Notes on Revelation from River Hills Church
Revelation Revealed
- 20 SIGNS of the LAST DAYS (revised: May, 2014)
- Spiritual Problems and Solutions from the 7 Churches of Revelation
- Rapture of the Church (A Reformed Theological Perspective)
- The Great Tribullation
- Daniel and Revlation
Notes on a 30-day fast
Day 1: Read Haggai 1-2. The fast has begun. I am waiting on the Lord. Fasting must be a great tool for God, if he calls us to do days and weeks of denial not only from food, but from the boundaries of economical and political systems, of human laws which demand food and of personal desires which starve and die when subjected under His command to fast.
Day 3: I am not hungry at all. I feel a bit lighter and can actually feel my body cleansing itself. My resting while sleeping is even better than before and my mind is much clearer and focused. Read Song of Solomon 5:8.
Day 4: Still not hungry at all. Now, I understand how Jesus fasted for 40 days and hungered only after that.
Day 5: Read Matthew 27:3 and realized that the ones who betray do come back repenting.
Day 6: Read Matthew 27:7 and noticed the word “strangers.” I am a little bit hungry.
Day 8: God spoke to me face to face.
Day 9: God confirmed His word from yesterday. It has been awhile since I have been able in such a way to feel the heavens open with every second spent in the presence of God. I am not hungry at all.
Day 11: It is quite true that the flesh dies during fasting. But the dying of the flesh goes much further than the weakness of the body. Along with the flesh, die the desires of the flesh, and all human desires, along with the desire to hurt others when we are hurt and even the desire to be ourselves, until only the desire to be like Him remains in us.
Day 15: Not hungry. Read Isaiah 58 about fasting:
1. Is. 58:2 These were people who wanted to find God, but did not want to be found by Him, for when a person is found by God all human plans must be left behind in order for the will of God to be done.
2. Is. 58:3 Require all your things from God, may mean that they fasted with the intention to receive something from God, while God sees fasting as a way to bring His plans to realization.
3. Is. 58:4 Not the many words from v. 3, but their fasting was heard before God.
4. Is. 58:5 Definition of humbleness in fasting, which is clearly not passive but it is an action. This action is clearly defined by God with 8 verbs directed outward producing results around the person (v. 6-7), and 4 verbs directed inward producing results within the person (v. 13).
5. Contrary to all human understating not the proper foods, but the absence of food brings health (v. 8) and strength (v. 11).
Day 17: Woke up extremely hungry. Read Psalm 25. God spoke to me through Isaiah 43:5; I now understand what it means that a man shall live not by bread alone, but with every word of the Lord.
Days 26: A series of radical changes and answers to prayer occurred in unexpected ways – unexpected because they were not natural ways that one may anticipate or understand naturally, but rather supernatural and miraculous. Walls which had been built for decades fell and situation which had been developed for generations and centuries came together in a divinely inspired plan which changed the past, the present and will change the future. These were accompanied by heavy anointing during prayer which cannot be described except as an open channel of communication with God.
Day 27: As the end of the fasting approaches, the body feels more and more hungry. Brief blackouts and lack of balance become more frequent. However, prayer time has advanced into an absolutely clear line of communication. While attempting to pray with a certain list of needs, the Spirit audibly and visibly shows places, people, situations and plans for the future which carry meaning so higher that the prepared list of prayer needs seems inadequate in the presence of God. His plan becomes real and its reality is so strong that every other thought, feeling and even physical and emotion sensations looses meaning as one realizes their triviality and temporality in comparison with the supremacy and allness of God.
Notes on Mark 10
1. Matthew updates the location mentioned by Mark. Mark says it that Jesus is in Judea beyond Jordan, while Matthew states He adds that he left Galilee in order to go to Judea.
2. The crowd follows Jesus in Matthew, while in Mark a new crowd gathers around Jesus. In Mark the people gather with Jesus.
3. Jesus’ ministry is also different. While Mark states that He taught the crowds, Matthew accents the healing ministry of Jesus at this particular occasion.
10:2 There is a difference between the questions which the Pharisees ask Jesus. Matthew adds “for any cause” to the words of Mark, giving a universal usage to the meaning and application of divorce.
10:3-9 No major differences in this passage. In v. 3 The Pharisees refer to Dt. 24:1, where Moses allowed them to giver a certificate of divorce. Mk. 12:6 is a quotation from Gen. 1:27; Mk.
12:7 from Gen. 2:24.
10:10 Mark puts it as a question by the disciples, while Matthew presents it as a saying of Jesus.
10:11 [exceptional clause] Mark refers to both man and the woman committing adultery in a case of divorce, while Matthew reduces to only the man. Mathew has an addition to the divorce case, which neither Luke nor Mark record. It refers to celibacy and has six facts about it:
1. Celibacy is better (Mt. 19:10).
2. Celibacy is not for everyone (Mt. 19:11).
3. Celibacy may be natural (Mt. 19:12).
4. Celibacy may be forced (Mt. 19:12).
5. Celibacy may be sacrificial (Mt. 19:12).
6. Celibacy may be commanded (Mt. 19:12).
II. Jesus Blesses the Little Children
This passage is recorded by all three of the Synoptic writers.
10:13 The original story in Mark is the story of the children being brought to be touched by Jesus. Matthew changes the verb to laying of hands. Obviously his perspective on the Doctrine of Laying of Hands was important at the time of his writing. Luke, however, revises the little children to infants, making the range of their age wider, which was probably significant for him.
10:14 In this verse Mark describes Jesus as being indignant. Both Matthew and Luke, who obviously did not like this characteristic as a part of Jesus’ personality, omit this word.
10:15 While Luke agrees with Mark on the receiving the kingdom of God, Matthew accents on the changing and becoming, which refers to the Doctrine of New Birth.
Matthew also focuses on a particular phrase he likes to use, namely the Kingdom of Heaven. He uses this phrase a replacement of the Kingdom of God used by both Mark and Luke, probably to escape any vain pronouncement of God’s name.
10:16 This verse is in a correlation with 10:13 where Mark uses the word touch. Here he changes to laying of hands is used by Matthew, but omitted by Luke. [blessed]
Mk. 10:17-31 The story of the rich young ruler has three major subdivisions:
1. Conversation between Jesus and the Ruler.
2. Saying of Jesus to the disciples on the entrance of rich men in the Kingdom.
3. Blessings for the disciples.
10:17 Only Mark mentions that Jesus was preparing for a journey. Matthew omits the adjective good with the word Teacher.
The three Synoptic writers have different description of the man. While for Mark he is only a certain man, for Luke he is a ruler, and for Matthew he is someone who he later calls a young man (Mt. 19:20, 22).
10:18 No difference between Mark and Luke, while Matthew omits good teacher as a natural continuation of the context created in the previous verse.
10:19 While both Mark and Luke suggest certain that the man had certain knowledge of the law, Matthew obviously has doubts about his proficiency in it?
Also, there are at least three differences between the lists of commandments from Ex. 20:12-16 and Dt. 5:16-20 that follow:
1. Luke changes the order of the first two, putting You shall not commit adultery before You shall not murder.
2. Mark lists You shall not defraud , which is not one of the Ten Commandments. Since this is an obvious error in the words of Jesus, both Matthew and Luke fix this in their lists.
3. Matthew adds You shall love your neighbor , which is not one of the Ten Commandments, but is a commandment in which Jesus incorporated some of them.
10:20-21 Mark and Luke agree on the phrase since my youth, while Matthew carefully omits it since it is in a contradiction with his following statements about the age of the man (Mt. 19:20, 22).
10:22 Among the three Synoptic Gospels, Mark has the most vivid and descriptive reaction of the man. According to Mark, he is shocked from the radical words of Jesus and grieving because he is not willing to completely follow them. Matthew omits the shock. Luke reduces the emotional condition of the man to being sad.
The financial status of the man is the reason for his lack of spiritual success. According to Mark he possesses many possessions. Matthew carries the same idea. Luke simply describes him as being rich.
10:23 The same contrast as in v. 15 appears. Matthew uses the phrase Kingdom of Heaven, while both Mark and Luke use the Kingdom of God.
10:24 Mark’s repetition of Jesus’s words is later omitted by both Matthew and Luke.
10:25-27 There is no major difference between the three Synoptic writers in this passage. It is interesting to notice that comparing to vv. 15, 23 even Matthew here uses the phrase the Kingdom of God in v. 25 in agreement with both Mark and Luke.
10:28 We left everything in Matthew and Mark is replaced by We left our homes by Luke.
10:29 Jesus\rquote saying is expanded by both Matthew and Luke. Matthew adds the enthronement procession of Jesus and the apostles over the 12 tribes of Israel. Luke adds to all of the above the Kingdom.
10:30-31 The list is pretty much the same, beside the changes in Luke, where he replaces fields with wife. Luke also replaces the phrase for my name’s sake with for the sake of the kingdom of God. He also changes the hundred fold from Mark and Matthew to very much more.
Mark repeats the list pattern similar to v.24, where he uses repetition to stress the importance of the passage. All three of the Gospel accounts contain the same eschatological promise.
Both Luke and Mark omit The Parable of the Laborers in the Vineyard. It exists only in the account of Matthew, in progressive correlation with the eschatological promise from the previous verse.
10:32 This is the journey Jesus was preparing for in Mk.10:17. As we earlier noticed both Matthew and Luke omitted this preparation. At his point Matthew mentions the direction of the Journey, while Luke remains silent.
10:33-34 The only difference is that Luke only mentions the prophecy about Jesus as a reference, while both Mark and Matthew records it. Only Matthew refers to the killing of Jesus as a crucifixion. Luke adds the misunderstanding of the disciples.
Mk. 10:35-45 10:35 Mark records that the brothers themselves came to ask Jesus, while Matthew changes the story to their mother coming to Jesus and asking. Luke does not record this particular story.
10:36-40 The dialog here remains unchanged; however, in both records Jesus’ answer is given to the brothers and not to the mother. Matthew omits the reference of Mark to Jesus’ baptism in vv. 38, 39.
10:41-44 At this point Luke suggests a dispute between the disciples, which is not in a parallel with Mark’s segment. The dispute is in most probability referring to the record on the Sons of Zabedee in the previous passage. The comparison between the Gentile civil-authority structure and the disciples remains the same through all three Synoptic accounts.
10:45 Another comparison between the disciples and the purpose of Jesus’ coming. It is omitted by Luke, who adds a rhetorical question as a conclusion to this passage.
10:46-52 10:46 This passage starts with two totally different chronological statements. Mark and Matthew claim that the time of the occurrence of the story was as they were leaving Jericho. In order to secure his previous insert of the story about Zachaeus Luke states that it was as they were approaching the city (Lk. 19:1-10). Furthermore, Mark names the blind man, while Luke does not record his name. Matthew records two blind men instead of one. There is agreement in all three accounts of the place where the miracle occurred, as well as the crowds that were present.
10:47-48 Mark and Matthew omit the question of the blind man/men who is going by. The prayer of the blind man/men and his/their dialog with the crowd remains fairly the same through the Gospel accounts.
10:49-50 Matthew and Luke reduce Jesus’ response to the prayer of the blind man/men recorded by Mark in details.
10:51 The dialog between the blind man/men and Jesus remains the same, beside that Mark uses My teacher, while Luke and Matthew write Lord.
10:52 Matthew records the compassion of Jesus; however, he omits Jesus’ words which have a reference to the faith of the blind man/men.
It seems like Mark omits one of the blind men in his early records. Matthew talks about both of them together. Luke places one of them at the entrance of Jericho, the other one in the city (Lk. 19:1-10). However, all three of the Synoptic writers agree on the immediate healing. Luke also adds the reaction of the crowd.
