Blood Feud

There is a history here in the Appalachian Mountains of what is referred to as "A Blood Feud". My understanding is that when there was a disagreement or quarrel between two parties or families the shedding of blood could be the possible result. I am not aware of any instances where this still occurs today but I suspect in some manner the feuds still take place.

In the unfortunate event that blood is shed then the feud is on. An eye for an eye. These feuds can last for years and across generations. I am sure most of us have heard about the famous feud between the Hatfields and McCoy's.

While considering this subject of a blood feud it dawned on me that blood feuds are very similar to what the apostle Paul encountered when he visited Jerusalem. In the book of Acts chapter 21 we have a written account of this visit. Paul was going up to see the Apostles to the Jews of which James Jesus' brother appears to have been chief among the others. Peter and John were there as well.

The Apostles in Jerusalem instructed Paul to participate in the ceremonial right of purification. This was a ceremonial law and act which is spelled out in the books of the Law. Specifically Numbers 6 and Numbers 29. My question is, why were the apostles/disciples in Jerusalem still practicing ceremonial law when the blood of Jesus had set them free from the rules, regulations, and laws of the Old Testament? This includes freedom from ceremonial law.

Not only were the apostles to the Jews still practicing the law but they were requiring others to do so as well. Now on Paul's visit they were trying to have him participate in keeping the law and to go back and require the gentiles to do the same.

The apostles to the Jews were still shedding the blood of bulls and goats many years after the blood that was shed by Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God. To me this is a very early record of a "blood feud". A feud that existed between the apostle Paul, the apostle to the gentiles and the apostles in Jerusalem who were the apostles to the Jews.

The disagreement or quarrel that existed between Paul and James was over blood. Paul believed the blood of Jesus Christ was sufficient and James declared that the practice of shedding of blood which was spelled out in the Old Testament was needed as well.

I heard one brother state recently that the mixing of the blood of bulls and goats with the blood of Jesus Christ is an insult to the cross.
I cannot say that I disagree with my friends statement. We can add nothing to the cross of Christ nor should we. His shed blood is sufficient.

His birth, life, crucifixion, death, burial, resurrection, ascension, and enthronement was and is sufficient for all we were in need of. We can add nothing to the finished work of Jesus Christ nor can we take anything away.

Either we live by grace as the apostle Paul taught or we are going to live by law. You cannot mix the two. It would be like mixing the blood of Jesus Christ with the blood of bulls and goats. This is indeed an insult to the cross of Christ. If we offer the blood of bulls and goats (dead works) rather than put our trust in the Blood of Christ then we fall from grace.

I encourage you to go to the Gospel Revolution web site http://www.gospelrevolution.com/ and order Mike Williams Cd series on the Book of Galatians. It is excellent!

You might also want to look again at the Book of Romans and also the Book of Hebrews. I believe the writer of the Book of Hebrews was trying to reach those in Jerusalem who not only believed in Jesus Christ but were also still practicing the Old Testament covenantal law.

I am reminded here about the woman who approached Jesus who had a bleeding issue. She was no different than those who sit in churches every Sunday and are subjected to those who still teach that we must keep the law. This kind of teaching only produces guilt, shame, condemnation, and a sin consciousness. This kind of false teaching is causing a bleeding issue in all those who are subjected to it. It is draining the life out of all those who hear it.

This bleeding issue will cease when we share the Gospel ( good news ) of Jesus Christ or in other words, The Gospel of Grace and Peace. Grace means because the sacrifice of Christ we get what we did not deserve, and peace simply means we will never get what we did deserve. That is Good News! He was the sacrifice for sin once and for all.

This alone can awaken the hearer to a righteousness consciousness and enable the listener to experience life and joy as the result of the freedom they embrace.

The blood of Jesus speaks of better things than that of bulls and goats! It speaks to us of life and freedom!

I am paraphrasing here but the writer of Hebrews said that "where there is a covenant that is the end of all disagreements and quarrels".
The blood of bulls and goats was a practice of Old Testament ceremonial and sacrificial law but the blood of Jesus Christ is the blood of a new and better covenant. We need to stop this feud over blood and agree that the only blood sacrifice that was capable of making all of us right with God once and for all is the Blood of the Lamb of God, Jesus Christ. In and because of Him the feud over blood is over!

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

DON'T ASK YOURSELF WHAT THE WORLD NEEDS
ASK YOURSELF WHAT MAKES YOU COME ALIVE,
AND GO DO THAT,
BECAUSE WHAT THE WORLD NEEDS IS PEOPLE WHO HAVE COME ALIVE.

Cheap Grace

A friend said to me recently that we oftentimes can sing what we cannot say. What he said birthed something in my heart as I have always believed music to be a powerfull tool for sharing the Good News of the Gospel. What follows is my first attempt at writing. My song writing partners and I have yet to put it to music but will do so in the next week or so. In the meantime I hope the lyrics speak to you.

CHEAP GRACE
Today I saw the woman that the townfolk call cheap Grace,
The one the churchfolk said was going to hell and that in heaven she had no place,
She wouldn't look me in the eyes, she kept her head turned to the ground,
But then she heard the voice of her Saviour and oh what a loving sound ...

He said, Grace there is nothing cheap about you,
My redeeming blood declares your worth,
the value of anything is determined, by what someone is willing to pay,
So don't listen to what they tell you, Just listen to what I say
There is nothing cheap about Grace

Today I saw the woman that the townfolk call cheap Grace,
There was a sweetness in her voice and a glow upon her face
She had her head lifted up, she looked me in my eyes,
When I asked just what had happened to her, she began to cry

She said, There is nothing cheap about God's Grace,
He loves me the same as He loves you,
His redeeming blood is what declares my value,
Yes I know He loves me and I know He loves you too

There is nothing cheap, there is nothing cheap,
There is nothing cheap about God'sGrace

Then she began to sing .....
Jesus loves me this I know,
For in my heart He tells me so,
Each one of us to him belong,
In Him I'm Holy, pure and strong ...
Yes, Jesus loves me,
Yes, Jesus loves me,
Yes, Jesus loves me,
In my heart He tells me so

Comprehensive Grace

Excuse the spelling errors in my first post. I am new to blogging and am not sure at this point how to correct spelling error's once they are posted. At this point I plan to post articles I find that reflect my own understanding of the finished work of Jesus Christ. Some call it "comprehensive grace"others call it "the doctrine of inclusion". The apostle Paul called it "the Gospel of Jesus Christ and" and also "The gospel of Grace and Peace". It is good news whatever you choose to call it. As one man has said, "if it isn't good news then it is not the Gospel". I hope you enjoy the following article and that it speaks to what you already know in your heart. I will include a link so you can find more articles and contact the folks that publish them.
www.knowingtodaysgod.com

Believing the Unbelievable
Does God ask me to believe the unbelievable? Through much of history we have been asked to believe in a "fireburning" Hell for the disobedient and unbelieving. Some have found this message unbelievable. The idea that God would condemn the well-intended, the honestly seeking, and the unknowing along with the willfully unrighteous has been a difficult doctrine for many, even the religious. Based on the actions of those who claim to believe this doctrine, my conclusion is that they really do not believe what they say. The horror of the orthodox, fundamentalist doctrine of eternal punishment would logically overwhelm any sane human being and compel them to unrelenting efforts to persuade friends, family, and acquaintances of their pending doom. No time would be wasted on the mundane cares of the world because nothing could be even remotely as important as "converting the lost." Of course, this all pre-supposes that anyone can identify the lost in the first place, and history verifies that we cannot do that with any agreement. Since the "believers" are not engaged in this type of frantic, horror driven effort, they cannot really believe what they seemingly profess.
Down through the years many have come to question the "unbelievability" of eternal punishment. Traditionally, however, the Old Covenant dealings have been brought forward in Christian orthodoxy as the model for how God deals with man today. In contrast other "non-traditionalists" have concluded that under the New Covenant, God deals with all mankind in a different way than he dealt with Old Covenant Israel. The God of judgment in the Old Testament becomes the God of mercy in the New. See John 1:17. The God of mercy works to redeem all mankind not just the chosen of the Old Covenant. The God of former exclusiveness is now manifested as the God who includes all in his blessedness. See Romans 5: 18-19. "All" is equated to "all" and "many" to "many".
Many recoil at the idea that God can and will save all, saying that this understanding is not believable. In their minds the evil must surely receive some sort of punishment. This is clearly Old Covenant thinking. The law condemned and restitution had to be made. Christ has now changed all of that. God can and will forgive and forget. Any human requirements to receive salvation make the New Covenant no different from the Old. "Accept" is just another word for "earn" and makes one's salvation dependent on one's own efforts plus those of their teachers. In that sense, the New Covenant requirements are more onerous than the Old, because the Jews were under no obligation to convert outsiders to Judaism.
Do you see any inconsistency in a God who authors the Old Covenant which requires perfect obedience and then "progresses" to a New Covenant, which requires obedience to deal with sin (which is disobedience)? Where is the improvement in man's ability to be obedient? As noted earlier, at least under the Old Covenant, the Jews had ample opportunity to know their requirements. Supposedly under the New Covenant, the poor lost man must rely on his Christian neighbor, or worse yet some foreigner from western civilization, to convert him. This is not progress in God's dealings with man, and it is not consistent with the God of Love who is described in I Corinthians 13 so majestically.
To those who object to idea that God can and will extend mercy to all, I ask this question: "Would you rather disbelieve because of horror or disbelieve because of magnificence." I joyfully choose to embrace the unbelievable God of Love, in the full assurance that he is able to do "exceeding abundantly more than we can ask or think." This is the God our hearts always knew. His grace and mercy are not "cheap" as some would term it. But it is unbelievable, for sure.