http://www.heritageproducts.info/hpBOCpg1.html

For Candace, always 16, always loved and missed…but we who know the Lord will see her again…bless the Lord…

John Kesler
“If you just read Matthew’s resurrection account, would there be any reason to conjecture that the women didn’t see the angel roll away the stone? I think not. Look back at Mathew’s whole account leading up to Easter:

Matthew 27:55, 59-61; 28:1-5 (NRSV)
55 Many women were also there, looking on from a distance; they had followed Jesus from Galilee and had provided for him. 56 Among them were Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee… 59 So Joseph took the body and wrapped it in a clean linen cloth 60 and laid it in his own new tomb, which he had hewn in the rock. He then rolled a great stone to the door of the tomb and went away. 61 Mary Magdalene and the other Mary were there, sitting opposite the tomb. 28:1 After the sabbath, as the first day of the week was dawning, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to see the tomb. 2 And suddenly there was a great earthquake; for an angel of the Lord, descending from heaven, came and rolled back the stone and sat on it. 3 His appearance was like lightning, and his clothing white as snow. 4 For fear of him the guards shook and became like dead men. 5 But the angel said to the women, ‘Do not be afraid; I know that you are looking for Jesus who was crucified.

“Matthew clearly says that the two Marys were witnesses to the crucifixion (they knew Jesus was actually dead) and burial (they wouldn’t go to the wrong tomb) of Jesus, and in verse five the angel speaks directly to the women, so what good reason is there to suppose that according to Matthew’s gospel, the women weren’t witnesses to the stone being rolled away by the angel as well? Why make explicit that the women saw where Jesus was buried and knew exactly which tomb was his, but then have them miss the actual removal of the stone, especially since Matthew’s stolen-body claim of the Jews (28:1-15), according to apologists, proves that the body was missing? If time elapsed from the time the guard was posted and the time the women arrived to see the open tomb, then how would they know that the body wasn’t removed? After all, this is what John claims Mary Magdalene assumed when she encounterd the empty tomb (John 20:1-2; 13-15).”

Steve McCormick
Here is the sequence of events according to Matthew 27:55-66 in the NRSV:
1. The women observe the crucifixion “from a distance”. Matt 27:55
2. Evening approached (NRSV follows erroneous NIV translation) vs 57. Nestle/Aland 27 Gk: the double verb is a participle/aorist tense combination-literally “evening having come”. But don’t take my word for it, that’s just how the KJV, NKJV, RSV, Darby, YLT, GLT, NASB, ESV, ASV, and Amplified Bible translators rendered it. It is an interesting fact that prior to the erroneous NIV translation, not one major translation that I am aware of failed to express the literal verb sense.
3. Joseph goes to Pilate to ask for the body of Jesus. vs 58a
4. Pilate gives the order to release the body to Joseph. vs 58b
5. Joseph took the body, wrapped it in clean linen cloth, vs 59
6. The body is placed in Joseph’s tomb, the stone rolled in place, and Joseph leaves. vs 60
7. The two Marys are sitting outside the tomb opposite it. vs 61
8. The next day, Saturday, the chief priests and Pharisees approach Pilate. vs 62
9. The group restates Jesus’ claim to rise after three days before Pilate. vs 63
10. They request a guard to be posted until the third day. vs 64 The time frame for the posting of the guard is from an indefinite time on Saturday to an indefinite time on Sunday.
11. Pilate gives the command, but leaves the details to them. vs 66
12. The priests and Pharisees post the guard and seal the tomb with an unspecified seal, either a Roman government or Jewish High Priest/Temple seal. vs 66 It should be noted that since the posting of the Roman guard is found only in Matthew, by virtue of what is clearly stated, it happens completely without the knowledge of the women. They are resting at home on the Sabbath. There is no indication in any of the accounts that any of the disciples knew about the Roman guard outside of learning of it well after the events of the resurrection were over. Not once did the women mention the soldiers. There is no interaction between them indicated. The women talk during the trip asking themselves who they can get to move the stone. If the women had known the guard was posted it is unlikely they would have gone to seek entrance in the middle of the night. They would know that with the tomb sealed the guards could not, or would not break the seal to grant them admission. (added 2.2.12 to my original post: Think about it and analyze it as a Roman officer would have. The guards have been warned that the disciples may come in the night to steal the body. What better ploy in an attempt to overpower the guards than sending in a group of innocent looking women first to distract the soldiers by asking for the tomb to be opened so they could supposedly “tend to the body” of the deceased? The zealot Jews in that era were known for guerrilla attacks on Roman soldiers. Jesus had been depicted by the Jewish leaders as a radical messianic pretender, one who was out to overthrow the Roman control of Israel by insurrection. Even many of the Jews believed that BEFORE the crucifixion. The Roman guard never would have fallen for it, especially with the tomb officially sealed. The disciples would never have believed the guards would have been that gullible and easily manipulated.)

Does it make sense that the exhausted Jewish women were completely unfazed by the appearance of a brilliant angel descending from heaven, rolling the stone away while the ground shook and the Roman soldiers trembled violently and passed out?

John states that Mary came to the tomb on the first trip and found the stone rolled away with no mention of either the angel or the soldiers. The soldiers had apparently come back to consciousness before the women arrive and are gone, and the angel was no longer visible, quite consistent with other angelic manifestations in scripture. Mary looked in and saw the tomb empty. It is completely logical that she would assume the body had been taken as John says she did. She had seen the body placed in the sepulcher, and had seen the stone rolled across the entrance. So she/they ran to the disciples, but instead of declaring he had risen as he had repeatedly told them, Mary declares someone had taken the body. This prompts Peter and John to run to the tomb to investigate. At least both of the Marys (perhaps other women) follow the two men back to the tomb, for John 20:10-11 depicts Mary Magdalene standing outside the tomb weeping after Peter and John return home. Then the angel appears to Mary. It is without question that up until the angel makes the announcement and Jesus actually appeared to the women, none of the disciples, including the women, believed he would rise from the dead, a fact driven home by the realization that by making the trip to the tomb on the third day with burial spices, the women had no hope.

Kesler asks three questions:
1. “Is there any reason to conjecture that the women didn’t see the angel roll away the stone?” and then I believe restates it “…so what good reason is there to suppose that according to Matthew’s gospel, the women weren’t witnesses to the stone being rolled away by the angel as well?”

2. “Why make explicit that the women saw where Jesus was buried and knew exactly which tomb was his, but then have them miss the actual removal of the stone, especially since Matthew’s stolen-body claim of the Jews (28:1-15), according to apologists, proves that the body was missing?”

3. “If time elapsed from the time the guard was posted and the time the women arrived to see the open tomb, then how would they know that the body wasn’t removed?”

Let me start by addressing the last two questions.
In response to #2. You are a Roman soldier. You are assigned to guard a grave from being opened by the disciples of Jesus who are anticipated to steal the body so as to fake his resurrection. A brilliant angel appears, descending from heaven, and the ground shakes as the stone is rolled away from the tomb where the angel sits on the stone. The whole experience is so overwhelming that the soldiers are overcome with fear and pass out. Eventually the soldiers come to, the angel is gone and the tomb stands open. Your only hope at that point is that the body is still in the tomb. What is the first thing you would do? Look in the tomb, but they find it empty. The squad is under the authority of a Roman officer, quite possibly the centurion who was in charge at the crucifixion and was later summoned to Pilate to confirm that Jesus was dead. The soldiers would do whatever the officer told them to do at this point (Mt 8:9). The seal is broken, the body is gone, and a rampaging angel with unbelievable power that can even cause an earthquake may still be in the vicinity. What sense does it make to stay at the site? If your forces are overrun by a more powerful foe, you have not abandoned your post. If you cannot fight because you are unconscious you have not failed in your duty. The officer is under the authority of the high priests since Pilate put them under their charge. So they go to the religious officials to report what happened and plead for mercy. The priests make up the only story they can come up with so they don’t have to mention anything about the angel. The soldiers do what they are told hoping this will all pass without them being killed.

The women came expecting to find the stone rolled up to a tomb with a body in it, not a Roman guard standing watch. But the stone was rolled away, the tomb was empty, and the Roman guard was nowhere in sight. Matthew makes their awareness of the location explicitly clear so as to prove they knew where to go. He makes it explicitly clear that the angel rolled the stone away, not the soldiers or anyone else including the women. He makes it explicitly clear that the whole experience was so terrifying that seasoned Roman soldiers passed out, as would have happened to the women if they had been there.

In response to #3. I am really sorry, but this question as stated doesn’t make sense. Could you rephrase it?

But now to answer Kesler’s primary question:
“Is there any reason to conjecture that the women didn’t see the angel roll away the stone?” The answer is “Yes.” for several good reasons found in the texts of the gospel accounts.
A. In none of the four accounts is it ever stated that the women saw the angel roll away the stone. In fact, the incident is only mentioned in Matthew. John specifically states there were two trips to the tomb. The stone was rolled away before they arrived the first time, and the angel appeared to them on the second trip to the grave.
B. If the women did not see the angel roll the stone away from the tomb, who did see it happen that it could be included in the gospel of Matthew? The soldiers. Any one of them, or several of them could have shared the truth later on when the gospel was written by Matthew.
C. There is no interaction between the soldiers and the women at all indicating their presence during the event. (added 2.1.12, I forgot to include this in the original posting) The soldiers would certainly have posted sentries out away from the tomb to intercept anyone approaching, at least on the main access to the garden cemetery. Any posted guard would have easily detected the women, talking among themselves, carrying the spices, and foot lamps or torches to find their way in the dark as John specified it was, long before they reached the tomb area.
D. After the women leave the tomb the first time they declare that the body was taken, not risen as the angel announced. The angelic experience of Matt 28 takes place on their second visit to the tomb in agreement with the other accounts.

http://www.apologetics.org/SkepticsWelcomeStation/tabid/57/Default.aspx

I want to be courageous.

I am faced with many hindrances in my endeavor to make this blog into something that can really help and encourage my brothers and sisters in Christ. But I have come to love the hindrances because so many God stories come out of seeing Him toss them out of the way for me. The hardest thing I have to do is wait on the Lord.

The blog site itself is one of those God stories as a brother in Christ at church was moved to come up to me and provide the site free of charge after he heard me preach a couple of months ago. In less than 24 hours I was online with my head spinning!

Another is about how God is about to transform it into a website by providing great software. I want to tell that story now.

I had known from the beginning that I wanted a website, not just a blog, but I had no resources for either. Although I was grateful brother Wes made the blog happen, I began to think about what I would like to do for a website. But with no money for software it was all “clouds in my coffee” to quote Carly Simon. Which reminds me, I haven’t had my first cup yet…ah, now I do…

So last Monday I got an email from my supervisor at work letting me know I needed to plan on being in on a training meeting Wednesday afternoon for our new intranet site, our “in company” website that no one sees from the internet. She is the administrator, and I am her backup.

The two of us listened, exchanging glances and whispers about how we were going to have a lot to learn to run the site with the new software as the technician went on about how amazing and “easy to use” the new software would be. I don’t know how many times we rolled our eyes over that comment.

We got to the end of the presentation and she asked what the software would cost the company. “Oh, the good news is, it doesn’t cost you anything,” he said, “it’s free open source software.”

At first we were just surprised. Then I was floored as what I had heard sank in.

“Wait,” I interrupted, “You mean I can download this software myself and use it for free too?” I could hardly believe it when he said yes and gave me the website to get it from.

So now I have a running blog, the website name I wanted, hosting space on a server, a programmer/web savy guy who helps me, free top line software that I am being trained to use, a person who notices my typos and would like to help out, and a son-in-law who happens to be a top notch website designer AND an ancient Biblical languages major at one of the top seminaries in the nation.

And I still have not needed any money.

IS THIS A GOD-THING OR WHAT???

On top of all this I am involved in the most important Bible study I will ever take on in my lifetime. I am interacting with a group of people in Fayetteville who had the courage to say they were unimpressed by those who could not explain the most important part of the Bible. I am preaching the Gospel to a captive audience of atheists, agnostics, and freethinkers. That group keeps growing potentially reaching people all over the world. Christians from across the nation have contacted me about how encouraged they are by someone facing off with those who attack the Word of God. I am teaching inductive Bible study methods to those who do not know how to study it. I have made huge strides in pursuing the solution of something I am repeated told cannot be solved. I am planning a trip to Dallas Theological Seminary to do research and basically move into the library for four days. I am growing my faith and my understanding of not only the Word of God, but the God of the Word. I have seen Him answer one prayer after another. And the list goes on.

I have to confess I am nearly giddy with anticipation of whatever God might choose to do next.

Being a Christian hasn’t been this much fun since I was first saved!

Well, that isn’t the Samsonite I have in mind this morning. Ancient records often use the extension “ite” when referring to descendants, like Hivites, Perizzites, or Jebusites. The descendants often shared characteristic features or philosophies of their founding namesake ancestor.

Sometimes I wonder if we are so much like Samson we could be called Samsonites.

You remember the story. Samson was one of those chosen by God before his birth to be a mighty deliverer for Israel. Set apart as a Nazarite he was to live a distinct life that everyone recognized as separated to God for special service. There were many other Nazarites, but none demonstrated the supernatural strength that Samson displayed. His feats of strength were nothing less than astonishing.

But there was something else that Samson displayed that should disturb us – his lack of the fear of the Lord. And I wonder if we look like we descended from him.

From his youth Samson started to make poor choices. They were small at first, like touching the carcass of a dead lion, seemingly insignificant in comparison to what God was calling him to be as a deliverer of Israel. But an interesting thing happened after each small transgression-nothing. God did not chasten Samson following each time he acted like God wasn’t watching. But instead of recognizing his wrongdoing and repenting, he kept making decisions that got increasingly more improper. He interpreted God’s grace as a license to sin with impunity.

It got worse until finally Samson stepped over the line, he forsook his outward identity as a Nazarite. He knew from his past experience with Delilah that she would cut off his hair. But by this point he didn’t care. He didn’t believe it would make any difference. He was still God’s man on God’s mission. “I will get up and go out just like before,” he thought to himself. Nothing will be any different. But it was, and I wonder how many times he replayed his life decisions while he was pushing that grindstone.

Do we look like Samson? Could we be mistaken as his offspring? Have we lost the fear of the Lord because we misinterpret the grace of God? Are we spiritually blinded to our weakened condition because we chose not to look at our choices with God’s eyes?

So where does this concept come from? Is it just the product of some overactive imaginations? Not at all. All three of the synoptic gospels record Jesus’ teaching something relevant to this issue. It can be found in the parable of the sower and the seed as retold in Matthew 13, Mark 4, and Luke 8.

In verse 5, Luke recorded, “A farmer went out to sow his seed. As he was scattering the seed, some fell along the path; it was trampled on, and the birds of the air ate it up.” Then in 11-12 Jesus explained, “This is the meaning of the parable: The seed is the word of God. Those along the path are the ones who hear, and then the devil comes and takes away the word from their hearts, so that they may not believe and be saved.”

All three accounts agree that the work of removing the seed, identified as the word of God, was figuratively the result of the actions of the birds in the story. Then in the explanation of each this removal of the seed is specifically designated as the work of the evil one, Satan, or the devil, respectively. The names are used by biblical writers interchangeably for the same angelic being. We know that Satan is not omnipresent. So how can he be responsible for all this work in varying places amongst those who hear the gospel and fail to respond?

The most plausible explanation is that the feast of the birds represents the work of demons to prevent the effectiveness of the gospel in many who hear but fail to respond. The apostle Paul further explains that, “The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.” 2Co 4:4   The Greek word for “mind” is “noema.”

When the apostle was instructing Timothy on the problem of responding to resistance to the message of the gospel he stated, “And the Lord’s servant must not quarrel; instead, he must be kind to everyone, able to teach, not resentful.  Those who oppose him he must gently instruct, in the hope that God will grant them repentance leading them to a knowledge of the truth, and that they will come to their senses and escape from the trap of the devil, who has taken them captive to do his will.” 2Tim 2:24-26

The term in this passage rendered “repentance” is the Greek term “metanoia“, which means “a change of mind.” Further, he describes the circumstance of these victims as one of having been taken captive to do Satan’s will. Since the work of blinding minds is ascribed to Satan, and he works in turn through demons in the lives of individuals, granting repentance (in at least this application) is quite likely God intervening to reverse the impact of demons on the ability of people to hear, understand, and respond to the gospel. This fits perfectly with both of the situations Rockstad and I encountered. The effect in both cases was stark and immediate.

Does this mean then that every person who does not believe the presentation of the gospel has demonic interference? No, not at all. Does it mean that praying as Rockstad and I did will solve every thwarted evangelistic experience? The answer to that is “No” as well.

More in the next installment.

“I, the LORD, have called you in righteousness; I will take hold of your hand. I will keep you and will make you to be a covenant for the people and a light for the Gentiles, to open eyes that are blind, to free captives from prison and to release from the dungeon those who sit in darkness.” Isa 42:6-7

The concept that I applied to the situation of the disruptive camper was not something I came up with on my own. I had learned it from a former pastor, turned evangelist, the late Earnest Rockstad. Although he passed into the presence of the Lord some years ago, I had the opportunity to speak to him on the phone a couple of times when I was first learning about spiritual warfare more than three decades ago. His family maintains his ministry writings and recordings at www.faithandlifeministries.com.

Mr. Rockstad had been witnessing to a friend for some time with no success. The friend would listen cordially to the presentation of the gospel and at the end would look at Rockstad politely and say, “Now you don’t really believe that do you?” Rockstad’s sense of frustration grew over several repeats of the process, until one day when he decided to ask another evangelist to share with his friend. He reasoned, “Perhaps I am doing something wrong.”

As the fellow evangelist shared, Rockstad could see that the same thing was happening when a thought came to him that maybe a demon was interfering with the presentation of the gospel. Rockstad interupted the evangelist and asked his friend if he would mind if Rockstad prayed. The friend agreed and Rockstad did the same thing I did with the campers in binding the work of any demon that might be interfering in his friend’s comprehension of the gospel.

Before Rockstad could even finish praying the friend looked up and said, “You know, I think I need to be saved.” He immediately received Christ as his Savior, the same reaction as “Joey” that morning in the northwoods of Michigan after his counselor, Mark, shared the gospel with his campers.

But what I was to discover was that the principle applied to more than just the presentation of the gospel.

More to come in Part Five.