Dearest 'MOM... hey girl!... amen... and amen.
Dearest Teejah... since most answered the 'secular' or institutional questions you posed, may I respond to the biblical... or 'spiritual'... ones, along with my girl, 'MOM? Thank you... and may you have peace!
Jehovah sent his Number One Son to the earth... the only-begotten. This superbly benevolent soul lived and died a perfectly sinless life. Why did twenty or more years go by before the Father 'inspired' men to write their biographies... two of whom didn't even know The Man personally? If that had been MY son, they'd of started to write a whole lot sooner... but that's me.
The only 'inspired' writing, that is, 'scripture'... is that which was DIRECTED by my Father, through his Son... to be written... and that is the Revelation given to John. That one in fact SAYS John was told to write it. None of the others do; thus, they are the same as what I am permitted to share with you all here. Inspired, yes, to some degree, some to a GREAT degree, but not 'scripture', in the sense it was not stated as 'write it down' in order for it to be PRESERVED as 'scripture'.
Revelation 1:19
In addition to John, all of the major prophets, the Psalmists, and Moses, were told to write things down... many for another 'time'... the physical events upon Israel and, primarly, the spiritual events. These, then, are the 'scriptures'. Everything else is, as 'MOM brought out, letters, admonitions, histories, chronologies, exhortions, testimonies, etc. I endeavor to write and share that which I receive under 'inspiration', and to state such inspiration by giving the glory to my Father and my Lord. I have been directed, however, and have admonished those that read what I share NOT to preserve it; NOT to make 'books' out of them, for four reasons:
1. So that no one bastardizes them and teach falsehood;
2. So that no one follows ME (which is a danger of the flesh; sheep WANT/NEED to be 'led');
3. So that no one RELIES on what is 'written', but instead;
4. So that all who 'hear' go directly TO my Lord, for he is our 'leader' and thus the One whom I always attempt to point the sheep to.
As 'MOM pointed out, there is the danger of one speaking of their own 'initiative'; I have tried to the best of my ability to point out when that is, so that no reproach is brought on my Father, my Lord, or the Spirit. I have, however, like Paul, run ahead on occasion. And, like Paul, I receive 'discipline'... as a son. Thus, I try to be VERY careful.
Hebrews 12:4-11
Do elder's kids really get away with more than other kids or does it just seem that way?
Hypocrites... are, after all... hypocrites.
Why did Paul, a former persecutor of Christ's brothers and a witness to some of the killings, write so much of the New Testament?
Many people have been erroneously taught... and thus, erroneously FEEL... that Paul's 'commission' was a 'reward'. While indeed, like ME, it is a PRIVILEGE... it is not a reward; it is payment for a DEBT.
Acts 9:16
You see, Paul was RESPONSIBLE for the lives of many of my brothers. He dragged them out of their homes, into court, and delivered them up to be put to death. Think Stephen. Paul had to 'pay' to some degree, FOR those lives. While, of course, he could not pay entirely... my Lord knew his HEART... and so in order for Paul to be a recipient of the 'free gift' of the promised holy spirit, he had to
'atone' to SOME degree... for his 'bloodguilt'. He could not 'bought' the free gift; there is no money or deed that can buy it. Paul had to SUFFER, because he had caused my brothers to suffer. Thus, Paul was eventually able to say that he was 'free, from the bloodguilt of all men.'
I have a similar debt, which I am not compelled to go into here; let's just say that among sinners, I am one of the 'foremost'. I do not do my Lord's will because I think I am SPECIAL; I do it because I know I am NOT... and wish to receive and remain in his love. He has forgiven me MUCH... and do I am indebted to him. I have not sinned to the 'degree' of Paul... but sin... is sin. He has 'released' ME... and so, I wish to do his will... and release all others that wish such releasing. That is my 'commission'.
And why are the writings of so many of the people who actually knew The Man considered apocrypha?
The word apocrypha means 'hidden'... or 'occult' (which also means 'hidden'). The early 'church' (Catholic), however, in trying to keep the laity in the DARK... determined what the people could know... and what they could not. It appears that those things that EXPOSE them as being false prophets and men of lawlessness, those things that bind THEM, that which teaches LOVE and FORGIVENSS, as well as that which they did not AGREE with... were deemed 'occult' or apopcrypha. Many's the 'religion', from the Catholic to the 'theocratic' (wink, wink), that has changed what is 'good' to bad, and said what is 'bad'... is good.
THAT's why WE... if we want to know the TRUTH... must go TO the Truth. For he is the ONLY One that can be trusted to TELL us the Truth. We have been warned, yes?... do NOT put your trust in earthling man!
John 14:6
Why did Peter, after all his years of personal association with The Man, come off looking like such a chump in his confrontation with Paul?
Actually, at different times, they both came off looking like chumps. Paul was right in exposing Peter's hypocrisy; however, the 12 were right in correcting Paul's pharisaical expelling of a man who'd slept with his father's wife. The Apostles, having walked WITH my Lord and thus learned directly from HIM... knew that the admonishment was NOT to judge and condemn, but to forgive and release.
Paul had to learn this and be corrected by the Apostles, and thus in the THIRD letter to the Corinthians, he changed his position, saying, "Anyone that YOU freely forgive, I too forgive." (Paul(?) had actually written 3; 1st and 2nd Corinthians are actually his 2nd and 3rd letters - 1 Corinthians 5:9; 2 Corinthians 13:1 - my 'understanding' is that the first letter was SO harsh, it was destroyed.)
But Paul and the Apostles did not get along, with the exception of Paul and Barnabas. Mark and Luke were not apostles at all; Mark was Peter's son... and Luke, a physician hired by the Roman ruler Theophilus to write an account of what was occuring between the Jews and the christians, so he would know what was going on and what to do (the territory was under Roman rule, and Paul had appealed to the Romans).
Paul actually started his 'commission' about three years after the death of my Lord in the flesh. When he met the apostles, there was no love lost between them. Barnabas, however, was commissioned to work with Paul (NOT through the apostles, but through certain prophets in Antioch - Barnabas had been sent by the spirit to Tarsus to find Paul and take him back to Antioch), and he obeyed. They, too, had disagreements.
It was about three years between the time Paul started, and the time he went up to Jerusalem with Barnabas over the circumcision 'issue'. It was then that he met the apostles. Peter had already tried to tell the older men that circumcision wasn't required, and they stopped teaching it for a minute, but when Paul and Barnabas arrived back in Antioch, after having gone on a three year journey, they found that the requirement was again being taught.
Paul and Barnabas spoke before the assembly and told them that there were people of nations ALL over who wanted to accept Christ as their Lord, and that they had received no instruction from the Spirit to tell such people to become circumcised. Yet, the people loved God and Christ. So, James, the brother of my Lord took the matter under consideration and it was JAMES and NOT the 'governing body' who made the decision on that matter, as well as blood, etc. The others, including the ENTIRE congregation (which meant men who were NOT among the 'older men') agreed with it and put it in writing to be sent out.
After that, it was about 14 years before Paul and the apostles were together again. The apostles went on to preach throughout Judea and Samaria, including Babylon. Paul, however, was an apostle to the NATIONS, and thus went outside that area to preach. And it is because of Paul's message to the NATIONS... that the Bible canon as we know it is what it is. For it was the NATIONS that put together the Bible, along with a few letters, the gospels and the Revelation. One of the most COMPREHENSIVE books of the Bible canon, however, is the letter to the Hebrews. It was not written by Paul, but by either Peter or John. I have heard both from my Lord so I am not sure which... or if it was actually both. But it was NOT Paul.
Does poppy grow on the Isle of Patmos?
I don't know; does it? It grows quite well here in sunny California. 'MOM's got 'em in her yard (you all should SEE her yard; the woman's a horticultural GENIUS).
Anyway, I will be going now, with my long-winded self. I hope your questions are answered.
Peace to you!
Your servant and a slave of Christ,
SJ
