The Name of Jesus

Jesus--Oh what a name!

There is none other who has such fame.

This is more than just a title we speak.

His name is the epitome of the word, unique.

Throughout history, no one so wonderful can we find.

He is truly one-of-a-kind.

Because of Him God’s beautiful love was revealed (Acts 2:38).

In His name people were even healed (Acts 3:6).

Above all, eternal life through Him came (1 John 2:25).

No wonder God gave Jesus the name above every name (Philippians 2:9).

Sadly, many in this life deny Him, living for the hear and now,

But whether it’s today or soon after, every knee to Jesus will bow (Philippians 2:10).

Peter and John said, “We cannot stop speaking” about His name (Acts 4:17-20).

Since there is no name like Jesus Christ, let’s also have the boldness to do the same.

SINGING WITH THE UNDERSTANDING: Ivory Palaces

Neal Pollard

A little less than a century ago, Henry Barraclough wrote one of the most unique, lyrically-rich songs in our songbook.  The musical arrangement is soothing in a way that matches the meaning of the words.  However, its poetry has caused some problems.

The first verse begins, "My Lord has garments so wondrous fine, and myrrh their texture fills; Its fragrance reached to this heart of mine, with joy my being thrills."  This and the following verses must be understood in light of the chorus, which essentially tells us that Jesus left the perfect splendor of heaven to come to this sinful earth because of His unmatched love.  With that background, we understand Barraclough's meaning to be figurative.  Jesus did not wear the clothes of a king while on earth.  Thus, the writer seems to speak of the qualities of Jesus' character, the power and influence of it.  Myrrh  is a perfume, a theme the writer uses through the various stanzas of the song.  So, this first verse speaks of the attractiveness of Jesus' character.

The second verse talks about the sorrow and pain He allowed Himself to endure.  While we think of aloe as a healing plant, the writer speaks of it in the sense of its bitter root (see the footnote at the bottom of the song in Praise For The Lord). While Jesus was a king, He was also the man of sorrows, acquainted with grief (cf. Isa. 53:3).

The third verse shifts the focus to Jesus as the Great Physician.  He's an attractive king, He's a suffering Savior, but He's also the able healer.  The word "cassia," as once again a footnote supplies, is a "medicinal herb."  The idea is that He rescues us from our sin problem.

The final verse refers to Jesus' second coming.  He will bring the faithful Christian to heaven.  Taken together, we see Jesus in the "garb" (clothes) of King, Savior, Physician, and Judge.  Driving it all is "only His great eternal love."  Understanding the underlying theme of the songwriter helps us to better worship and better appreciate the perfect Son of God. 

Not Your Typical Leader

 

I came across an author who made an interesting contrast between who Christ was as opposed to how others thought He would be.

“A Roman leader would have ridden in a chariot pulled by magnificent white stallions--Jesus entered the city on a donkey, and a borrowed one!

A political leader would have been surrounded by security guards who would have kept crowds from close physical contact to prevent any personal harm to him--Jesus was surrounded by his disciples representing many walks of life and rode into the midst of the people, almost at their height.

A military leader would have galloped along the road, passing the crowds with perhaps a wave of the hand or a nod of the head if there were any recognition at all--Jesus on a donkey moved slowly with the people, accompanying the people, as well as accompanied by the people.

A religious leader in traditional, appropriate priestly robes would have moved sedately through the crowds surrounded by an orderly contingency of other religious leaders who would've prevented anyone who was unclean from touching him--Jesus, dressed in his usual attire, moved humbly through the crowds, surrounded by his diverse band of disciples, not shrinking from the touch of anyone.”

(Ruth Daugherty, Issues Of Leadership Into The 21st Century, Viewpoint, Summer 1991, p. 2).

Jesus certainly was not the expected or stereotypical leader.  Jesus spent His entire ministry telling His disciples and convincing others that He was not going to be the earthly leader they wanted.  Jesus wasn’t the typical leader, and as a result, neither was His kingdom.  In John 18:38, Jesus said to Pilate, “My kingdom is not of this world.  If My kingdom were of this world, then My servants would be fighting so that I would not be handed over to the Jews; but as it is, My kingdom is not of this realm.”

Jesus certainly didn’t fill the expected mold of a king in most people’s eyes.  Despite all of this, Christ became a king that was far beyond all we could have asked for.  He is perfectly loving, forgiving, and kind.  He takes care of us and protects us from the internal enemy of sin.  He was a king who was willing to die for you and me.  He is preparing us a heavenly kingdom filled with supreme peace and happiness.  No, Jesus wasn’t the typical leader, and we should praise God that He wasn’t.  What a magnificent heavenly King we serve!

"The Historical Jesus"

Neal Pollard

When someone is given the title “Bible scholar,” they bear a lot of responsibility and should have a better grasp of what the Bible says before accepting such academic recognition.  Such is the case with Rachel Havrelock, interviewed by Jennifer Viegas of the Discovery Channel.  While she at times said things that seemed to honor scripture, other times reflected a bias that was either the result of her views or the views of those who interviewed her.

She contended that there is a misconception that the Bible is “meant to present a very conservative, traditional viewpoint.”  One wonders what she means by that.  What is a conservative, traditional viewpoint?  What would one call an alternative to this viewpoint?  She also said, according to the interview, that Jesus’ primary concern was spreading a social gospel.  See Luke 19:10, 1 Timothy 1:15, and a host of similarly worded passages.   Sure, the people wanted bread, but Jesus was more interested in giving them the bread of life!  She credits Paul, through a genius marketing ability, for causing early Christianity to spread so furiously.  One wonders what to do with the first twelve chapters of Acts.  Her last response is most telling, for what it says and what it implies.  Asked what Bible-related myths she thought most needed “busting,” Havrelock turned on that hanging curveball by saying, “It’s commonly thought today that the heterosexual family, with a mother, father and children, was the only family unit sanctioned by the church. The early Christians instead put more emphasis on community that allowed for gender equality and where everyone was equal in the eyes of God.”

Friends, we do not have the right to arbitrarily and subjectively reconstruct who we think or would like the historical Jesus to be.  It seems that history continuously finds man trying to remake God into his image (cf. Gen. 1:26-27).  While it seems that “experts” like Havrelock might fancy themselves as being unpredictable and untraditional, she seems to fall in line with so many of her peers and predecessors.  What would truly fit that description would be someone interviewed by a major media outlet having the courage to say what the Bible actually teaches without the dross of cultural pressure or personal, philosophical bias.  It is not likely that the Discovery Channels or MSNBCs of the world has great interest in finding such true scholars.  Those truly interested in learning more about the historical Jesus know just where to find Him.  He is in the book most scrutinized and criticized, but which shines truth more brightly every day!