Daily Archives: September 16, 2018


For the Lord giveth wisdom: out of his mouth cometh knowledge and understanding.

Proverbs 2:6

The writer of the Proverbs in the Old Testament taught that true spiritual knowledge is the result of a visitation of heavenly wisdom. It is a kind of baptism of the Spirit of Truth that comes to God-fearing men and women. This wisdom is always associated with righteousness and humility; it is never found apart from godliness and true holiness of life.

We need to learn and declare again the ministry of wisdom from above. It is apparent that we cannot know God by the logic of reason. Through reason we can only know about God. The deeper mysteries of God remain hidden to us until we have received illumination from above. We were created with a capacity to know spiritual things—that potential died when Adam and Eve sinned. Thus, “dead in sin” is a description of that part of our being in which we should be able to know God in conscious awareness.

Christ’s atoning death enabled our Lord and Savior to take God the Father with one hand and man with the other and introduce us. Jesus enables us to find God very quickly!

Thank You, Father, that You provided a way—the only way—to bring sinful people back into a right relationship with You. That one way is through faith in Jesus Christ. Thank You, Lord, that You did not leave us lost and hopeless.[1]

[1] Tozer, A. W. (2015). Mornings with tozer: daily devotional readings. Chicago, IL: Moody Publishers.


I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images.

—Isaiah 42:8

One vital test of all religious experience is how it affects our relation to God, our concept of God and our attitude toward Him.

God being who He is must always be the supreme arbiter of all things religious. The universe came into existence as a medium through which the Creator might show forth His perfections to all moral and intellectual beings: “I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another” (Isaiah 42:8). “Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created” (Revelation 4:11).

The health and balance of the universe require that in all things God should be magnified. “Great is the LORD, and greatly to be praised; and his greatness is unsearchable” (Psalm 145:3). God acts only for His glory and whatever comes from Him must be to His own high honor. Any doctrine, any experience that serves to magnify Him is likely to be inspired by Him. Conversely, anything that veils His glory or makes Him appear less wonderful is sure to be of the flesh or the devil. MDP134-135

Lord, may I clearly see Your glory today. May I not be fooled by any experience or thought that does not magnify You, and may You be pleased with my worship this day. Amen. [1]

[1] Tozer, A. W., & Eggert, R. (2015). Tozer on the almighty god: a 365-day devotional. Chicago, IL: Moody Publishers.

September 16 Daily Help

JESUS is the great teacher of lowliness of heart. We need daily to learn of him. See the Master taking a towel and washing his disciples’ feet! Follower of Christ, wilt thou not humble thyself? See him as the Servant of servants, and surely thou canst not be proud! “He humbled himself!” Was he not on earth always stripping off first one robe of honor, and then another, till, naked, he was fastened to the cross? and there did he not empty out his inmost self, pouring out his life-blood, giving up for all of us? How low was our dear Redeemer brought! How, then, can we be proud?[1]

[1] Spurgeon, C. H. (1892). Daily Help (p. 263). Baltimore: R. H. Woodward & Company.

“I Thought He Might Kill Me” – Kavanaugh Accuser Breaks Silence

Following Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh’s “categorical and unequivocal” denial of allegations of sexual misconduct that Democrats had been aware of since July, referred to the FBI this week, who then confirmed they would not investigate the matter; the accuser has gone public.

As The Washington Post reports, Christine Blasey Ford, now a 51-year-old professor at Palo Alto University in California, has come forward as the person who wrote a confidential letter to a senior Democratic lawmaker alleging that Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her more than three decades ago, when they were high school students in suburban Maryland.

As The Hill reports, Ford described an incident between the two in high school, alleging that Kavanaugh pinned her to a bed one summer in the 1980s and forced himself on her.

Ford told the Post that Kavanaugh “groped her over her clothes, grinding his body against hers and clumsily attempting to pull off her one-piece bathing suit and the clothing she wore over it.”

She also said Kavanaugh put his hand over her mouth when she attempted to scream for help.

“I thought he might inadvertently kill me,” Ford said.

“He was trying to attack me and remove my clothing.”

While it should not matter in this case of she-said-he-said, we note that Ford is a Democrat who made donations to various Democratic recipients.

Kavanugh vehemently denied these allegations last week:

“I categorically and unequivocally deny this allegation,” Kavanaugh said in a statement provided by the White House, his first comments on the allegations.

“I did not do this back in high school or at any time.”

Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley’s (R-Iowa) office sent out a letter on Friday morning from 65 women who knew Kavanaugh when he was in high school.

“We are women who have known Brett Kavanaugh for more than 35 years and knew him while he attended high school between 1979 and 1983,” the letter states.

“For the entire time we have known Brett Kavanaugh, he has behaved honorably and treated women with respect.”

“We strongly believe it is important to convey this information to the Committee at this time,” they added.

Grasssley’s office added that Kavanaugh has undergone six FBI investigations since 1993 and “no such allegation resembling the anonymous claims” was included in the FBI reports, and that, separately, no similar allegations have been brought to Republican members of the Judiciary Committee or staff.

Source: “I Thought He Might Kill Me” – Kavanaugh Accuser Breaks Silence

DEVELOPING: Writer of Confidential Kavanaugh Letter Speaks Out – She’s a Far-Left Activist! — The Gateway Pundit

Senate Democrats on the Judiciary Committee are working overtime to delay Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation to the Supreme Court.

On Thursday, ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) referred a mysterious letter about Kavanaugh to the FBI.

Feinstein said in a statement Thursday to the feds that she “received information from an individual concerning the nomination.”

Feinstein released a statement via The Intercept:

 “I have received information from an individual concerning the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court. That individual strongly requested confidentiality, declined to come forward or press the matter further, and I have honored that decision. I have, however, referred the matter to federal investigative authorities.”

It turns out the woman who sent the letter to Democrat lawmakers is a far-left activist.

Christine Blasey Ford, a California professor and far left activist, wrote a letter to a Democrat lawmaker earlier this summer claiming she was sexually assaulted by Brett Kavanaugh while they were in high school in Maryland over three decades ago.

Via the Washington Post:

Speaking publicly for the first time, Ford said that one summer in the early 1980s, Kavanaugh and a friend — both “stumbling drunk,” Ford alleges — corralled her into a bedroom during a gathering of teenagers at a house in Montgomery County.

While his friend watched, she said, Kavanaugh pinned her to a bed on her back and groped her over her clothes, grinding his body against hers and clumsily attempting to pull off her one-piece bathing suit and the clothing she wore over it. When she tried to scream, she said, he put his hand over her mouth.

“I thought he might inadvertently kill me,” said Ford, now a 51-year-old research psychologist in northern California. “He was trying to attack me and remove my clothing.”

Ford said she was able to escape when Kavanaugh’s friend and classmate at Georgetown Preparatory School, Mark Judge, jumped on top of them, sending all three tumbling. She said she ran from the room, briefly locked herself in a bathroom and then fled the house.

Independent journalist Mike Cernovich says Christine Blasey is a far-left activist who spent all weekend deleting her social media accounts.

The Dems are so dirty they had to go back over three decades to Kavanaugh’s high school days to dig up ‘dirt’ using a left-wing activist.


Kavanaugh categorically denied the allegations on Thursday in a statement.

The White House also released a statement.

“Senator Schumer promised to ‘oppose Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination with everything I have,’ and it appears he is delivering with this 11th hour attempt to delay the confirmation.”

via DEVELOPING: Writer of Confidential Kavanaugh Letter Speaks Out – She’s a Far-Left Activist! — The Gateway Pundit

Lights, Camera, Action! Terrorists film 9 staged chemical attack videos – Russian military

The White Helmets have shot at least nine videos intended to serve as proof in accusations that the Syrian government conducted a chemical weapon attack using chlorine against civilians in Idlib, the Russian military claims. READ MORE: https://on.rt.com/9e6i RT LIVE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFAcqaNzNSc Check out http://rt.com Subscribe to RT!

Some Amazon employees are reportedly accepting cash bribes from online sellers to delete negative product reviews (AMZN)

  • Some of Amazon’s online sellers are offering bribes to Amazon employees to take down bad reviews or retrieve confidential information, the Wall Street Journal reports.
  • The practice, which is especially common in China, has reportedly launched an internal investigation within the company.

For Amazon’s online sellers, a negative product review can be extremely damaging to businesses selling their products on the retail giant’s site.

In order to quash bad feedback, some sellers are offering Amazon employees bribes to obtain bad reviewers’ email addresses or to erase the negative review from the site entirely, the Wall Street Journal reported on Sunday.

According to the Wall Street Journal’s sources, this practice is especially common in China, where small business owners sometimes pay Amazon employees around $300 for each bad review they take down.

These services are reportedly overseen by brokers who use the Chinese messaging service WeChat to connect sellers with Amazon employees.

Sellers can even contact brokers to get proprietary information on sales volume and data relating to shoppers’ online spending habits in order to boost sales, the sources said.

Amazon policies prohibit disclosing this information, and the online retail giant has reportedly launched an internal investigation to determine which employees are violating the company’s policies.

Amazon didn’t immediately respond to Business Insider’s request for comment.

Source: Some Amazon employees are reportedly accepting cash bribes from online sellers to delete negative product reviews (AMZN)

BOMBSHELL: Republican Operative Claims Former Obama Officials Are Advising Europe On How To Evade U.S. Sanctions On Iran — The Gateway Pundit

Democrats have been absolutely furious about Trump dissolving various aspects of Obama’s legacy, especially the Iran Deal. This is not a secret.

This weekend, it became known that John Kerry has had meetings with Iran where he advised them to just wait out the Trump presidency. However, that may just be the tip of the iceberg. Republican operative Richard Goldberg tweeted an ominous claim yesterday about Obama officials advising Europe on how to evade U.S. sanctions on Iran which are due to take effect this fall.

Joel B. Pollak reports at Breitbart:

Claim: Former Obama Officials Advising Europe to Evade Iran Sanctions

Richard Goldberg, the Republican political operative who helped coordinate opposition to the Iran deal on Capitol Hill, claimed Saturday evening that former Obama administration officials were trying to devise ways to help Europe evade sanctions on Iran.

Goldberg was reacting to former Secretary of State John Kerry’s admission last week that he had been meeting with Iranian foreign minister Javad Zarif in an effort to persuade Iran to stick with the now-defunct Iran nuclear deal, which President Donald Trump withdrew from in May.

…Goldberg tweeted that he had heard from his sources in Europe that Obama alumni were advising European governments about how to evade new U.S. sanctions against Iran:

The new sanctions, which go into full effect in November, effectively force European banking institutions to choose between doing business with Iran and doing business with the U.S.

Sadly, this claim is not hard to believe. We already know the lengths Obama loyalists will go to in order to preserve Obama’s legacy. These are the same people who still haven’t accepted the outcome of the 2016 election nearly two years later.

The question now is that if these claims are true, what will be done about it?

via BOMBSHELL: Republican Operative Claims Former Obama Officials Are Advising Europe On How To Evade U.S. Sanctions On Iran — The Gateway Pundit

Judicial Watch Files Ethics Complaint Against ‘Spartacus’ Cory Booker For Violating Senate Rules — The Gateway Pundit

The conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch has filed an ethics complaint against New Jersey Democrat Senator Cory Booker.

Last week, Booker violated rules of the U.S. Senate during confirmation hearings for Judge Brett Kavanaugh. Booker admitted his wrongdoing because he was trying to look like a hero for leftists. He said at the time that he would accept the consequences for doing so. Well, here you go Senator Spartacus.

CNS News reports:

Judicial Watch Files Ethics Complaint Against Sen. Cory Booker For Violating Senate Rules

The government watchdog group Judicial Watch delivered a letter on Wednesday to the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Ethics requesting that it investigate Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) for his “admitted violation [of] Senate rules by releasing confidential records through his social media accounts,” said the organization in a Sept. 12 press release.

In a Sept. 7 tweet, Sen. Booker said, “I broke committee rules by reading from ‘committee confidential’ docs.” Also, in a Sept. 9 Facebook post, Booker said, “And the classification of many documents as “Committee Confidential” is a sham… I willfully violate these sham rules. I fully accept any consequences that might arise from my actions including expulsion.”

The Democratic senator also opened a Dropbox account that is accessible to the public. It contains documents and is headed, “Booker Confidential – Kavanaugh Hearing Documents.”

“Senator Booker, in an absurd invocation of ‘Spartacus,’ explicitly invited his expulsion from the Senate in his egregious violation of the rules and contempt for the rule of law and the Constitution,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

“Will the Senate assert the rule of law in the Booker case or allow mob rule to be the new standard?” asked Fitton.

You can read the full complaint here.

via Judicial Watch Files Ethics Complaint Against ‘Spartacus’ Cory Booker For Violating Senate Rules — The Gateway Pundit

FBI Had No Clue About Trump-Russia Collusion When Mueller Took Over: Lisa Page

A newly reported comment made by former FBI attorney Lisa Page during her May testimony to Congress has revealed a “momentous fact,” according to The Hill‘s John Solomon: after nine months of investigations – which included the use of a well-paid spy to infiltrate the Trump campaign, The FBI had no clue whether there was any collusion between Trumpworld and Russia when the case was handed over to special counsel Robert Mueller.

It’s a reflection of us still not knowing,” Page told Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-Texas) when questioned about texts she and Strzok exchanged in May 2017 as Robert Mueller was being named a special prosecutor to take over the Russia investigation.

With that statement, Page acknowledged a momentous fact: After nine months of using some of the most awesome surveillance powers afforded to U.S. intelligence, the FBI still had not made a case connecting Trump or his campaign to Russia’s election meddling.

Page opined further, acknowledging “it still existed in the scope of possibility that there would be literally nothing” to connect Trump and Russia, no matter what Mueller or the FBI did. –The Hill

“As far as May of 2017, we still couldn’t answer the question,” said Page at another point.

In short – the FBI’s lead attorney on the Trump-Russia investigation said the agency had no evidence of Trump-Russia collusion, while special counsel Robert Mueller has yet to produce a shred of evidence either.

Comey corroborates…

As Solomon notes, ex-FBI Director James Comey told the Senate shortly after he was fired that there was “not yet evidence to justify invstigating Trump for colluding with Russia.”

“When I left, we did not have an investigation focused on President Trump,” Comey told Congressional investigators.

Meanwhile, Page’s lover Peter Strzok – who spearheadsed the FBI’s counterintelligence investigation before Mueller took over, texted “there’s no big there, there.”

The Department of Justice (DOJ) inspector general asked Strzok shortly before he was fired from the FBI what he meant by that text, and he offered a most insightful answer.

Strzok said he wasn’t certain there was a “broad, coordinated effort” to hijack the election and that the evidence of Trump campaign aides talking about getting Hillary Clinton dirt from Russians might have been just a “bunch of opportunists” talking to heighten their importance.

Strzok added that, while he raised the idea of impeachment in some of his texts to Page, “I am, again, was not, am not convinced or certain that it will,” he told the IG. –The Hill

In short, James Comey, Peter Strzok and Lisa Page have all said or implied that the FBI had nothing linking Trump to Russia. Which, as John Solomon concludes, raises the question: If there was no concrete evidence of collusion, why did we need a special prosecutor?

Page’s admission also sugests that the FBI and DOJ officials were likely behind a series of leaks to the media just before Mueller’s appointment which made collusion evidence look far stronger than investigators knew it to be. It also suggests that the MSM – “perhaps longing to find a new Watergate,” were “far too willing to be manipulated by players in a case that began as a politicial opposition research project funded by Trump’s Democratic opponent, Hillary Clinton, and led by a former British intelligence agent, Christopher Steele, who despised Trump.”

At what point does Trump simply demand Mueller lay his cards on the table?

Source: FBI Had No Clue About Trump-Russia Collusion When Mueller Took Over: Lisa Page

September 16, 2018 Afternoon Verse Of The Day

The Divine Child

“And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall name Him Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David; and He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and His kingdom will have no end.” (1:31–33)

After Gabriel’s greeting, Mary for the first time heard what the gracious work of God in her life was going to be. If his greeting had perplexed her, she must have been dumfounded at what he said next. Mary knew of only one way that she could conceive a son—through sexual relations with a man. She also knew that she had not had such relations, as her question in verse 34, “How can this be, since I am a virgin?” indicates. The concept of a pregnant virgin was utterly inconceivable to her; an impossibility, a contradiction in terms like a married bachelor, or a square circle.

Nevertheless Gabriel’s stunning announcement, in words fulfilling Isaiah’s prophecy of Messiah’s virgin birth (Isa. 7:14; cf. Matt. 1:23), was that Mary without the seed from a man would conceive in [her] womb and bear a son. That staggering promise of a divine miracle was far beyond her understanding or any human comprehension.

Then, with breathtaking brevity, in one vast, glorious revelation Gabriel succinctly summarized the entire ministry of the Lord Jesus Christ: His saving work, righteous life, deity, resurrection, ascension, glorious return, and kingdom rule. He began with the command to name Him Jesus, the name that was the Greek form of the common Hebrew name Yeshua (“Yahweh saves”), which introduced the reality of Messiah’s saving work. God is a saving God, and it was “to seek and to save that which was lost” (Luke 19:10; cf. 2:11, 30, 38; Matt. 1:21; 1 Tim. 1:15; cf. John 12:27; Rom. 8:3–4; 2 Cor. 8:9) that Jesus Christ came into the world. His saving work is the central theme of the New Testament (cf. Matt. 11:28–30; John 14:6; Acts 4:12; 5:31; 13:23, 38; Rom. 5:1–2; 2 Cor. 5:21; Heb. 7:25; Rev. 1:5). In obedience to the angel’s command, Mary and Joseph named their newborn Son Jesus (Luke 2:21).

Gabriel then told Mary that her Son Jesus will be great (megas). Once again the understatement is striking. But all the synonyms that could be added, such as extraordinary, splendid, magnificent, noble, distinguished, powerful, or eminent, would be equally inadequate. It beggars human language to do justice to the majestic, glorious person of the Lord Jesus Christ. Adjectives and superlatives are not used because they are superfluous. His life will define great. And worshiping believers are always aware that language is inadequate to express the honor and glory of His person.

Unlike John the Baptist, whose greatness was qualified as being in God’s sight (1:15), Jesus’ greatness is unqualified. He is great in and of Himself; His greatness is intrinsic to His very nature as God, and is not derived from any source outside of Himself. Jesus Christ is “far above all rule and authority and power and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this age but also in the one to come” (Eph. 1:21).

The true measure of Christ’s greatness may be seen in His sharing of God’s glory—of which God declared, “I will not give My glory to another” (Isa. 42:8). Referring to Isaiah’s vision of God’s majesty and glory (Isa. 6:1–10), the apostle John wrote, “These things Isaiah said because he saw His [Christ’s] glory, and he spoke of Him” (John 12:41). John could say that when Isaiah viewed God’s glory in the temple, he saw the glory of Christ, because He shares the Father’s glory. That glory, though veiled in His human flesh, was nonetheless manifested during Christ’s earthly life. John wrote, “The Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth” (1:14). And for a brief moment on the Mount of Transfiguration, Jesus’ majestic glory was unveiled to Peter, James, and John (Matt. 17:1–8).

Christ possesses the glory of God because as the Son of the Most High (cf. 1:35, 76; 6:35; Acts 7:48) He possesses the nature of God. Most High (hupsistos) is the Greek equivalent of the frequently used Old Testament title for God El Elyon (Gen. 14:18–20; Deut. 32:8; 2 Sam. 22:14; Pss. 7:17; 9:2; 21:7; 46:4; 47:2; Isa. 14:14; Lam. 3:35, 38; Dan. 4:17, 24; 5:18, 21). It is a title that refers to His position as the supreme sovereign ruler. To identify Jesus as the Son of the Most High is to affirm that He is of the same essence as God. In the words of the writer of Hebrews, “He [Jesus] is the radiance of His [God’s] glory and the exact representation of His nature” (Heb. 1:3; cf. Matt. 1:23; John 10:30; Phil. 2:6–9; Col. 2:9).

This amazing Child would be God incarnate, perfectly righteous in everything He thought, said, and did. He would die as a sinless sacrifice, providing Himself as a substitute for sinners, offering His atoning death to save them from their sins. But that is not the end of the story. He would not remain dead, but would rise to reign. The culmination of Christ’s work will come when the Lord God gives Him the throne of His father David; and He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and His kingdom will have no end. As noted above, the Lord Jesus Christ was the rightful heir to the throne of His father David through His legal father, Joseph. Gabriel’s words emphasize both the Jewish character of Christ’s kingdom, since He will rule over the house of Jacob (Isa. 65:17–19; Zeph. 3:11–13; Zech. 14:16–21, as well as the rest of mankind; cf. Dan. 7:14, 27), and its eternality, since His kingdom will have no end (Rev. 11:15).

The promised kingdom is not limited to Christ’s present spiritual reign, as amillennialists advocate. The Bible teaches that Satan will be bound during the millennium (Rev. 20:1–3); yet now, as Peter warned, he “prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour” (1 Peter 5:8). Therefore, the present age cannot be the millennium. Nor does the church usher in the millennial kingdom, at the end of which Christ returns, as postmillennialists postulate. Jesus Himself posed the rhetorical question, “When the Son of Man comes, will He find faith on the earth?” (Luke 18:8). (For a further discussion of millennial views, see Revelation 12–22, The MacArthur New Testament Commentary [Chicago: Moody, 2000], 228–33).

The Lord Jesus Christ clearly did not establish His kingdom at His first coming. As John noted in the prologue to his gospel, “He came to His own [Israel], and those who were His own did not receive Him” (John 1:11; cf. 11:53; Matt. 9:34; 12:14; 21:37–43; Mark 6:3; 16:14; 1 Thess. 2:14–16). The Jewish people (particularly their leaders), “recognizing neither Him nor the utterances of the prophets which are read every Sabbath, fulfilled these by condemning Him. And though they found no ground for putting Him to death, they asked Pilate that He be executed” (Acts 13:27–28; cf. 2:23; 7:52; Matt. 27:22–23; Luke 23:13–24; John 19:12–16).

Jesus Christ rules spiritually in the heart of every believer (cf. Col. 1:13), and that spiritual rule will last forever because salvation is forever. But that does not preclude the future literal, earthly, millennial kingdom. During that blessed time, Jesus Christ, “the root and the descendant of David” (Rev. 22:16; cf. Isa. 11:1, 10; Matt. 1:1; Rom. 15:12), the Lion of the tribe of Judah (Rev. 5:5), will sit on His glorious throne, judging the nations with a rod of iron (Ps. 2:9; Rev. 12:5; 19:15) for a thousand years (Rev. 20:4–5). At the end of that time, God will uncreate the universe and create a new heaven and earth that will last for all eternity. The apostle Paul wrote,

Then comes the end, when He hands over the kingdom to the God and Father, when He has abolished all rule and all authority and power. For He must reign until He has put all His enemies under His feet. The last enemy that will be abolished is death. For He has put all things in subjection under His feet. But when He says, “All things are put in subjection,” it is evident that He is excepted who put all things in subjection to Him. When all things are subjected to Him, then the Son Himself also will be subjected to the One who subjected all things to Him, so that God may be all in all. (1 Cor. 15:24–28)

Gabriel’s message to Mary introduces the pivotal point in redemptive history. How people respond to the Child of whom Gabriel spoke will determine their eternal destiny. As Simeon would later say to Mary, “Behold, this Child is appointed for the fall and rise of many in Israel” (Luke 2:34), and the rest of the world as well. And as the Child Himself would warn, “Unless you believe that I am He, you will die in your sins” (John 8:24), since “there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12).[1]

32–33 Some scholars consider it significant that, whereas in v. 15 Gabriel had qualified his prophecy of the greatness of John (“he will be great in the sight of the Lord”), here his statement of the greatness of Mary’s Son has no qualification whatsoever. The striking term “Son of the Most High” (v. 32; cf. vv. 35, 76) leads to a clear messianic affirmation—the reference to the “throne of his father David.” Jesus’ divine sonship is thus linked to his messiahship in accord with 2 Samuel 7:12–14 and Psalm 2:7–9 (cf. Ps 89:26–29). The description of Jesus’ messianic destiny follows the statement of his sonship, and this sonship is related in v. 35 to his divine origin. Clearly Luke sees the messianic vocation as a function of God’s Son rather than seeing sonship as just an aspect of messiahship.

The OT concepts of “throne,” Davidic line, “reign” (v. 33), and “kingdom” are spoken of as eternal—i.e., they “will never end.” Though this idea is found in Micah 4:7, it is not common in Jewish thought.[2]

1:32 / He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High: An Aramaic fragment found at Qumran (Cave 4) reads: “(he) shall be great upon the earth, [O King!] … he shall be called [son of] the [g]reat [God], and by his name shall he be named. He shall be hailed (as) the Son of God, and they shall call him Son of the Most High” (Fitzmyer, p. 347). To whom reference is made, however, is not clear due to the fragmentary condition of the text. The angelic annunciation, of course, in 1:32b alludes to the Davidic covenant of 2 Samuel 7 and applies it to Jesus. Elsewhere in the infancy narrative Jesus’ Davidic descent is emphasized (Luke 1:69; 2:4, 11). On the expression, “Most High,” see Jub. 16:18; 1 Enoch 9:3; 1QapGen 12:17; as well as Luke 1:76.

1:33 / he will reign over the house of Jacob forever; his kingdom will never end: This statement is a succinct summary of Israel’s messianic hopes (see Mic. 4:7; Dan. 2:44; 7:14). “The patriotic strain is once more apparent” (Leaney, p. 83).[3]

The Message Is about Jesus Christ (1:31–33)

1:31–33. The angel’s message began with revealing the virgin birth and the name of the Child—you shall name Him Jesus (1:31). The transcendent significance of the Child was related: His person—He will be great (1:32a); His relation to God—He will be called the Son of the Most High (1:32b; a way of saying He is the “Son of God”), and His purpose—the Lord God (Yahweh of the OT) will give Him the throne of His father David (1:32c). This child will be the fulfillment of the Davidic covenant promises (1:33; cf. 2Sm 7) and the OT promises of the literal earthly kingdom for the nation of Israel (see also the comments on Mt 3:1–4).[4]

1:32–33. The angel predicted five things about Mary’s Son.

  1. He will be great.
  2. He will be called the Son of the Most High (cf. v. 76). The Septuagint often used the term “Most High” (hypsistou) to translate the Hebrew ‘elyôn (cf. v. 76). Mary could not have missed the significance of that terminology. The fact that her Baby was to be called the “Son of the Most High” pointed to His equality with Yahweh. In Semitic thought a son was a “carbon copy” of his father, and the phrase “son of” was often used to refer to one who possessed his “father’s” qualities (e.g., the Heb. trans. “son of wickedness” in Ps. 89:22 [kjv] means a wicked person).
  3. He will be given the throne of His father David. Jesus, as David’s descendant, will sit on David’s throne when He reigns in the Millennium (2 Sam. 7:16; Ps. 89:3–4, 28–29).
  4. He will reign over the house of Jacob forever. Jesus’ reign over the nation Israel as her King will begin in the Millennium and continue on into the eternal state.
  5. His kingdom will never end. These promises must have immediately reminded Mary of the promise of Yahweh to David (2 Sam. 7:13–16). David understood the prophecy as referring not only to his immediate son (Solomon) who would build the temple, but also to the future Son who would rule forever. David stated that Yahweh had spoken of the distant future (2 Sam. 7:19). Mary would have understood that the angel was speaking to her of the Messiah who had been promised for so long.[5]

1:31–33 Notice the important truths which are enshrined in the annunciation:

The real humanity of the Messiah—you will conceive in your womb and bring forth a Son.

His deity and His mission as Savior—and shall call His name JESUS (meaning Jehovah is the Savior).

His essential greatness—He will be great, both as to His Person and His work.

His identity as the Son of God—and will be called the Son of the Highest.

His title to the throne of David—the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David. This establishes Him as the Messiah.

His everlasting and universal kingdom—He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of His kingdom there will be no end.

Verses 31 and 32a obviously refer to Christ’s First Advent, whereas verses 32b and 33 describe His Second Coming as King of kings and Lord of lords.[6]

1:32, 33 great … Son of the Highest: In contrast to Luke 1:15, Jesus is simply called great (perhaps Mic. 5:3 is alluded to here). The reference to “the Highest” is another way to refer to the majesty of God to which Jesus has a unique relationship as Son. His greatness and His sonship are defined by what follows. He fulfills promises made to David of an unending rule (i.e., He is Messiah). The OT introduces and develops this promise in great detail (2 Sam. 7:8–17, especially vv. 13, 16; 1 Kin. 2:24, 25; Pss. 2:1–12; 89:14, 19–29, 35–37; 110:1–7; 132:11, 12; Is. 9:6, 7; 11:1–5, 10; Jer. 23:5, 6). In Judaism this hope was very political and earthly in focus and also was expressed as the hope of unending rule or an unending line of rule (Psalms of Solomon 17 and 18, especially 17:4; 1 Enoch 49:1; 62:14; 2 Baruch 73:1). The NT does not lack this picture of an earthly focus to this rule, but portrays its most visible manifestations to the period of Jesus’ return (Rev. 19 and 20). Luke does portray aspects of this rule and authority as already in evidence in Jesus’ initial coming, though its most evident elements will be displayed in the future (18:39; 19:38; 22:69; Acts 2:30–36). The Davidic connection is one Luke emphasizes in these early scenes (1:27, 32, 69; 2:4, 11). The hope is expressed in vv. 32, 33 in very national terms, as are most of the remarks in Luke 1 and 2. This is because the promise, as Paul puts it, was to the Jew first and then to the Greek (Rom. 1:17; 9:1–5).[7]

[1] MacArthur, J. F., Jr. (2009). Luke 1–5 (pp. 48–51). Chicago: Moody Publishers.

[2] Liefeld, W. L., & Pao, D. W. (2007). Luke. In T. Longman III & D. E. Garland (Eds.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Luke–Acts (Revised Edition) (Vol. 10, p. 60). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[3] Evans, C. A. (1990). Luke (p. 29). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books.

[4] Zuber, K. D. (2014). Luke. In M. A. Rydelnik & M. Vanlaningham (Eds.), The moody bible commentary (p. 1557). Chicago, IL: Moody Publishers.

[5] Martin, J. A. (1985). Luke. In J. F. Walvoord & R. B. Zuck (Eds.), The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures (Vol. 2, p. 205). Wheaton, IL: Victor Books.

[6] MacDonald, W. (1995). Believer’s Bible Commentary: Old and New Testaments. (A. Farstad, Ed.) (p. 1371). Nashville: Thomas Nelson.

[7] Radmacher, E. D., Allen, R. B., & House, H. W. (1999). Nelson’s new illustrated Bible commentary (pp. 1249–1250). Nashville: T. Nelson Publishers.

Sunday’s Hymn: Blest Be the Tie That Binds

Blest be the tie that binds
Our hearts in Christian love:
The fellowship of kindred minds
Is like to that above.

Before our Father’s throne
We pour our ardent prayers;
Our fears, our hopes, our aims, are one,
Our comforts and our cares.

We share our mutual woes,
Our mutual burdens bear,
And often for each other flows
The sympathizing tear.

When we asunder part,
It gives us inward pain;
But we shall still be joined in heart,
And hope to meet again.

This glorious hope revives
Our courage by the way,
While each in expectation lives,
And longs to see the day.

From sorrow, toil and pain,
And sin, we shall be free;
And perfect love and friendship reign
Through all eternity.

—John Fawcett




Other hymns, worship songs, or quotes for this Sunday:

Source: Sunday’s Hymn: Blest Be the Tie That Binds

Venezuela sues neighbors for … not treating its flood of refugees well enough

New heights of chutzpah in the annals of socialism.

After driving millions of Venezuelans out of their country through starvation, state terror, crime, corruption and lack of medical care, Venezuela is planning to sue Colombia, Peru and Ecuador for … not treating them well enough.

According to Jim Wyss of the Miami Herald:

In recent days, [President Nicolas] Maduro and his cabinet have said they might sue Colombia, Ecuador and Perú for their “xenophobic” treatment of Venezuelan migrants. And on Tuesday, Maduro ordered his justice department to sue Colombia to claw back money he says his administration has spent providing social services to millions of Colombians living in Venezuela.


It sounds like the sort of thing Mexico would do – to us, after driving out its own citizens from their fair land. And of course, it has.

In Maduro’s case, it’s not a matter of keeping the elites’ ‘safety value’ of illegal immigration open, but of actually being out of money, given that socialism is a guaranteed formula for national bankruptcy, and in Venezuela’s case, it’s happened. First they starved their people out – and Maduro’s predecessor, Hugo Chavez, actually ordered them out, and now so many have left that the nations in the line of fire are doing all they can to keep them out. It’s gotten so bad the Organization of American States is literally threatening military force against the miscreant hellhole. Now Maduro says they’re not treating them well enough – as if he cared the least about such things back at home.

Being crooks, the Maduro regime is now looking to obtain cash in a way that comes natural to them — by shakedown. According to Wyss:

The legal threats come as Venezuela seems increasingly desperate for cash. Once wealthy, the country is being slammed with chronic food and medicine shortages. Its foreign cash reserves are at their lowest levels since the 1980s. And oil output, the country’s lifeblood, is down to levels not seen since a 2002 oil-worker strike. In addition, U.S. sanctions have been keeping the country from finding fresh funds.

And just as they’ve learned from Mexico and its illegals, it’s also likely they’re taking a cue from Ecuador, which tried to shake down Chevron for billions through lawsuits over its own state oil company’s jungle pollution. Government by shakedown didn’t exactly do them any good and the regime that did it recently got thrown out.

There are additional layers upon layers of chutzpah throughout this, and not just in the maltreatment of refugees claim. In the second, Colombian clawback, lawsuit, which apparently they are getting ready to file soon, it’s laid on thick.

More than a million Colombian refugees, who came in during Colombia’s FARC wars with communist terrorists, were actually invited in by Maduro’s predecessors, including the late unlamented Hugo Chavez, according to the Wyss report, and others that came before him. They were invited, so in they came, and as Wyss notes in his report, Hugo Chavez went his predecessors one further and gave them voting rights, too, to assure his continued rule, much in the same way Democrats seek to give voting rights to illegals. It was no secret at the time that Chavez shoveled the goodies on them in order to get their votes to save himself from a 2004 recall referendum, as Wyss notes. Maduro himself has actually been accused of being one of these Colombians.

Can Colombia be sued for shipping over Maduro?

Now they want to shake money out of Colombia for it, despite them being the ones who not only invited the Colombians in, but who financed the terrorists who drove them out. In 2006, Colombia struck a major blow to FARC by blowing away its most odious commander, Raul Reyes, who was hiding out in Ecuador with a bunch of leftist Mexican students. When the Colombians recovered his laptop computers, they found massive evidence that Venezuela was bankrolling the FARC communist narcoterrorists to the tune of $300 million.  Those were the same rebels who were driving Colombia’s poor to seek refuge in Venezuela.

Wyss, by the way, finds that there aren’t many of such Colombians left, something like 174,000 as of 2017, probably a lot less now. The Colombians have likely fled Venezuela for the same reason millions of Venezuelans have fled Venezuela. Colombia, by contrast, is now caring for more than a million Venezuelan refugees fleeing socialism.

Venezuela’s the one that ought to be paying the bill for that. But we have never seen a lawsuit filed in that direction, either from us on Mexico and Central America, or Colombia on Venezuela.

Funny how these lawsuits work with socialism. Having propagandized the public that they are all a nation of victims as part and parcel for the justification of socialism and its class warfare, they then make themselves the victims on the world stage, seeking to lawsuit their way out of their economic disasters as victims. It just goes to show why socialism is such a parasite on the global politic, making its living off the cash and labors of others when the money pot runs out.
— Read on www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/09/venezuela_sues_colombia_ecuador_and_peru_for__not_treating_its_refugee_flood_well_enough.html

O for a thousand tongues

The End Time

On this Lord’s Day in hopes that this sweet hymns of praise might refresh your soul, I offer this song of praise to our Redeemer. I pray you have opportunity to attend a loving and doctrinal church, meet with the saints and love the Lord through hearing His word, prayer, song, and fellowship.

O for a Thousand Tongues to Sing

Written in 1739 by Charles Wesley. Based on Psalm 35:28. Information from Wikipedia

“O for a Thousand Tongues to Sing” is a Christian hymn written by Charles Wesley. Charles Wesley wrote over 6,000 hymns, many of which were subsequently reprinted, frequently with alterations, in hymnals, particularly those of Methodist churches.

Charles Wesley was suffering a bout of pleurisy in May, 1738, while he and his brother were studying under the Moravian scholar Peter Boehler in London. At the time, Wesley was plagued by extreme doubts about his faith. Taken to…

View original post 398 more words

California Leads Nation In Poverty But Governor Jerry Brown Launching State Satellite To Monitor Global Warming — The Gateway Pundit

Yesterday, we noted that California now leads the nation in poverty. Where is Governor Jerry Brown placing his priorities? On fighting global warming, naturally. Like many progressives, the far left governor is obsessed with climate change and is planning to launch a satellite to monitor the situation.

The Daily Caller has the story:


California Gov. Jerry Brown announced Friday night at the end of a climate summit that the Golden State will launch a satellite into space at some point to monitor the scope of man-made global warming.

Brown has long had to live down the nickname “Moonbeam” after he pushed in the 1970s for California to occupy space. The Democratic governor is now accepting the moniker and pressing forward on a plan to send satellites into orbit to track pollutants.

“With science still under attack and the climate threat growing, we’re launching our own damn satellite,” Brown said in prepared remarks. “This groundbreaking initiative will help governments, businesses and landowners pinpoint — and stop — destructive emissions with unprecedented precision, on a scale that’s never been done before.”

Friday’s Global Climate Action Summit — and President Donald Trump’s nearly two year-long mission to drastically cut Obama-era environmental regulations – likely the rejuvenated Brown’s desire to catapult California to space.

The thousands of people living in homeless camps in Los Angeles and other places throughout the state will probably be very relieved to know Governor Brown is focused like a laser on the big problems.

via California Leads Nation In Poverty But Governor Jerry Brown Launching State Satellite To Monitor Global Warming — The Gateway Pundit

September 16 God’s Divine Purpose

He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love.

Ephesians 1:4

While Israel was still wandering in the desert of Sinai, Moses told them, “The Lord did not set His love on you or choose you because you were more in number than any other people, for you were the least of all peoples; but because the Lord loves you, and because He would keep the oath which He swore to your fathers, the Lord has brought you out with a mighty hand, and redeemed you from the house of bondage, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt” (Deut. 7:7–8). God did not choose the Jews because of who they were but because of who He is.

The same is true of God’s choosing believers. He chooses solely on the basis of His divine will, purpose, and love. There’s nothing you did to earn or gain salvation; it’s all of God. Be thankful that He chose you from before the foundations of the world.[1]

[1] MacArthur, J. (2001). Truth for today : a daily touch of God’s grace (p. 281). Nashville, Tenn.: J. Countryman.

September 16 Being Filled with the Holy Spirit

“Be filled with the Spirit.”

Ephesians 5:18


God wants every aspect of the believer’s being to be under the complete control of the Holy Spirit.

Pleroo, the basic Greek word for “be filled,” offers three shades of meaning that illustrate what Paul’s command to be Spirit–filled means. First, the word describes the pressure of wind filling a ship’s sails and moving the vessel across the water. That parallels the Holy Spirit’s leading us down the pathway of spiritual obedience. We aren’t primarily motivated by our own plans and desires, but we allow the Spirit’s gracious pressure to move us in the right direction.

The well–known pain reliever Alka–Seltzer effectively illustrates the second meaning, permeation. If you drop two Alka–Seltzers into a glass of water, they immediately fizzle and soon transform themselves into clear bubbles throughout the water and permeate it with a distinct flavor. That’s how God wants the Holy Spirit to fill our lives, so that there will be no doubt in others’ minds that we possess the distinct and pervasive savor of the Spirit.

Pleroo’s third and primary shade of meaning is that of domination or total control. In Luke 6:11 the scribes and Pharisees “were filled with rage” when Jesus healed a man on the Sabbath. Jesus said, “Sorrow has filled your heart” (John 16:6) when He described the disciples’ reaction to the news that He was soon departing. In those two examples, pleroo denotes an emotion that thoroughly dominated the people’s thoughts and excluded everything else.

In regard to earthly concerns, such overwhelming feelings can be wasteful, foolish, and even harmful. But it is beneficial and completely in agreement with the Lord’s will when we yield every thought, feeling, and action to the absolute domination of the Holy Spirit. This yielding will occur in our Christian lives only when we obey another of Paul’s commands, “Let the word of Christ richly dwell within you” (Col. 3:16). In practice, the Spirit–filled walk is a matter of knowing God’s Word and obeying it.


Suggestions for Prayer: Ask God to forgive you for the times when you have not allowed His Spirit to completely fill and control your life.

For Further Study: Read and compare Isaiah 6 and Revelation 1:9–18. What reactions did the prophet Isaiah and the apostle John both have to the notion of God’s overwhelming power and control? ✧ What other general similarities are present in their visions?[1]

[1] MacArthur, J. (1997). Strength for today. Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books.

Best-selling book on Islam has ignited firestorm German media

Living in an imaginary world in which people behave as we wish they would is never a sound policy, yet seems to be the approach of Western establishments toward Islam.

The German and European media establishment is outraged that a prominent business and political leader has written a best-selling book warning against problems with Islamic religious doctrine.  The criticisms, which are pervasive, seem to amount to this:

Just because sharia law based on the sacred texts of Islam commands violence against Jews and other infidels, and imposes demeaning humiliations on non-Muslims permitted to live as second-class dhimmis, if they pay discriminatory taxes, there’s no reason to fear the growing presence of Muslims who refuse to assimilate to local culture in Germany.

Thilo Sarrazin, a former senator in the Berlin government, and a former member of the board of the Bundesbank, has written a book on Islam that quickly rocketed to best-selling nonfiction in Germany. The book, titled Hostile Takeover: How Islam Impeded Progress and Threatens Society, has been subject to withering criticism by the German and European press. American media, so far as I have seen, has been silent so far.
— Read on www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/09/bestselling_book_on_islam_has_ignited_firestorm_german_media.html

Profiles In Treason: Rod Rosenstein – Rosenstein Sold Out America For Globalism While Covering Up Clinton Family Crimes

09-15-2018 • http://allnewspipeline.com, by John C. Velisek

The Deep State continues its agenda to take out the sitting President of the United States. The corrupt leadership of the FBI, DOJ, State Department, and even the CIA pushes forward in the machinations that have embroiled the country in divisive politics for the past two years. The American people have let this go on for far too long, starting with an inept Attorney General Sessions.

One of those members of the Deep State cabal is Rod Rosenstein. When approved as Deputy Attorney General by a wide margin, there was a lack of vetting that has created the damaging position we find ourselves in now. From the IRS to the investigation (or lack thereof), Rosenstein has had a hand in all of it.

James Comey took over the Clinton Foundation investigation. At the same time, Lois Lerner was “transferred” to the IRS Tax Exemption Branch of the IRS. At that time Rod Rosenstein was head of the tax division from 2005 to 2011.

Read Full Story
— Read on allnewspipeline.com/Profiles_In_Treason_Rod_Rosenstein.php

September 16 The Significance of Jesus at Cana

On the third day there was a wedding in Cana of Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there; and both Jesus and His disciples were invited to the wedding.—John 2:1–2

A wedding was a major social event in first-century Palestine, and the ensuing celebration could last as long as a week. It marked the culmination of the betrothal period, which often lasted for several months. The couple was considered legally man and wife during their betrothal period. They did not, however, live together or consummate the marriage during that time (cf. Matt. 1:18). On the night of the ceremony, the groom and his friends would go to the bride’s house. They would then escort her and her attendants to the groom’s house, where the ceremony and banquet would be held.

John states that a particular wedding was held in Cana. That both Jesus and His mother attended suggests the wedding involved relatives or friends of the family.

By attending this wedding and performing His first miracle there, Jesus sanctified both the institution of marriage and the ceremony itself. Marriage is the sacred union of a man and a woman whereby they become one in the sight of God. The ceremony is an essential element of that union, because that’s when the couple publicly vow to remain faithful to each other.

That Jesus attended the celebration also reveals the marked difference between His ministry and that of John the Baptist. Instead of being a voice in the wilderness, Jesus had the more difficult task of mingling with the crowds and ministering to them in their daily existence.


Does your faith travel with you into social settings like this? When your time is your own, when the conversation is light, when you feel a long way from the workweek or the usual pressures of life, are you still looking for opportunities to be used of God and helpful to others?[1]

[1] MacArthur, J. (2008). Daily readings from the life of Christ (p. 268). Chicago: Moody Publishers.