fact that they do not die “any more” signifies that they used to regularly die 'again'. Whereas they were, upon a time, associated both with life and death, the worthy will have their association to death removed.

That the worthy neither marry nor are given in marriage in no way signifies a situation indicative of “that” other world. It may well be that the non-marrying type, who are accounted worthy of the other world, are simply the type who refrain from marriage in this present world. In regard to this consideration, I remind the reader of the 144,000 virgins found in Revelation 14:4.

“These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were redeemed from among men, being the firstfruits unto God and to the Lamb. ”

If there is a transition from opposing types, it is not necessarily to be found in aspects associated with this present world. The book of revelation seems only to indicate virgin men, but a transition that follows the pattern of 'worldly to spiritual' may mean a new spirit in women that is equal to the spirit in men.

Is 'that' world a wholly different physical world from “this' world? Consider this question with due diligence. If you took the time to research the word 'world', you would find this list of synonyms: everyone, everybody, people, mankind, humankind, society, humanity, sphere, arena, milieu, province, domain, and discipline. Obviously, a world is more than a physical location.

We have obtained a world that is a physical location, a solid rock speeding through a solid void. The cold vacuum of space is not so empty. The ethereal and invisible nature of spirituality, by the same token, may be more inhabited than previously established. Think about it. Man, as a living thinking soul, could not inhabit this rock called Earth without an appropriate vehicle. The physical body perfectly matches the need, but alas, the body is bound to the cycle of life and death.

Likewise, a soul may not inhabit a world associated with eternal life without an appropriate vehicle. To obtain the necessary vehicle is to obtain the domain. The discipline of immortal angels frequents this physical world, but not as men do. And yet, Biblical accounts of angels depict them as men – as man-like yet untethered to death. In short, an opportunity has been presented to the children of men, an opportunity for an upgrade that is neither physical nor worldly.

Balance Between the World and the Spirit

Seekers of truth always dig deeper than the rest. We look, now, at Luke 20:25 as if viewing two layers – a worldly, or common, layer and a spiritual, or refined layer. Like everyone else, we see what is on the surface of things, although we are rarely inclined to take things at face-value. We see both where we are and where we should be.

If I said to you, “I am off to a good start,” my comment is only a common, face-value, worldly, on-the-surface-of-things statement. However, what I have not said, also makes a statement. To be off to a good start is a place and a condition that is equal to not yet having reached the finish line. Knowledge of the goal is that higher, refined layer.

When we want someone to pay special attention and get a particular point, we say 'listen up'. Up is the key direction. Whenever you see the face-value of something, as in where you are or what you are, you should strive to look beyond that. You should seek the unspoken truth that is above the world.

When Jesus spoke, he wanted people to 'listen up'. His parables were the unspoken truth behind the face of things, above the surface of the world. His message, although it was couched in worldly illustrations, always pointed away from what a person was or where they were to what they were supposed to be and where they needed to go.

A case in point is Luke 20:25. For the reader, there are two levels to be seen in the statement Jesus made. On the surface of things, Jesus was outwitting the people who were trying to trap him in his words. At face-value, the statement was a clever reply, but the unspoken truth, above the worldly surface of things, was the issue of finding and keeping balance.

Jesus said, in Luke 20:25, “Render therefore unto Caesar the things which be Caesar's, and unto God the things which be God's.”

How does one find a balance between the things of the world and the things of the spirit? Indeed, does one even seek said balance? You may notice that in his statement, Jesus used the word 'and' rather than the word 'or'. He did not say don't pay tribute to Rome, nor did he minimalize the importance of faithfulness to God. He said to find the proper balance.

The view on a balance between the world and God, in both Christian and non-Christian thought, is an 'either-or' arrangement. It is not a matter of balance but a restriction of one reality in preference for another reality. All realities are actually one and the same, yet certain people only see what is real through the lens of personal preference.

Some personal preferences restrict the use of musical instruments in worship services. Some personal preferences restrict modern technology in daily life. Some personal preferences restrict the vocalization of the name of God. For some, prayer only works if you kneel down, or if you lay on your face, or if you fold your hands just so, or if you finger some beads. Some men can't be spiritual without a beard; some women must wear uncomfortable clothing and head coverings to be what they think they should be – or worse, to be what others think they should be.

The Christian can't seem to shake the inclination that in order to give God his due, he or she must restrict the normal realities of life. It is a restrictive state of mind that empties life of TVs and radios, and games, and computers – as if reality opposes itself -- as if God did not place or allow all these things in life.

As if it was not bad enough that the Christian can't find balance between his worldly reality and his spiritual reality, the Non-Christian comes along and bashes him with such accusations as 'you can't be a Christian if you smoke', or 'you can't be a Christian if you drink', or 'you can't be a Christian and have sex, too'. So, why can't a Catholic monk, or a nun marry and have children – how does that decrease their faith or devotion to God?

A balance between the world and God is a balance between the outer man and inner man. 'Either-or' is an impractical mindset. There is a balance to be found, and to the Christian, the Bible has this advice in regard to the 'either-or' approach to truth and spirituality, in the following NIV translation of Ecclesiastes 7:16-18.

“Do not be overrighteous, neither be overwise – why destroy yourself? Do not be overwicked, and do not be a fool – why die before your time? It is good to grasp the one and not let go of the other. Whoever fears God will avoid all extremes.”

Recognition and Title

In Luke 19:39, Jesus is addressed as 'Master'. Christians, these days, see absolutely nothing odd about this. What I wish to point out is who, exactly, called him Master. In the multitude that crowded around Jesus, as he made his triumphal entry into Jerusalem, and positioned close enough to speak with Jesus, were Pharisees. It was they who called Jesus by the title of Master.

Pharisees were themselves, in their own station, addressed as Master. This instance was a case of Masters calling Jesus by the same title. It was a case of positive recognition of the station and title of a peer.

Jesus was more than a wannabe in their eyes; the Pharisees knew Jesus for who he was. He was much more than some country-bumpkin upstart with twelve disciples. According to verse 37 of this section of scripture, Jesus was attended by “the whole multitude of the disciples.” Everyone who followed Jesus was a disciple – and Jesus had quite a large following. The Pharisees were part of that multitude, part of that following.

One has to ask, why did the Pharisees always follow Jesus? You would think, if they were there only to harass and lay traps, the twelve, being closest, would set a perimeter, do some crowd control. That was the case for many among the press, but not so for the Pharisees. They were always close to Jesus.

Since I approach this as evidence of authoritative recognition of the station and title of Jesus in a social setting, I wish to address how many times, in the New Testament, the title of Master was applied. Master is the interpretation of both 'Rabbi' and 'Rabboni'.

In Matthew 8:19, a scribe addressed Jesus as Master. In Matthew 9:11, Pharisees addressed Jesus as Master. In Matthew 10:24-25, Jesus referred to himself as master. In Matthew 12:38, both scribes and Pharisees addressed Jesus as Master. In Matthew 17: 24, tribute collectors referred to him, in speaking to Peter, as “your master.” In Matthew 19:16, a young man with great possessions called Jesus “Good Master.” In Matthew 22:16, disciples of the Pharisees, and of the Herodians addressed Jesus as Master.

It is interesting that both Jesus and the Pharisees had disciples. It seems that having disciples was a standard practice of the Pharisees.

In Matthew 22:24, it was the Sadducees who addressed Jesus as Master. In Matthew 22:36, a Pharisee lawyer addressed Jesus as Master. In Matthew 23:8, Jesus said this about himself, “But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren.” He said pretty much the same thing in verse 10, “for one is your Master, even Christ.” In Matthew 26:18, Jesus called himself by the title of Master. In Matthew 26:25, he was called Master by the disciple Judas. Again, Judas said, “Hail, master;” when he betrayed Christ.

Jesus is called by the recognized title of Master fifteen times in Mark, twenty-two times in Luke, and eight times in John. Altogether, in the New Testament, Jesus is addressed by the official title of Master some fifty-nine times.

Such a number places one far above the upstart level. Pharisees were also referred to by the title of Master. When Jesus spoke to Nicodemus, who was a Pharisee, he asked him this in John 3:10, “Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?”

I am convinced that Jesus had an official status among the religious leaders and that his peers recognized that fact every time they addressed him by the title of Master.

Interestingly, John the Baptist, Jesus' close cousin, was also addressed as 'Master' in Luke 3:12. Here is what I wish to note in closing, Pharisees, Sadducees, scribes, and lawyers were all masters of Israel. The title of 'Master' and the title of 'Rabbi' are one and the same. 'Master' is a bonafide title. All of them, being addressed by the title of Master – whether Pharisee, John, or Jesus – all of them, I say again, had disciples. It was a standard practice for all titled religious leaders.

Accusation, Confession, and Judgment

We turn our attention to Luke 19:7-10. Zacchaeus, a tax collector for Rome, was called by name. Jesus called him down from the sycamore tree and told him he would eat with him. Zacchaeus hosted Jesus and at least some of his troop that day. Jesus had not been invited; Zacchaeus had been invited. That was the decision of the Son of God.

It was a savior's decision.

In verse ten, Jesus said plainly and publicly for all to hear, “The Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost.”

The part about being lost – that was past tense. It had already happened. The part about seeking and saving was present tense. It was the ongoing mission of the Son of man. The fall of man, his sinful nature, his need for redemption – all were concepts widely known and believed. Nothing about those concepts was foreign to the people standing around at the time.

Jesus said what he said for a pointed reason. Zacchaeus was not the only one standing there who was lost. He was an example of being lost, an example of the need for salvation, an example of God's grace.

The people had complained, they stood there and accused Zacchaeus of being a sinner. Sinners accusing sinners obviously ticked Jesus off. We can be so dense sometimes. And it wasn't just a few ornery individuals pointing the finger. Verse seven goes like this: “And when they saw it, they all murmured . . .”

Who, exactly, were 'they'? The people who had come to town with Jesus? Had he not traveled the country healing their diseases and forgiving their sins? His disciples? Had he not taught them better? Townfolk? Could they really be so grudging?

It was Jewish nature that accused. The national concept of a savior was bent around the hope that someone would save them from Rome. Rome was despised. Romans were despised. Anyone who sold out to Rome was despised. Was Zacchaeus a sinner because he collected taxes for the Romans? The Jewish consensus was a resounding 'Yes!'

The bruised and burdened Jewish heart accused anyone who worked against the Jewish state. Jewish equaled good, Roman equaled bad. Law of God equaled good, law of Rome equaled bad. It was a natural reaction for that day and age.

While those around Jesus spoke ill of Zacchaeus, murmuring, accusing, Zacchaeus, on the other hand, made confession. In the spirit of making things right, he confessed to Jesus that either he would make things right, or was already in the process of making things right.

He said this in verse eight, “Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor; and if I have taken any thing from any man by false accusation, I restore him fourfold.”

The Hebrew law, found in Exodus 22, deals with the restoration of lost goods and requires a twofold, fourfold, or fivefold restoration.

To a son of Abraham, charity is a fundamental way of life. Jewish law requires an individual to give one tenth of his substance to the poor. “Tzedakah” is the Jewish word for charity. It is taken from the root “Tzadei-Dalet-Qof ” which translates as righteousness, justice or fairness.

A good article on this topic may be found here: http://www.jewfaq.org/tzedakah.htm

Zacchaeus worked for the Romans, but he was a fair and a just man who obeyed the laws of God. In everything we read about the man in these verses, we see a desire toward God and his laws. Zacchaeus had such a desire to see Jesus, who he unreservedly called Lord, that he climbed a tree, and when called down, “He made haste, and came down, and received him joyfully,” verse six.

Jesus judged the situation and the man in verse 9, “This day is salvation come to this house, forsomuch as he also is a son of Abraham.” Inasmuch as Zacchaeus was a son of Abraham no less than those who accused him of sin, and since it was the Son of man's ongoing mission to seek and save such sons of Abraham, Jesus clearly displayed the type of spirit in a man that is right with God and God's law.