SuperLutheran

I took no offense (I'm firmly a paleocon anyway). But I agree with you at the end of the day, there's an irreconcilable difference between the higher values of Christianity and the brutal - and paradoxically fanciful - practicality of a lot of hardliners.

Shadowman311 here, bridging the gap between Catholicism and Lutheranism more than every last ecumenical meeting between Rome and the LWF. Who knew it'd be this easy?

1 Then Pharisees and scribes came to Jesus from Jerusalem and said, 2 “Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat.” 3 He answered them, “And why do you break the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition? 4 For God commanded, ‘Honor your father and your mother,’ and, ‘Whoever reviles father or mother must surely die.’ 5 But you say, ‘If anyone tells his father or his mother, “What you would have gained from me is given to God,” 6 he need not honor his father.’ So for the sake of your tradition you have made void the word of God. 7 You hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy of you, when he said:
8 “‘This people honors me with their lips,
but their heart is far from me;
9 in vain do they worship me,
teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’”
-Matthew 15:1-9

Interacting with Catholic apologists online, one angle they'll occasionally take in our conversations is attacking the doctrine of Sola Scriptura. We Lutherans hold that the Word of God is the sole infallible source of doctrine and morals: my Catholic friends say it must be Scripture plus tradition. By "tradition" they mean the councils of the Church, the pronouncements of the Pope and the teaching magisterium, and the writings of various Church Fathers.

Over the course of this conversation, occasionally someone will claim that the Bible does not teach Sola Scriptura. But I would say that all of Scripture is saturated with it the same way the doctrine of the Trinity is taught everywhere as well. There may not be a verse that says "the Word of God is the sole infallible source of doctrine and morals" as stated in the Lutheran Confessions, but time and time again the explicit Word is held up as having authority over men.

Our reading this morning is one such instance. The pharisees had their traditions and they constituted a magisterium. That "tradition of the elders" demands that people wash their hands when they eat, but Christ and the Apostles freely ignore such a command. There is no Biblical commandment to wash one's hands when they eat, so why bind one's conscience to it?

When the Pharisees and scribes ask about this, they are sent from Jerusalem: the pharisaic magisterium, the Sanhedrin, wants answers. Jesus replies that their tradition itself violates the Word of God, so it is not legitimate. The Pharisees abdicated their spiritual authority by contradicting the clear Word, allowing men to refuse honoring their fathers, therefore their silly hand washing tradition is null.

The rule established here is quite clear. If violating the Scriptures means losing the authority one might have had, then the Scriptures themselves are the superior authority. Men will have traditions as a natural outcome of religion itself, but these traditions must be judged by what the inspired Word says.

Our Catholic interlocutor might reply that Christ later tells people "The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses' seat, so do and observe whatever they tell you, but not the works they do" (Matthew 23:2-3). Ostensibly this would mean that despite the Pharisees' sins and false teachings, the dynamic of tradition was divinely instituted so the people had to obey. This would extend over the Roman magisterium as well. But the problem with that thinking is that Jesus and all of His disciples disobeyed the Pharisees' rules *all the time.* They ate without washing, ignored the talmudic Sabbath regulations, associated with Gentiles, and much more. So when Jesus tells the people to not observe "the works they do," this includes all the unbiblical things the Pharisees commanded. Scripture remains above this human tradition and authority.

We would be foolish to say that Christ holding Scripture above the traditions of men is only applicable to the Pharisees. Throughout the New Testament the same rule is applied to the sadducees, the judaizers, the proto-gnostics, the nicolaitans, and more. If someone violates the Word in their teachings, they have no authority until such time as they fix themselves.
Heck, St.Paul opposes St. Peter when the latter starts observing the traditions of men over what the Word taught (Galatians 2:11-14). And so the Word remains supreme in the faith.

22 Immediately he made the disciples get into the boat and go before him to the other side, while he dismissed the crowds. 23 And after he had dismissed the crowds, he went up on the mountain by himself to pray. When evening came, he was there alone, 24 but the boat by this time was a long way from the land, beaten by the waves, for the wind was against them.
-Matthew 14:22-24

We often forget the immediate context of the feeding of the five thousand. Jesus went alone to pray in the wilderness after hearing about John the Baptist's execution. The people followed Christ to where He was, and He showed compassion on them. He did not refuse them, did not say "I don't have time for this," and nor did He rebuke their neediness.

Once that crowd is healed, taught and fed though, *then* our Savior dismisses them. He even instructs the Apostles to go out by boat, perhaps to give them a moment to rest from their labors too. Then He goes right back to what He wanted to do in the first place: praying by Himself in sweet solitude.

Did Jesus know a storm would brew, terrifying the disciples? Absolutely, for He knows all things. But He knows that the disciples will survive: after all, He plans to come and deliver them. He does not fret as He goes out alone to pray.

Here Christ gives us a pattern by which we all ought to live. Yes, we must prioritize worship and service to neighbors. Yes, we must put the needs of others before ourselves. But this does not mean we neglect our own needs and desires. Christians are not buddhists: self interest and desire are things God designed in us, and we honor God when we don't ignore them. Christ could have gotten in the boat and prayed in the company of the Apostles. He could have prayed silently while hiking with the crowds back to their homes. It's not about prayer itself. Instead, He *wants* to be alone for solitude's sake, to be refreshed. Having taken care of others, now is the time to do what He *wants* to do. In our lives, we must imitate Christ in this manner - to be unselfish, but still remember to take care of the self that God made for us.

23 “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint and dill and cumin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness. These you ought to have done, without neglecting the others. 24 You blind guides, straining out a gnat and swallowing a camel!

25 “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you clean the outside of the cup and the plate, but inside they are full of greed and self-indulgence. 26 You blind Pharisee! First clean the inside of the cup and the plate, that the outside also may be clean.

27 “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs, which outwardly appear beautiful, but within are full of dead people's bones and all uncleanness. 28 So you also outwardly appear righteous to others, but within you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness.
-Matthew 23:23-28

Looking holy is not the same as being holy. For the jews, a man with a big phylactery publicly counting his seeds for tithing looked holy; for us today, it is standard pastoral or monastic nonsense. One "looks" holy with vestments, monastic habits, tassels, and the tranquil expression given by contemplative prayer and fasting. Extra points for having a scraggly beard and tired eyes - you know the bit. None of those things are commanded for us yet Christians all over the world are happy to emulate the Pharisees this way. People back then were no different from people today, obsessed with aesthetics but devoid of Godly substance.

But Jesus is having none of it. He wants you to be a Pietist. He wants us having a transformed character that truly seeks to BE good, not just look the part. Yes, we are justified - declared righteous - by faith alone. But once we are justified, it is the task of a Christian to seek that inner transformation that we may be better than we once were.

This is not done by fasting, mystical meditations or wearing funny clothes. It is done by heeding Christ's rebuke in this passage. One must seek justice, mercy and faithfulness. A Christian must expunge from himself all greed, self-indulgence, hypocrisy and lawlessness. He must regularly engage in those habits of charity, forgiveness, confession, and obedience to the Decalogue. Then the man's heart, clothed with the righteousness of Christ, is adorned and decorated with sanctification; these are far more worthy of our efforts than fancy robes or home prayer shrines. Ask the Holy Spirit for help embarking on this pilgrimage, and you will find yourself avoiding pharisaism (both in the ancient and modern varieties).

Catholic theology makes limbo a kind of refrigerator in hell

Jonathan Edwards, james white, Catholic theology regarding Limbo, and a whole host of other guys.

Pictured: us, getting along with each other for a day (for some homies it's really hard)

Connor Murphy, a successful fitness influencer, has passed away after having a drug-fueled psychotic episode. https://www.tmz.com/2026/07/08/connor-murphy-dead-afte Happiness can kill you if you don't have discipline or wisdom. Joy is a worthless thing if you do not have the Scriptures tempering its excesses and giving you a true appreciation for God's blessings. This man had everything that worldly people want: great health, lots of money, a handsome appearance, fame and adulation, and access to all kinds of pleasure. He also had emotional contentedness, claiming all sorts of "mindfulness" practices. He still went nuts doing drugs and died.

@Titanbreakerkun@poa.st That guy can say he fought a dust devil and lived to tell the tale. I'm kinda jealous ngl

LEVITICUS BIBLE STUDY STREAM TONIGHT!

Let's look at the death of Nadab an Abihu from a different angle, and dwell on how God stopped a vicious cycle from repeating.

Catch the stream here at 9pm EST:
https://t.me/VeryLutheran

So the new Special Olympics was a flop:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9NupUtBAnc

Despite all the chemicals they were injecting, only one (1) male-to-male transgender athlete broke a world record. This tells us that:
A. Previous world records were achieved by doping, or:
B. Doping doesn't actually do all that much for athletes.

Either way, remaining "unenhanced" (that is, being what God made you) remains undefeated as the best way to live.

Andrew Wilson whenever anyone says anything at all:

41 Now while the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them a question, 42 saying, “What do you think about the Christ? Whose son is he?” They said to him, “The son of David.” 43 He said to them, “How is it then that David, in the Spirit, calls him Lord, saying,
44 “‘The Lord said to my Lord,
“Sit at my right hand,
until I put your enemies under your feet”’?
45 If then David calls him Lord, how is he his son?” 46 And no one was able to answer him a word, nor from that day did anyone dare to ask him any more questions.
-Matthew 22:41-46

If anyone ever tells you that Jesus never claimed to be God, they are either lying or extremely ignorant.

Here Jesus quotes from Psalm 110:1. This particular song of David is rich with dense prophetic meaning, speaking of the Messiah as superior to the king of Israel in every way. Most noticeably, David makes it explicit that the Messiah is Divine. Looking a bit deeper at the two languages used to express this, the Psalm itself shows us that though there is one God, there are multiple Persons to the one God.

In the Hebrew, a more direct translation would be "YHWH said to my Adonai," While "Adonai" is in rare occasions used for human rulers, we know that David used it for a Divine figure because he was *king* of Israel - there were no humans above him. The only Adonai above him is YHWH, God Himself! So there is one God, but both these titles for God distinguish the persons: YHWH is God, speaking to Adonai who is God.

The Greek text of Psalm 110 is more direct, using the same word Kyrios: εἶπεν ὁ κύριος τῷ κυρίῳ μου, "Said the Lord to my Lord." In the Greek Old Testament, the proper name of God (יהוה, the four lettered Tetragrammaton) is often rendered as κύριος. The educated Pharisees who had access to the Hebrew rendering of Scripture would understand the advanced distinction; one deity, with two Persons of that deity interacting in the text. For everyone else hearing Jesus speak, used to the more common Greek rendering, they understood Him to point to the Psalm as saying "My God said to God." Jesus, explaining the text, clears away any belief the commoner might have had that God was just doing internal deliberation, as though He were thinking to Himself. He shows them that this is discussion between two Persons.

The Pharisees are silent that day, in part because they could not account for what the Psalm says about the Messiah. But the Psalm also prophesies the institution of a new priesthood, one which God prefers over the Levitical institution. From the fourth verse,
The Lord has sworn
    and will not change his mind,
“You are a priest forever
    after the order of Melchizedek.”

In other words, David writes that the Messiah is Divine. When He arrives He will be the head of a priesthood that precedes and is superior to the Aaronic order. As the Pharisees take stock of the Psalm in their minds, they don't just recognize Jesus claiming to be God; they also understand that He is prophesying the greatest religious upheaval in history, a replacement of the old with the new.

SUNDAY RESOURCES NOW UP!

For this week's homily, let's talk about the final public proclamations of David - and some bozo kings that sucked.
Audio: https://soundcloud.com/verylutheran/the-swan-songs-of-...
Video: https://youtu.be/aj3OzaLRb8g

And for the LEVITICUS BIBLE STUDY, let's talk about uncomfortable incest stuff, and more importantly about the Law itself.
Audio: https://soundcloud.com/verylutheran/leviticus-pt-20-th...
Video: https://youtu.be/jlU9EF7F6tc

PDF manuscripts can be found here:
https://verylutheran.biz/resources

Support the VLP! If you can't, please let someone know about us, it helps to spread the word!
https://verylutheran.gumroad.com/
https://verylutheran.biz/contact

God bless your weekend everyone!

34 And when they had crossed over, they came to land at Gennesaret. 35 And when the men of that place recognized him, they sent around to all that region and brought to him all who were sick 36 and implored him that they might only touch the fringe of his garment. And as many as touched it were made well.
-Matthew 14:34-36

From pagan poets like Homer to modern writers like Mark Twain, every society has had something like that old saying: "the clothes make the man." This is to say, our estimation of ourselves is made by appearances. Kings want people to think they are regal, priests want people to think of them as holy, soldiers want to look manly, etc. So all of these wear clothing intended to convince people that their self identification is correct. Kings wear crowns and robes, priests wear cassocks, soldiers wear fatigues, and everyone else dresses "appropriately" for how they want to be seen.

This is not the case when it comes to our Savior. The only reason people knew who he was in this passage is because Gennesaret is a part of Capernaum. He was known to go through that area frequently enough that people would recognize His face. Otherwise, our humble Carpenter King would have blended in with the crowd. He did not wear dazzling clothing, nor did He glow with some cinematic aura. But His deeds spoke for themselves, and His reputation as the Healer and Teacher was well-earned.

In the case of Christ, the Man makes the clothes. He does not need to convince you or I that He is the Messiah by wearing expensive cloth or jewelry. To the contrary, His authenticity is so powerful that what He was wearing didn't matter. The crowds at Gennesaret heard that a humble woman touched the hem of His robe and was healed (Matthew 9:20-22), and in faith they decided to do the same. It worked and they were healed - not because of some magical property of the robe, but because Jesus is who He says He is, and His compassion extends far beyond what we could imagine.

Believers today benefit from something similar but far more precious than just touching a robe to be healed from the flu. Today, we receive Christ's Body and Blood at the Eucharist, mysteriously clothed with bread and wine. By taking, eating and drinking we receive the more important healing, namely the forgiveness of our sins and the strengthening of our faith. When we go to the altar this Sunday, let us receive the Sacrament with the same faith and rejoicing as the men of Gennesaret. For whether it is by robe or bread, we know that with Christ there is perfect healing and life for all that trust Him.

@KingOfWhiteAmerica@poa.st I could have sworn you weren't a day over 30 🙂‍↕️

Andrew Wilson when nobody's saying anything:

@chud@nicecrew.digital @BowsacNoodle@poa.st @branman65@poa.st Adding Jolt cola for intuitu fidei

The latest in the Church Fathers series is now up!
Sometimes a heretic asks a simple question that requires a complex answer. Other times they ask a complex question with a single answer. Let's listen to Irenaeus tackle both kinds of questions here.

https://soundcloud.com/verylutheran/reading-the-church...

Never underestimate the power of autistic theologians to ruin something.

The latest in the Church Fathers series is now up!
Have you ever noticed how the ecumenical councils and the Church Fathers tend to freak out over anything that could threaten the Incarnation? Ever wonder why these guys took the Virgin Birth so seriously? Well it seems Irenaeus is the first to explain it, and he gives us some pretty solid reasons to hold it as a chief doctrine.

https://soundcloud.com/verylutheran/reading-the-church...

The latest in the Evaluating Gnosticism series is now up!
Occasionally you'll hear the term "Archon" bandied about in gnostic circles. But what exactly is an "archon?" Why did the early gnostics talk about them in hushed tones, as though they were an immanent problem in their community? Let's find out:

https://soundcloud.com/verylutheran/evaluating-gnostic...

@grips@cawfee.club Did the dream version of me at least post cool quotes from Luther in the dream roast?

16 “Woe to you, blind guides, who say, ‘If anyone swears by the temple, it is nothing, but if anyone swears by the gold of the temple, he is bound by his oath.’ 17 You blind fools! For which is greater, the gold or the temple that has made the gold sacred? 18 And you say, ‘If anyone swears by the altar, it is nothing, but if anyone swears by the gift that is on the altar, he is bound by his oath.’ 19 You blind men! For which is greater, the gift or the altar that makes the gift sacred? 20 So whoever swears by the altar swears by it and by everything on it. 21 And whoever swears by the temple swears by it and by him who dwells in it. 22 And whoever swears by heaven swears by the throne of God and by him who sits upon it.
-Matthew 23:16-22

Jesus said earlier in this Gospel that a Christian's word should be trustworthy: his yes means yes and his no means no, and no one can accuse him of falsehoods (Matthew 5:33-37, James 5:12). This is in condemnation of the odd sort of jewish oaths, where they would swear by important objects rather than by God's Name. It is not that He is condemning the things we would call oaths today - promises, contracts, the pledge of allegiance, wedding vows, or even the oaths included in the Law of Moses. He is banning the unserious swearing that His kinsmen started to do according to the teachings of the Pharisees.

Here He gives examples of why pharisaic oaths are so injurious. "If anyone swears by the temple, it is nothing, but if anyone swears by the gold of the temple, he is bound by his oath." Why wouldn't both of these oaths be binding? If a man gives his word to something, it shouldn't matter what he swears on - it should matter that he made a promise and must keep it! But the Pharisees wanted escape clauses, loopholes, and ways to lie without sin.

It is no accident that Jesus calls them blind guides. If a man will not be a champion for truth, then whatever he says is untrustworthy. The Pharisees are blind because they cannot be trusted nor trust one another, and yet teach people the very things that would make everyone untrustworthy. If they can make up rules that negate their promises, who's to say they haven't introduced other rules to permit lies in other matters? How can they even trust themselves?

If being extreme-right means accepting abortion, I don't want to be extreme-right. Sorry fam, killing kids is a dealbreaker for me🤷‍♂️

1 Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples, 2 “The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses' seat, 3 so do and observe whatever they tell you, but not the works they do. For they preach, but do not practice.
-Matthew 23:1-3

When Jesus says that the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat, He was almost certainly being sarcastic. After all, He just spent the previous parables, those of the tenants and the wedding feast, portraying them as murderous traitors who had abdicated any authority they once held (Mt.21:33-46, 22:1-14).

They sat in Moses' seat as pretenders and usurpers, having replaced the Word of God with their "oral Torah." See, they denied the Commandments through legalistic exceptions. The Pharisees taught things like "Corban," wherein one stops honoring his parents by telling them his deeds were dedicated to God. They tried to commit murder by slandering Jesus as a sorcerer or tax rebel, caring nothing about the Eighth Commandment - or for that matter the Fifth! And how would they excuse it, but by claiming that they were just speculating in public or just asking questions. Such exceptions were to be found for nearly every Mosaic commandment...but none were permitted for their traditions. In the first century, you could get away with theft or adultery or refusing to honor you parents, so long as you used pharisaic escape clauses; heaven help you though if you were caught healing a man on the Sabbath! To say that they were in Moses' seat then is an accusation, not a concession: they were there illegitimately.

So when Jesus says "do and observe whatever they tell you," this too is not meant as an earnest command. He did not personally do what they instructed people to do and nor did the Apostles and other disciples. Christ and His followers ate without washing, plucked grain on the Sabbath, healed on the Sabbath, and spent time with those declared untouchable by the Pharisees (tax collectors and sinners). Being without hypocrisy, our Savior quickly adds "but not the works they do." In other words, if a Pharisee does it, do not do it: this includes their illegitimate commands, which they themselves observed. They preached righteousness, but practiced nothing but talmudic nonsense. Thus, He means that only insofar as a Pharisee says what Moses commanded, that is what the people should do.

So it is with our churches today. If a Pope, metropolitan, pastor, theologian, etc., tries teaching or commanding something that is not in Scripture, what authority does he have? Why should you feel any need to obey him? If a man in a dress demands that you kiss paintings, fast twice a week, pay indulgences, put in "seed money," or any other absurdity, is this not the same abdication of authority as the Pharisees?

28 And Peter answered him, “Lord, if it is you, command me to come to you on the water.” 29 He said, “Come.” So Peter got out of the boat and walked on the water and came to Jesus. 30 But when he saw the wind, he was afraid, and beginning to sink he cried out, “Lord, save me.” 31 Jesus immediately reached out his hand and took hold of him, saying to him, “O you of little faith, why did you doubt?” 32 And when they got into the boat, the wind ceased. 33 And those in the boat worshiped him, saying, “Truly you are the Son of God.”
-Matthew 14:28-33

Why did St. Peter tell Jesus to command him to get out of the boat? Most likely it is because the Apostle knew Jesus *very* well. Jesus had a habit in those days of challenging people to exercise their faith in God and His Word. We see Him tell people to believe when they ask Him to heal them or their family members. We see Him calling people to faith in the Son of God and the Kingdom of Heaven. He invited people to step out of the pharisaic rabbinical system and have faith that their freedom wasn't sin. If the figure on the water was Jesus and not some ghost, St. Peter reasoned, then that figure would *challenge* him for his own good.

Typically in sermons a minister will criticize St. Peter's lack of faith as he begins to sink, or comment on how he only began to sink once he took his eyes off of Christ. I find this to be off-base for a number of reasons. First, Christ says he is one of "little faith" - that's a start, not an absence. Second, and more importantly, would YOU have gotten out of the boat? Personally I struggle to say that I would. Eleven other men, Apostles hand selected by Christ Himself, did not get out of the boat or even dare to ask what St. Peter asked. To be of "little faith" is something a whole lot of people should aspire to, for only the Apostle with "little faith" got out of the boat. When St. Peter begins to sink and cries out "Lord save me," we ought to admire that this fisherman - who knew well that he could swim - still saw clearly that only Jesus could save. May we have the same outlook in the midst of our own, more embarrassing failures.

The Apostles all rightly worship Jesus when He enters the boat and calms the storm. Even Judas. But let us not suppose that this is meritorious of them. Any man with common sense can see that someone who walks on water, empowers others to do the same, and calms the weather with a single look is probably Divine. But eleven of the Apostles stayed in the boat. It's easy to have faith when you are being saved from extreme circumstances, not so easy when it's time to rely on that faith for guidance, refusing the bad and embracing good. Judas worshiped Christ here when the storm scared him: he did not worship Christ when he was staring at a handful of silver. St. Peter as well worshiped Christ after being delivered from drowning: later he denied Jesus three times.

Here, our Lord challenges us. Yes, we believe in Him when we need to be delivered from sin, the fear of death, and the devil. But do we believe in Him when it is time to stay loyal to Him above all? Do we truly fear God or do we fear men? Do we worship our Savior, or do we worship comfort and stability? May we look in faith to the Man who walked on water and rose from the dead, yes; even more so may we look to Him who challenges us to exercise that faith and stay loyal to Him no matter what.

The latest Sex&Marriage is now up!
I got an email from a man whose marriage is in crisis. He asked for help, and I figured it would be a good idea to talk about how men can work to save their marriages without becoming doormats, without becoming tyrants, and without losing their minds.

Audio: soundcloud.com/verylutheran/sex-marriage-how-to-save-y...
Video: https://youtu.be/j9hpiM8TNYk

LEVITICUS BIBLE STUDY STREAM TONIGHT!

Have you ever wondered why there are those weird dietary laws in the Old Testament? Why couldn't Israelites eat pork or shellfish, what was the point? Let's dive into the theology of it tonight!

Catch the stream here at 9pm EST:
https://t.me/VeryLutheran

I think these days you have to own General Dynamics stock before the warmonger club lets you join

An artist's illustration of the New Earth after the Resurrection. Note the dazzling lights, the attention to detail on the reflections in the water running through the New Eden - that is, Heavenly Jerusalem come to earth.

It's gonna be a lot like that and I am excited to catch this view irl while getting new tattoos (outdoors because there won't be any more risk of infection) and chatting with my fellow immortals.

And to the theology goofuses who'd say there's no tats in Heaven: shut up 😎

15 Now when it was evening, the disciples came to him and said, “This is a desolate place, and the day is now over; send the crowds away to go into the villages and buy food for themselves.” 16 But Jesus said, “They need not go away; you give them something to eat.” 17 They said to him, “We have only five loaves here and two fish.” 18 And he said, “Bring them here to me.” 19 Then he ordered the crowds to sit down on the grass, and taking the five loaves and the two fish, he looked up to heaven and said a blessing. Then he broke the loaves and gave them to the disciples, and the disciples gave them to the crowds. 20 And they all ate and were satisfied. And they took up twelve baskets full of the broken pieces left over. 21 And those who ate were about five thousand men, besides women and children.
-Matthew 14:15-21

When Jesus multiplies the fish and the loaves, in our modern eyes we just see a miracle. He demonstrates His compassion on the crowd by healing them, teaching them, and feeding them so that they do not have to make an arduous journey back home to eat. He shows His Divine power by defying the laws of physics (which He wrote anyway when creating the universe), making matter expand and increase out of nothing. He shows this for all to see, and get He also remembers that "the worker is worthy of his wages," so each Apostle gets a whole basket of food to reward their labors in distributing to the people.

This is all well and good, and modern believers do well to treasure these things in our heart. Christ is all powerful, He is all loving, and He rewards those who serve Him. In the first century this would have been the same message, but with a deeper connection to bolster their understanding. You see my friends, they were students of the Scriptures, being raised with lessons about the prophets of old. Elisha comes to mind.

42 A man came from Baal-shalishah, bringing the man of God bread of the firstfruits, twenty loaves of barley and fresh ears of grain in his sack. And Elisha said, “Give to the men, that they may eat.” 43 But his servant said, “How can I set this before a hundred men?” So he repeated, “Give them to the men, that they may eat, for thus says the Lord, ‘They shall eat and have some left.’” 44 So he set it before them. And they ate and had some left, according to the word of the Lord.
-2 Kings 4:42-44

Elisha takes twenty loaves of bread, enough food for twenty men, and by the power of God he multiplies it fivefold and then some. Sure every man could have had a fifth of a loaf, but that would be nothing more than a snack: they needed a *meal.* And so they are satisfied.

When Christ feeds the five thousand, He does so with less materials than Elisha had. The crowd of people, all of whom assuredly knew of Elisha, would rightly be astounded. Add in the women and children and you get ten thousand people fed, making for an estimated ten thousand meals; Jesus fed one hundred times as many people as Elisha did, using less materials and having far more left over.

After the Nativity, the holy family fled to and from Egypt, fulfilling and redeeming the Exodus. When He fasts for forty days in the desert, Jesus fulfills and redeems the Israelite wilderness years. When Christ gave the Sermon on the Mount, He was fulfilling and redeeming the giving of the Law at Sinai. Here, He fulfills and redeems the ministries of the Old Testament prophets. This recapitulation of all the Scriptures is a key feature of Christ's life, one which signals to the reader that all of the histories point to Him. It is not just the prophecies which told people who Jesus is, but the events themselves show that the whole Old Testament is about Him through typological fulfillment.

The latest in the Evaluating Gnosticism series is now up!
Occasionally you'll hear someone say that gnosticism is just Christianity plus Platonism, a kind of syncretistic mix between the two. While on the whole that's not the case, when it comes to valentinian gnosticism it's absolutely true. But valentinianism is also a big ugly mess, so let's laugh at the guy we're reading from:
https://soundcloud.com/verylutheran/evaluating-gnostic...

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/celebrity/articles...

29 At the end of twelve months he was walking on the roof of the royal palace of Babylon, 30 and the king answered and said, “Is not this great Babylon, which I have built by my mighty power as a royal residence and for the glory of my majesty?” 31 While the words were still in the king's mouth, there fell a voice from heaven, “O King Nebuchadnezzar, to you it is spoken: The kingdom has departed from you, 32 and you shall be driven from among men, and your dwelling shall be with the beasts of the field. And you shall be made to eat grass like an ox, and seven periods of time shall pass over you, until you know that the Most High rules the kingdom of men and gives it to whom he will.” 33 Immediately the word was fulfilled against Nebuchadnezzar. He was driven from among men and ate grass like an ox, and his body was wet with the dew of heaven till his hair grew as long as eagles' feathers, and his nails were like birds' claws.
-Daniel 4:29-33

I'm starting to think public crashouts are when God gives people the Nebuchadnezzar treatment. The response to seeing this sort of thing is to confess your sins, hold close to the Gospel and reform your life so you don't end up like mr. Hilton here.

We're gonna see this happen with a lot more celebrities, aren't we?

Come to think of it, I don't know anyone under 40 who has the same politics as he did ten years ago, and shockingly few whose beliefs held for even five. It's a horribly fickle idol isn't it?

All three of these goofballs are psychotically wrong.
-Person one: "babies might suffer so we should be able to murder them."

-Person two: "if you kill babies then my god will torture them for all eternity. He loves torturing babies forever, that glorifies him, but don't do it or else this bad thing that's good will happen. Abortion is bad but damning babies is good but also it's something you don't want happening."

-Person three (Keith): "I don't understand original sin but I'm mad at it something something Hegel Jung Heidegger."

It's OK to be generally anti-war.
I don't support either side in the Iran war, I don't support either side between Russia and Ukraine, etc. None of these are just wars and it'd be best if they all just stopped. All these deaths are needless and stupid.

Believe it or not, you can want peace most of the time and still not be a pacifist.

Andrew Wilson at Church (he appreciates the incense)

NEW SPIRITUAL WARFARE POST NOW UP - and it's the last in this miniseries.
We've identified the devil and his angels, talked about the first steps in mounting a defense, discussed how to detect their activity, and went over how one gets rid of evil spirits. We also brought up the Lutheran Reformers' perspective on it. Now let's go over putting on the whole armor of God.

Audio: https://soundcloud.com/verylutheran/lutheran-warfare-7...
Video: https://youtu.be/KBepXqOK-Hc

Support the VLP!
https://verylutheran.gumroad.com/

The latest in the Church Fathers series is now up!
The marcionite says "lol u no sacrifice therefore u no worship same God."
Irenaeus replies "oh, but we DO make sacrifices. Let's talk about how that was prophesied."

https://soundcloud.com/verylutheran/reading-the-church...

That would explain his physique

SUNDAY RESOURCES NOW UP!

For this week's homily, let's do some decoding for some of the obtuse language in 1 John 4:
Audio: https://soundcloud.com/verylutheran/full-assurance-7ju...
Video: https://youtu.be/vf7Y-Fy6yKE

And for the LEVITICUS BIBLE STUDY, let's talk about the death of Nadab and Abihu, and the oddly comforting message that comes after that;
Audio: https://soundcloud.com/verylutheran/leviticus-pt-12-st...
Video: https://youtu.be/pje47tdOZqk

PDF manuscripts can be found here:
https://verylutheran.biz/resources

Support the VLP! If you can't, please let someone know about us, it helps to spread the word!
https://verylutheran.gumroad.com/
https://verylutheran.biz/contact

God bless your weekend everyone!

Dude martial arts used to be so much cooler
https://youtu.be/tDKR6XlOPqo

We need to go BACK

34 But when the Pharisees heard that he had silenced the Sadducees, they gathered together. 35 And one of them, a lawyer, asked him a question to test him. 36 “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?” 37 And he said to him, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. 38 This is the great and first commandment. 39 And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. 40 On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets."
-Matthew 22:34-40

After so many attempts at destroying His reputation or having Him killed through slander, and after being thoroughly defeated by our Lord every time, it was inevitable that some Pharisees would start to turn to Him. Only a fool would fail to see His wisdom and how endlessly He is vindicated. So it was that this pharisaic lawyer comes to Jesus and asks Him which is the greatest Commandment.

It is a straightforward and basic question, so it lacks the venom of the Pharisees' previous attacks. This man is not trying to accuse Jesus or harm Him, but rather wants to clear the air. Is this Jesus a heretic? Are His teachings nearly as wild as the rabbis are saying? "Well then," the lawyer must have reasoned, "if He is a false teacher then He won't even get the basics right."

Our Savior is no false teacher, for He is the truth Himself (John 14:6). Of course He gets this question right, for it is the bedrock of the Old Testament and its Law - which Christ Himself gave at Sinai, for He is the very God who led the people out of Egypt (Jude 1:5). No one knows the Law better than He does. For this reason He gives both the first and second greatest Commandments, while adding further that all of the Law and Prophets rest on them.

It is a simple yet deep teaching. There is one God, and since He is the only God then He deserves all of your love and devotion. How does one love God? Chiefly by loving one's neighbors, whom God put in your life. From this all of our life and morality flows, with the Ten Commandments being the crucial commentary on what loving God and neighbor look like in practice. Meanwhile all the prophets demonstrate right and wrong in history, showing us the triumphs and failures of men regarding these two great laws. Jesus didn't just answer the lawyer here, He gave the man a proper hermeneutic method for understanding all of Holy Writ up until that point. Chances are the man converted shortly after the encounter, leading to even further distress among his compatriots.