Author Archives: Pastor Ricky Kurth

¿Es Cristo tu Rey?

Posted on by Pastor Ricky Kurth

La mayoría de los cristianos responderían a esta pregunta con un rotundo sí, pero la mayoría de los creyentes en la gracia responderían con un enfático no. Saben que el pueblo de Israel vivió en un reino (I Sam. 24:20), y saben que el Señor nació “Rey de los judíos” (Mt. 2:2) y un día gobernará sobre ellos en el reino de los cielos en la tierra. Correctamente razonan que un reino es gobernado por un rey, pero que los creyentes de hoy son miembros del “Cuerpo de Cristo” (I Corintios 12:27), y un cuerpo es gobernado por una cabeza. Ya que Cristo es nuestra Cabeza (Efesios 4:15), es fácil ver por qué algunos dicen que Él no es nuestro Rey.

Pero el mismo apóstol que nos dice que somos miembros del Cuerpo de Cristo también nos dice que “el Padre… nos ha trasladado al reino de su amado Hijo” (Col. 1:12,13). Pablo está hablando aquí del reino general de Dios de los salvos de todas las edades, pero cualquier reino, por definición, está gobernado por un rey.

Hay, por supuesto, algunas diferencias dispensacionales. Un reino tiene que ser gobernado por la ley, por lo que Dios le dio a Israel una ley, una ley que decía que si tu prójimo tiene hambre, debes alimentarlo (Deuteronomio 15:8). Pero los cuerpos no se rigen por una ley, se rigen por el amor. Cuando tu estómago tiene hambre, tu cabeza no necesita una ley que te diga que la alimentes. Lo alimentas porque “nadie aborreció jamás a su propia carne; sino que la alimenta y la cuida” (Efesios 5:29). En un reino, tienes que tener leyes que digan cosas como “no matarás” y “no robarás”, así que Dios le dio al reino de Israel una ley que decía cosas como esa. Pero nuestro apóstol dice que leyes como “no matarás” y “no robarás” están “brevemente comprendidas en esto… Amarás a tu prójimo como a ti mismo…” (Rom. 13:9,10). Entonces, después de decirles a los gálatas que no estamos bajo la ley sino bajo la gracia, Pablo les dijo: “servíos por amor los unos a los otros” (Gálatas 5:13). ¡Bajo la gracia, no nos matamos ni nos robamos unos a otros porque nos amamos unos a otros! Pero, ¿qué pasaría en el reino de Chicago si el alcalde anunciara que suspendería todas las leyes y que de ahora en adelante todos deberían simplemente amarse unos a otros? La gente no tardaría mucho en darse cuenta de que el amor funciona bien cuando se trata de gobernar un cuerpo, ¡pero un reino necesita leyes!

Pero a pesar de estas diferencias dispensacionales, Cristo sigue siendo el rey del reino general del cual somos parte. Algún día Él se “sentará en el trono de su gloria” en el reino de los cielos en la tierra (Mt. 25:31). Mientras tanto, ¿se sienta Él en el trono de tu corazón? ¿Por qué no elegir darle al “Rey” el “honor y la gloria” que merece (I Timoteo 1:17) al elegir obedecerle?

"Dos Minutos con la Biblia" le permite comenzar el día con artículos de estudio bíblicos breves pero potentes de la Sociedad Bíblica Berea. Regístrate ahora para recibir Dos Minutos con la Biblia todos los días en tu bandeja de entrada de correo electrónico. Nunca compartiremos tu información personal y puedes cancelar tu suscripción en cualquier momento.

¿Cómo fue quebrantado Cristo por nosotros?

Posted on by Pastor Ricky Kurth
“¿Cómo podría decir el Señor que Su cuerpo fue partido por nosotros si otros versículos dicen que ninguno de Sus huesos fue quebrado?”
Hablando del pan que el Señor partió en la última cena (1 Corintios 11:23), Pablo dijo:
“…Y lo partió, y dijo: Tomad, comed; esto es mi cuerpo, que por vosotros es partido…” (v. 24).
Cuando el Señor partió la hogaza de pan para que los apóstoles la compartieran, usó el pan partido para ilustrar cómo Su cuerpo sería partido por ellos en la cruz. Pero hablando de los soldados que lo crucificaron, Juan dijo:
“…no le quebraron las piernas…para que se cumpliese la Escritura: Hueso suyo no será quebrado” (Juan 19:33,36).
Juan estaba citando el Salmo 34:20. También sabemos que la cruz era un tipo de la Pascua (1 Corintios 5:7), y hablando del cordero pascual, Dios le dijo a Moisés, “ni le quebraréis hueso” (Ex. 12:46 cf. Núm. 9:12). Entonces, ¿cómo podría el Señor decir que Su cuerpo fue partido por nosotros?
Bueno, un cuerpo puede romperse sin romper ningún hueso. Ninguno de los huesos de Job fue quebrado, pero habló de cómo Dios “me quebranta con la tempestad, y multiplica mis heridas” (Job 9:17 cf. 16:14), un quebrantamiento que incluye el quebrantamiento de su piel (7:5 ). Otros versículos hablan de la rotura de los dientes de un cuerpo (Sal. 3:7; Pr. 25:19; Lam. 3:16; Sal. 58:6), su corazón (Ecl. 12:6) y otras partes (Lev. 21:20). La “sangre y el agua” que brotaron del costado traspasado del Señor indican que Su corazón estaba quebrantado, porque el corazón descansa en un saco salino. Así que no hay contradicción entre Juan 19:36 y 1 Corintios 11:24.

"Dos Minutos con la Biblia" le permite comenzar el día con artículos de estudio bíblicos breves pero potentes de la Sociedad Bíblica Berea. Regístrate ahora para recibir Dos Minutos con la Biblia todos los días en tu bandeja de entrada de correo electrónico. Nunca compartiremos tu información personal y puedes cancelar tu suscripción en cualquier momento.

What Does Matthew Mean by “Many Are Called, but Few Are Chosen”?

Posted on by Pastor Ricky Kurth

“What does it mean that “many are called, but few are chosen” (Matt. 22:14)?

The parable in the context pictures how God always planned to marry His Son to Israel (v. 2 cf. Rev. 19:7-9). The “servants” (v. 3) sent to call Israel represent John the Baptist, the twelve apostles, and the Lord Himself (cf. Isa. 42:1). The animals that were killed (v. 4) were a type of Christ’s sacrifice. People with “merchandise” (v. 5) were unbelievers, for believers sold “all” their merchandise at Pentecost (Luke 18:22 cf. Acts 2:45). Verse 6 speaks of Stephen and others who’ll be martyred in the Tribulation. Verse 7 depicts Christ’s fiery second coming (2 Thes. 1:7,8), where He’ll judge “unworthy” unsaved Jews (v. 8 cf. Acts 13:46).

God postponed that judgment with the dispensation of the mystery, but will send Israel more preachers in the Tribulation (v. 9). The millennial kingdom will have “good and bad” people (v. 10), i.e., saved and unsaved. After the millennium, the ones not clothed in God’s righteousness (vv. 11,12 cf. Isa. 61:10) will be cast into the “outer
darkness” (v. 13) of the lake of fire.

So the “many” who were called (v. 14) were the “many” in Israel for whom Christ came to die (Matt. 20:28). But we know only the “few” Jews in the Lord’s “little flock” (Luke 12:32) were chosen. They were chosen when they believed on God’s chosen (Matt. 12:18) and became chosen in Him, just as we are (Eph. 1:4).

Two Minutes with the Bible lets you start your day with short but powerful Bible study articles from the Berean Bible Society. Sign up now to receive Two Minutes With the Bible every day in your email inbox. We will never share your personal information and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Un dicho que no debería dejar de decirse

Posted on by Pastor Ricky Kurth

“Palabra fiel es esta… que Cristo Jesús vino al mundo para salvar a los pecadores…” (I Timoteo 1:15).

Probablemente hayas escuchado el viejo dicho: “No critiques a un hombre hasta que hayas caminado una milla en sus zapatos”. Una vez escuché a un comediante agregar: “¡De esa manera, cuando lo criticas, estás a una milla de distancia y tienes sus zapatos!”.

Si bien esta adición lo convierte en un dicho humorístico, “Cristo Jesús vino al mundo para salvar a los pecadores” es un dicho fiel. Eso significa que si eres un pecador que necesita un Salvador, puedes confiar en el hecho de que Cristo vino a salvarte, sin importar quién seas o lo que hayas hecho.

¿No desearías que todos los viejos dichos fueran así de confiables? Dicen: “Obtienes por lo que pagas”, pero no tengo que decirte que a veces no es así. Pero incluso bajo el programa del reino de Dios para Israel, el Señor declaró:

“Los sanos no tienen necesidad de médico, sino los enfermos… No he venido a llamar a justos, sino a pecadores al arrepentimiento” (Mateo 9:12,13).

Apenas tengo la edad suficiente para recordar cuando los médicos hacían visitas a domicilio, y mi médico una vez vino a nuestra casa para tratarme el asma. Por supuesto, él no habría venido si no hubiera necesitado atención médica. De manera similar, Cristo no habría venido al mundo para salvar a los pecadores si los hombres no necesitaran la salvación.

Pero si no eres salvo y no estás dispuesto a admitir que eres un pecador, estás en problemas, ¡porque eso significaría que Cristo no vino a salvarte! Si estás dispuesto a reconocer que “todos pecaron” (Rom. 3:23), pero te consideras bastante piadoso en general, todavía estás en problemas, porque “Cristo murió por los impíos” (Rom. 5:6). Si eso te obliga a reconocer que eres un pecador impío, pero crees que tú y Dios todavía están en buenos términos, todavía estás en problemas, porque debes admitir que estás entre sus “enemigos” si quieres ser “reconciliado con Dios”. por la muerte de su Hijo…” (Rom. 5:10).

Pero no te desanimes, ¡todo esto son buenas noticias! ¿Qué pasaría si Pablo hubiera dicho: “Cristo Jesús vino al mundo para salvar a la gente alta”, y usted tiene un “desafío vertical”? No puedes admitir que eres alto, pero puedes admitir que eres un pecador. ¿Por qué no admitirlo ahora mismo y creer que Cristo murió para pagar por tus pecados y resucitó (I Corintios 15:3,4). Si eres salvo, ¿por qué no repites este viejo dicho a alguien hoy? “Cristo Jesús vino al mundo para salvar a los pecadores” ¡no es un dicho que debería quedar sin decir!

"Dos Minutos con la Biblia" le permite comenzar el día con artículos de estudio bíblicos breves pero potentes de la Sociedad Bíblica Berea. Regístrate ahora para recibir Dos Minutos con la Biblia todos los días en tu bandeja de entrada de correo electrónico. Nunca compartiremos tu información personal y puedes cancelar tu suscripción en cualquier momento.

The Travels of Paul – Acts 20:1-5

Posted on by Pastor Ricky Kurth

 

Summary:

Paul didn’t decide to leave Ephesus (v.1) because the “uproar” that Satan instigated (Acts 20:23-41) ran him out of town.  He left because he knew his work in Asia was done (Acts 19:9,10).  So he actually planned to leave for Macedonia before the uproar (v.21).  He planned to go to “Achaia” because he’d heard that the church he established in the Achaian city of Corinth had fallen into sin.  So he wrote them a letter and sent Timothy to deliver it (19:22 cf. ICor.4:17).

In that first Corinthian epistle, Paul really let them have it, and warned them of his plan to come and straighten them out further in person (ICor.16:5,8)—especially because he’d also heard some of the Corinthians were doubting his apostleship. So in that first epistle he warned them he was coming to chasten them with an apostolic rod (ICor.4:18-21).

But after all his big talk, he didn’t show up in Corinth.  His detractors claimed that he was obviously a man who made promises lightly, and didn’t keep them (IICor.1:15-17).  So Paul wrote them that second epistle, explaining he didn’t show up in Corinth to “spare” them (1:23-2:1).  He didn’t want to have to use his rod on them, so he took some time to cool off in Macedonia before going to Corinth (Acts 20:2).

The Macedonian churches of Philippi and Thessalonica were among Paul’s favorites, but even they needed “much exhortation” from God’s Word (v.2)—and so do you!  Be sure to be in church to get it, as often as you can.

During the time Paul was administering that exhortation, he was going through a rough time himself (IICor.2:12,13).  When you find yourself going through tough times like he describes in those verses, be sure to do what he did and just keep serving the Lord in spite of it all.  That’s the best cure for dealing with adversity.  Then find God’s comfort in the fellowship of other believers, as Paul did (IICor.7:5,6).

Paul was also comforted by the news Titus brought him that said the Corinthians had repented (7:7).  He was very comforted by this, for he’d repented of some of the things he said in that first Corinthian letter (7:8).  Even Paul wasn’t always sure he’d done the right thing!  I find that very comforting, how about you?  We know Paul wrote II Corinthians from Macedonia due to the references he makes to Macedonia in it (IICor.7:5; 8:1; 9:2,4).  He then visited the church in Corinth during his time in “Greece” (Acts 21:2).

It must not have taken Paul more than three months to write an epistle, for he wrote Romans during his three months in Greece (21:2,3).  We know this because he mentions staying with Gaius, a Corinthian (Rom.16:23 cf. ICor.1:14).  Of course, the writing of Romans got Satan’s attention, and he instigated a Jewish plot on Paul’s life (Acts 21:3).  God was phasing out rescues like the earthquake in Acts 16, so Paul rescued himself. He heard the assassination was to take place near the ship he was taking to Syria, so he took a land route to Macedonia instead (Acts 21:3).  We too must save ourselves from trouble by making adult son decisions like that!

Paul also gathered bodyguards (21:4), who also joined him to guard the money he collected from the churches in their respective cities (cf.Rom.15:26).  After the Jews rejected the Spirit when they stoned a Spirit-filled man, He withdrew, and the ones He empowered to live as one, with no lack (Acts1:8;2:4;4:34,35), suddenly became “poor” (Rom.15: 26).  The twelve asked Paul to help them (Gal.2:9,10), which Paul was “forward” to do by taking collections for those poor Jewish saints from the Gentile churches (Rom.15:25,26).

Paul sent Titus to pick up the Corinthian letter, but sent a man with him (IICor.8:16-19) to provide things honest in the sight of all men when it came to the Lord’s money (ICor.16: 1-3).  Plus, the collecting of money can’t be kept secret, so Paul was “in perils of robbers” (IICor.11:26).  So the more men involved in collecting and delivering money, the better.

A Video of this sermon is available on YouTube: “The Travels of Paul” Acts 20:1-5

The Bible Conferences Paul Passed On

Posted on by Pastor Ricky Kurth

A defense attorney was conferring with his client one day, and told him: “I’ve got good news and bad news.” His client said, “Give me the bad news first.” His attorney replied, “They did a DNA analysis of the blood at the crime scene and it turns out it’s yours. So they are charging you with triple homicide, and recommending the death penalty.” The man nodded and said, “What’s the good news?” His lawyer said, “According to the blood at the crime scene, your cholesterol is down.”

Well, speaking of conferring with people, after the Apostle Paul got saved, he decided not to confer with anyone! He told the Galatians,

“…when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother’s womb, and called me by His grace,
“To reveal His Son in me, that I might preach Him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood” (Gal. 1:15,16).

Now I have to tell you, that’s certainly different than what I did after I got saved. I wanted to confer with as many believers as I could, to learn more about the Lord. And it seems odd that Paul didn’t.

And what seems even more odd is that Paul is giving his testimony here. Why would he make it a point to mention in his testimony that he didn’t confer with anyone after getting saved?

Well, what he’s doing here is answering the legalistic troublemakers who had persuaded the Galatians to put themselves under the law of Moses. Those legalists had accused Paul of getting his new message of grace from men, and not from God. That’s why he began this passage by writing,

“But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.
“For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ” (Gal. 1:11,12).

And that’s why, in giving his testimony, Paul mentions that he “conferred not with flesh and blood.” It’s impossible to get a message from men if you don’t confer with any men.

An Apostolic Oversight

But let me ask you: If you had gotten saved back in Paul’s day, which twelve men would you have wanted to confer with? I kind of gave it away when I said “twelve men,” didn’t I? You’d have wanted to confer with the twelve apostles, wouldn’t you?

After I was saved back in 1970, my parents took me to a Billy Graham crusade. I guess they figured that as long as their son was suddenly into all this Christianity stuff that they would take him to see the most famous Christian there was in that day.

And the most famous Christians when Paul got saved were the twelve. So you’d think that Paul would at least want to confer with them. If God was making me His new leader on earth, I know I’d want to confer with the old leaders. But after affirming that he hadn’t conferred with flesh and blood, Paul added:

“Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus” (Gal. 1:17).

That prompts another question. When you give your testimony, do you say, “I got saved, and then I didn’t go see Billy Graham?” Probably not. So why would Paul make it a point in his testimony to say he got saved and then didn’t go see the twelve?

Well, here Paul is addressing the legalists’ charge that he’d gotten his message from the twelve in particular. You and I know the twelve couldn’t have given Paul his new message of grace, for the Lord told them to “observe” the law of Moses (Matt. 23:1-3), and then told them to teach the nations of the Gentiles to “observe” the law that He’d told them to observe (28:19,20).

But the legalists were at the Jerusalem council, and heard Peter remind the rest of the twelve that they’d always known they were ultimately saved by grace (Acts 15:11), because the law was a yoke no man could bear. The legalists misconstrued him to say that they’d always believed men were saved by grace without the law, something that wasn’t so. But it was easy for the legalists to conclude from what Peter said that the twelve were the ones who gave Paul his message of salvation by grace without the  law. No wonder Paul is making it a point to deny that he went to see the twelve after he got saved, that he went into Arabia instead.

An Apostolic Redaction?

But if I was one of the legalists who were accusing Paul of getting his gospel from men, I’d have read that and said, “Wait a minute, Paul! You’re leaving out part of the story here. You didn’t go to Arabia right away.” And it’s true, he didn’t. After he got saved, he asked the Lord,

“…Lord, what wilt Thou have me to do? And the Lord said…go into the city….And Saul arose… and…they led him by the hand, and brought him into Damascus” (Acts 9:6-8).

So the first thing Paul did after getting saved was to continue down the road to Damascus to the city of Damascus—not Arabia. And if I were one of the troublemakers, I’d have suggested that Paul conferred with some of those flesh and blood men in Damascus at that time.

But we know he didn’t, because the Lord told Ananias,

“…Ananias…go into the street which is called Straight, and enquire in the house of Judas for one called Saul, of Tarsus: for, behold, he prayeth” (Acts 9:10,11).

Paul wasn’t conferring with anyone during those three days. He’d been blinded by the light of the Lord’s glory, so he was praying, not conferring.

We know Ananias didn’t give Paul his message, because of what Ananias told him in Acts 9:17:

“Ananias…said…Brother Saul, the Lord…hath sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight….”

The Lord sent Ananias to Saul to give him his sight, not his message. The only message he gave Paul was the kingdom message of salvation by water baptism (cf. Acts 22:16), and Paul later learned that the Lord had not sent him to baptize (1 Cor. 1:17). So what happened then?

“Then was Saul certain days with the disciples which were at Damascus” (Acts 9:19).

But we know he didn’t get his message from those disciples either, for in Galatians 1:16 Paul says he didn’t confer with flesh and blood. One of the meanings of the word confer is to give. It’s usually used that way when someone says something like: “I confer upon you the title of The Duke of Earl.”

But if “confer” means to give, then when you confer with someone, you’re doing more than just shooting the breeze. The dictionary says “confer” means to give someone your ideas and opinions. That’s why when a bunch of people get together to confer, they call it a conference.

But Paul insists he didn’t confer with those disciples in Damascus after he got saved. He passed on that Bible conference, and on any other conferences he might have attended in Arabia or anywhere else. He passed on any and all opportunities for men to
confer a message upon him.

Apostolic Bad News

If you think it through, the only message that any apostle, or any flesh and blood kingdom saint, could have given Paul would have to include what the Lord told them in Matthew 12:31:

“…blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.”

If Paul conferred with any of those disciples at Damascus, they would have had to say, “Don’t look at us to tell you what message to preach. As far as we know, you shouldn’t even be saved after you blasphemed the Spirit by consenting unto the death of Stephen, a man filled with the Spirit. If we gave you a message to preach, it’d be that blasphemers like you can’t be saved.”

And that is not the message Paul preached! He knew that the Lord said “blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven… in this world, neither in the world to come” (Matt. 12:31,32). And he knew the world to come started at Pentecost when men “were made partakers of the Holy Ghost…and the powers of the world to come” (Heb. 6:4,5). And he also knew that the coming of that world had been interrupted by the dispensation of the mystery! That’s how God could save Paul and all other blasphemers during “this present evil world” (Gal. 1:4).

Now we’re not told how long Paul stayed in Damascus, but we know what he did there, for Acts 9:20 says,

“…straightway he preached Christ in the synagogues, that He is the Son of God.”

While Paul was in Damascus, he wasn’t conferring with men to learn what to preach—he was preaching what he’d already learned on Damascus Road. He began by preaching the first thing that Jews like himself need to hear, that Jesus was the Son of God. If you don’t believe that, it won’t do you any good to believe He died for your sins. For if he wasn’t the Son of God He was just another sinful son of man, who had sins of His own to die for, and couldn’t die for yours.

Then,

“…after that many days were fulfilled…when Saul was come to Jerusalem, he assayed to join himself to the disciples: but they were all afraid of him…But Barnabas took him, and brought him to the apostles…” (Acts 9:23-27).

When it says Paul went to Jerusalem and saw the apostles after many days, we’re not told how many days, but we find out as we read on in Galatians 1:

“Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days” (Gal. 1:18).

If you doubt that the Bible would call three years “many days,” we know it would, for after Elijah told King Ahab it wouldn’t rain for three years,

“…it came to pass after many days, that the word of the Lord came to Elijah in the third year, saying…I will send rain upon the earth” (1 Kings 18:1).

But even though it had been three years since Paul persecuted the apostles, they were still afraid to confer with him, until Barnabas convinced them he was now on their side.

Apostolic Chopped Liver

But we know Barnabas didn’t take Paul to see all the apostles, for right after saying he saw Peter in Galatians 1:18, he wrote,

“But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord’s brother” (Gal. 1:19).

Here we learn Paul only saw two apostles. And for some reason, Paul only wanted to confer with Peter. Why wouldn’t he want to see all the apostles?

I think it was because Peter was the only apostle who could give Paul the only information he wanted to confer about—that sheet vision that God gave Peter in Acts 10, when the Lord showed him that unclean animals were no longer unclean. How did Peter interpret that vision? A little later, he said:

“…God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean” (Acts 10:28).

Peter rightly interpreted that vision to mean that the Gentiles were no longer unclean. Now that’s something “the apostle of the Gentiles” (Rom. 11:13) would want to confer with Peter about!

But when Paul says he visited with Peter for 15 days, you’d think that at some point Peter would have invited the other eleven apostles over to meet the new apostle. But Paul says the only other apostle he saw was James, and while James was an apostle, he wasn’t one of the twelve apostles.

So why would Paul snub the other eleven? We know they all still lived in Jerusalem, for the Lord told them to stay in Jerusalem until the city was converted, so they would not have left. So how come Paul didn’t say to Peter, “What do you say we have a fish fry with the rest of the apostles, like the one you guys had on the beach with the Lord after He rose from the dead?” Wasn’t it a little rude not to invite them over?

If I were one of the other eleven, I’d be thinking: “What am I, chopped liver? Does the new apostle think he’s too good for us?” But the Lord knew that men would say Paul got his message from the twelve, so He likely told Paul to steer clear of them.

You say, “But couldn’t he have gotten his message from Peter?”

The answer to that question is, no, he couldn’t, for the Lord had told Peter,

“…Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven… if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of My Father which is in heaven. For where two or three are gathered together in My name, there am I in the midst of them” (Matt. 18:18-20).

That’s not a prayer promise, as so many Christians mistakenly believe. That was the Lord telling them that after He ascended into heaven, they could make official decisions in His absence if there was a quorum of two of the twelve present to make them.

An Apostolic Quorum

That means there is simply no way that the twelve would do anything official—like loose their commission to the Gentiles, and bind themselves to minister to saved Jews (Gal. 2:9)—unless two or three of them agreed to do it. So no, Paul could not have gotten his message from Peter alone, the only member of the twelve with whom he met.

And there’s no way the legalizers could suggest Paul got his message from James the Lord’s brother either, even though Paul admitted to seeing him, for 23 years later

“Paul went…unto James…and all the elders….And…they…said unto him, Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the law” (Acts 21:18,20).

That means James had been preaching the law for 23 years! So nobody would believe it if the legalizers said Paul got his message of grace from a man who never stopped preaching the law. The grace message given to Paul is conspicuous by its absence in the epistle written by James, and the epistles written by Peter and John and Jude as well. That gives us further evidence that Paul didn’t get his message from the apostles, for they too never stopped teaching the law and the kingdom.

Now if you’re thinking that none of this is very important, I can assure you that Paul thought it was extremely important. If he didn’t, he wouldn’t have said what he said in the next verse of Galatians 1:

“Now the things which I write unto you, behold, before God, I lie not” (Gal. 1:20).

Paul thought that all this was important enough to lift his hand and swear an oath to God Almighty that he was telling the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. And the reason God included his oath in the Bible is that God knew there would always be Christians who think Paul preached the same thing as the twelve. I hear from them all the time here at BBS.

If you don’t think it’s important to know that Paul didn’t preach what the twelve preached, talk to the people who lost loved ones because they thought they could drink poison or handle serpents like the Lord told the twelve they could do. Talk to the ones who stopped believing in God because He doesn’t answer all their prayers like the Lord promised the twelve (Matt. 21:22). Talk to the ones who are literally haunted by the thought that they’ve committed the unpardonable sin, or that God let their baby die because of their sins (like He did with David under the law)—the law that the twelve preached!

That’s why Paul swore an oath that he didn’t get his message from the twelve, and that’s why God recorded his oath in the Bible, so we would know how crucially important it is to proclaim the gospel given to the Apostle Paul.

You can receive More Minutes With the Bible every week in your email inbox. This list features longer articles, including both original content and articles that have appeared in the Berean Searchlight.


¿Fue Pablo salvo bajo el programa del Reino?

Posted on by Pastor Ricky Kurth

“¿Fue Pablo salvo bajo el programa del reino?”

No, Pablo era “un blasfemo” (I Timoteo 1:13) quien, como fariseo estricto y respetuoso de la ley (Hechos 26:5), nunca blasfemaría contra el Padre, sino que estaba entre los que blasfemaban contra el Espíritu cuando apedreaban. Esteban (Hechos 7:51-8:1). Esto lo hizo inelegible para la salvación bajo el programa del reino, porque el Señor había advertido, “al que blasfemare contra el Espíritu Santo, no le será perdonado” (Lucas 12:10).

Entonces, ¿cómo podría Dios salvar a Pablo? Bueno, recuerda que el Señor había advertido: “A cualquiera que hable contra el Espíritu Santo, no le será perdonado ni en este siglo ni en el venidero” (Mateo 12:32). La nación de Israel blasfemó contra el Espíritu en el mundo del que el Señor habló como “este mundo” cuando rechazaron a Esteban, un hombre lleno del Espíritu (Hechos 7:55). “El mundo venidero” se define en Hebreos 2:5 como el reino, el “mundo” que Dios “sujetará” bajo Cristo, donde la gente conocerá plenamente “los poderes del mundo venidero” (Heb. 6). :5) que sólo probaron en Pentecostés.

Dado que la blasfemia contra el Espíritu era imperdonable en ambos mundos, sabemos que Saulo fue salvo bajo el programa de un mundo completamente nuevo, la dispensación de la gracia, “este mundo” en el que vivimos (Efesios 1:21), “este mundo presente” en el cual debemos andar y agradar a Dios (Tito 2:12).

"Dos Minutos con la Biblia" le permite comenzar el día con artículos de estudio bíblicos breves pero potentes de la Sociedad Bíblica Berea. Regístrate ahora para recibir Dos Minutos con la Biblia todos los días en tu bandeja de entrada de correo electrónico. Nunca compartiremos tu información personal y puedes cancelar tu suscripción en cualquier momento.


The Town Clerk Comes To The Rescue – Acts 19:35-41

Posted on by Pastor Ricky Kurth

 

Summary:

When it looked like Paul and his fellowworkers in the Lord’s work were about to be killed (Acts 19:23-40), a city official “appeased” the murderous mob (v.41).  Since they wanted the apostles dead, he probably appeased them by just beating Gaius and Aristarchus to satisfy their bloodlust (cf.Gen. 32:20).

Since that angry mob was worried that people wouldn’t come visit the temple of Diana they had built in Ephesus, the townclerk reminded them that they also had “the image which fell down from Jupiter” that people came to worship (v.35).  They claimed a meteorite that landed in Ephesus fell from Jupiter because it is the largest of the planets, and because Jupiter was the name of the king of all their gods.

They also named it Jupiter because Jupiter was the father of their goddess Diana!  Once that rock landed, they claimed Jupiter thought enough of them to send them that image.  This may have led to the justification of building her magni-ficent temple there, making Ephesus the headquarters of all worship of Diana.  So as long as they had that rock, these things could not be “spoken against” (Acts 19:36). And since no one could speak against it, the townclerk encouraged the mob not to do anything rash by killing the apostles.

He went on to remind them of the only two legal reasons they could kill them under Roman law (v.37).  The first reason was if Paul had robbed any churches of their most highly valued commodity—their idol.  That was a crime that had historically been punishable by death (Gen.31:32).  The second crime punishable by death in Rome was blaspheming another religion’s god.  That’s why the Jews charged Stephen with blasphemy (Acts 6:11,13).  They knew Rome wouldn’t censure them for killing him for that, and they were right.  So when they wanted to kill Paul, that’s what they charged him with as well (25:7,8).

So how did the townclerk know Paul hadn’t robbed any churches of their gods? Well, he knew he hadn’t robbed their temple, for they still had that rock, and their statue of Diana.  And he knew Paul hadn’t robbed other churches, for he’d been in Ephesus three years.  Paul did say there was no such thing as idols (19:26), but that must not have met the stand-ard of blasphemy under Roman law, for he wasn’t executed for saying it in Athens (17:29).  The townclerk probably meant Paul never singled out Diana, or any other god, to say he or she wasn’t a god.  His point was: if they killed a man who hadn’t broken any laws, they’d be breaking the law.

And all the townclerk cared about was the law.  He spoke of “your” goddess (v.37), not “ours.”  He didn’t care about Diana.  He just cared about keeping the peace.  He then went on to remind the angry mob that there were legal ways to settle their differences with Paul (19:38-41).  He pointed out that the courts were open to hear such cases, and there were “deputies” who judged court cases (cf.18:12-17).

But when it came to “other” matters that were outside the jurisdiction of Roman law, things that Roman judges would not judge (cf.18:14,15), they could settle those differences in a “lawful assembly,” i.e., in a venue similar to Mars Hill in Athens.  This riot was an unlawful assembly.  He then made it clear that there’d be an inquiry into this riot if they took things any further by killing Paul (v.40).  And he didn’t say it’d be one in which “you” could give no legal account to justify.  He said “we” couldn’t justify it. He knew that he’d be accountable if he let a mob murder someone on his watch.

Paul was putting idol makers out of business, just as God will one day put Babylon out of business, the church of the Antichrist (Rev.18:10-18).  But in that dispensation of wrath, God will do it by burning Babylon.  In the dispensation of grace, Paul did it by grace.  That’s the way to put abortion clinics out of business.  It’s also the way to deal with govern-ment corruption, instead of bombing federal buildings, etc.


A video of this message is available on YouTube: “The Townclerk Comes To The Rescue” Acts 19:35-41

Contralores que empujan coches

Posted on by Pastor Ricky Kurth

Si desea iniciar una gran pelea en poco tiempo, simplemente pregunte a algunos cristianos qué creen que quiso decir Pablo cuando escribió que las “mujeres jóvenes” con “esposos” e “hijos” deberían ser “guardianes de la casa” ( Tito 2:4,5). Pero la única manera segura de interpretar la Biblia es comparando Escritura con Escritura (I Corintios 2:13), ¡no comparando opiniones con opiniones! Con eso en mente, comparemos cómo se usa la palabra “guardián” en otras partes de la Biblia.

Por ejemplo, probablemente haya escuchado a los cristianos citar este amado versículo:

“Prefiero ser portero en la casa de mi Dios, que habitar en las tiendas de maldad” (Salmo 84:10).

Los porteros del templo de Israel tenían deberes muy específicos, algunos de los cuales involucraban las finanzas de la casa de Dios:

“…entregaron el dinero que había sido traído a la casa de Dios, que habían recogido los levitas que guardaban las puertas… y lo dieron a los obreros que trabajaban en la casa de Jehová, para reparar y enmendar la casa” (II Crónicas 34:9,10).

Como puede ver, los porteros de la casa de Dios evidentemente estaban involucrados en las finanzas que se usaban para mantener el hogar más grandioso del mundo, el templo de Salomón. Entonces, decir que eras portero en esos días probablemente no sonaba como un trabajo que implicaba mucha responsabilidad. Pero los que conocían bien la Palabra de Dios sabían que no era así.

De manera similar, cuando una mujer cristiana dice que es una de las “guardianes de la casa” de las que habla la Biblia, eso también suena como un trabajo que no conlleva mucha responsabilidad, al menos en los oídos de los no creyentes. Pero los que conocen bien la Palabra de Dios saben que tampoco es así. Por ejemplo, en muchos hogares cristianos la esposa está a cargo de las finanzas.

Esto es algo que me gusta señalar en la clase de consejería prematrimonial que tengo con las parejas antes de oficiar su boda. ¡Algunas mujeres son naturalmente mejores para llevar los libros! La Palabra de Dios enseña claramente que “el marido es la cabeza de la mujer” (Efesios 5:23), pero un marido sabio reconoce las habilidades de su esposa y está dispuesto a delegar parte de su autoridad en ella.

Claro, un esposo podría insistir: “Soy la cabeza de familia, así que es mi trabajo administrar nuestras finanzas”. Y dado que las finanzas son un aspecto extremadamente importante del hogar, seguramente puedo entender cómo un hombre puede sentirse de esa manera, y no tengo más que respeto por su convicción.

Pero si esa es su persuasión personal como esposo, lo invitaría a considerar que las finanzas también son un aspecto extremadamente importante de los negocios y corporaciones. Sin embargo, sabemos que tanto los dueños de negocios como los directores ejecutivos emplean contralor, CPA y otras personas con habilidades contables para llevar los libros. Un líder que insiste en administrar personalmente cada aspecto de su organización seguramente afectará negativamente su salud, y lo mismo ocurre con el cabeza de familia.

¡Y sin necesidad! Dios llama “virtuosas” a las mujeres que están a cargo de las finanzas, diciendo:

“…considera un campo, y lo compra…” (Proverbios 31:10,16).

Como puede ver, la mujer virtuosa descrita en este conocido pasaje de las Escrituras tenía un esposo que le permitía tomar decisiones financieras que eran más que incidentales. Su libertad para hacer una compra tan importante muestra que era cierto que “el corazón de su marido está confiado en ella” (v. 11) en el área importante de las finanzas de la familia, así como en otras áreas donde ella puede “le da bien y no mal todos los días de su vida” (v. 12).

El hogar cristiano a menudo es criticado por el mundo como un lugar donde la esposa y madre es poco más que un trapo y una alfombra. ¡Pero no es así como la Palabra de Dios describe a los “guardianes de la casa”! La esposa y madre cristiana es una parte integral de la administración del hogar más grandioso del mundo en nuestros días: el hogar cristiano.

"Dos Minutos con la Biblia" le permite comenzar el día con artículos de estudio bíblicos breves pero potentes de la Sociedad Bíblica Berea. Regístrate ahora para recibir Dos Minutos con la Biblia todos los días en tu bandeja de entrada de correo electrónico. Nunca compartiremos tu información personal y puedes cancelar tu suscripción en cualquier momento.


Buenas direcciones

Posted on by Pastor Ricky Kurth

Un viejo chiste que es popular entre las mujeres especula que la razón por la que los judíos tardaron cuarenta años en hacer el viaje de once días a través del desierto (Deut. 1:2) es porque Moisés era un hombre típico, demasiado obstinado para detenerse y pedir ayuda. ¡direcciones! Por supuesto, los estudiantes de la Biblia saben que la verdadera razón de este retraso épico fue la rebelión pecaminosa de Israel contra Dios. En aquel entonces, el Señor guió a Su pueblo en cada paso de su camino con una nube (Núm. 9:15-23), pero la nube los llevó a “errar por el desierto cuarenta años” (Núm. 32:13) para castigarlos. por su desobediencia.

Pero en ausencia de una nube que nos guíe hoy, ¿cómo podemos esperar que el Señor nos dirija? ¿Qué quiso decir exactamente Pablo cuando escribió,

“Y el Señor encamine vuestros corazones al amor de Dios, y a la espera paciente de Cristo” (2 Tes. 3:5).

La mayoría de los creyentes en la gracia saben que Dios dirige a los miembros del Cuerpo de Cristo con Su Palabra, pero sigue habiendo mucha confusión al respecto, con base en versículos como Proverbios 16:9:

“El corazón del hombre traza su camino, pero el Señor dirige sus pasos”.

Versículos como este se usan para enseñar que los hombres planean lo que van a hacer, pero luego llega Dios y vence su voluntad y los hace caminar en una dirección diferente a la que planearon. Esta interpretación conduce a una forma extrema de calvinismo que enseña que Dios es responsable de cada movimiento que hacen los hombres, que Él es el titiritero que mueve los hilos y que el hombre es la marioneta que responde impotente a todos sus caprichos. Esta visión de Dios bordea lo que se llama fatalismo. Muchos incrédulos creen que el “destino” controla todo en nuestras vidas y somos impotentes para anular su más mínimo capricho.

El problema obvio de creer que somos manipulados por el Todopoderoso y que no podemos hacer nada que Él no cause es que lo convierte en el autor de todos nuestros pecados. Entonces debe haber alguna otra explicación para versículos como Proverbios 16:9, y creemos que la hay. La única manera segura de interpretar la Biblia es comparando Escritura con Escritura (1 Corintios 2:13), así que comparemos la palabra “dirige” en este versículo con la forma en que Isaías usó la palabra en el pasado:

“¿Quién dirigió el Espíritu del Señor, o siendo su consejero, le enseñó?” (Isaías 40:13).

Note que cuando el profeta dice que nadie puede dirigir el Espíritu del Señor, luego reformula sus palabras diciendo que el Señor no puede ser aconsejado ni enseñado. Esto, entonces, es lo que Pablo quiso decir cuando habló de Dios dirigiendo nuestros corazones. Dios nos dirige aconsejándonos a través de la enseñanza de Su Palabra. El corazón malvado del hombre trama su camino (Jeremías 17:9), y el Señor viene y lo dirige a hacer lo que Él ordena por el consejo de Su Palabra.

"Dos Minutos con la Biblia" le permite comenzar el día con artículos de estudio bíblicos breves pero potentes de la Sociedad Bíblica Berea. Regístrate ahora para recibir Dos Minutos con la Biblia todos los días en tu bandeja de entrada de correo electrónico. Nunca compartiremos tu información personal y puedes cancelar tu suscripción en cualquier momento.