Application GEMs to help us overcome every “dead-end” and rise in the newness of Life!
Let God Expressed Meekly/Mightily in you sparkle brightly with insights from Cobbey Crisler
as found in The Christian Science Quarterly Bible Lesson on
“Probation After Death”
for April 24, 2022
(Cobbey’s insights are shared with the blessing of Janet Crisler janetcrisler7@gmail.com)
by Warren Huff, CedarS Executive Director Emeritus, warren@cedarscamps.org
BE RECEPTIVE TO GOD’S UNFORGETTABLE, LIFE-SAVING POWER! ACCEPT THAT
“IN CHRIST SHALL ALL BE MADE ALIVE!” (I Cor. 15:22) Cobbey on Luke 7:11-16/cit. B10
[Cobbey Crisler on dead son of Nain widow raised!] “Were it not for Luke, we would not have had preserved for us one of three recorded times that Jesus raised someone from the dead (Luke 7:11-17). There is a significant fact about the accounts of raising the dead in the Bible. They are not all in the New Testament. The significance is that not all healings made a sufficient impact at the time to have impressed upon human memory the location where it occurred. This is why you will find statements mentioning when Jesus went to a particular village.
However, in every case of raising the dead, from the Old Testament all the way through the New Testament, the human mind was startled by seeing what it accepted as the impossible, occur. This is what is in common about Zarephath. Shunem, Nain, Capernaum. Bethany, Jerusalem, Joppa, and Troas. They didn’t forget where it happened. The details of the healing are particularly sharp.
In this case we have a city called Nain, probably a village as it is today. There is still an ancient cemetery outside the gate. There was a lonely widow at the head of this procession. Jesus, detecting thought again, saw her entire situation at one glance. He came to her and said, “Weep not” (Verse 13). He dealt with the heavy weight of grief on thought, touched the coffin (Verse 14), strictly forbidden under Jewish law, and then said, “Young man.”
Notice the radical nature of what Jesus said. The only one supposedly there who could not hear was the one Jesus addressed. He must have expected that man’s faculty of hearing to be normal. “Young man, I say unto thee, Arise.” He doesn’t help him either.
Dominion over death is part of that unqualified dominion God gave to man. As a matter of fact, dominion, as a word, as a concept, simply can’t be qualified. If it is, you no longer have dominion. (Verse 15,) “He that was dead sat up, and began to speak. He delivered him to his mother. “
Also, it might be interesting for you to recall that of the three times Jesus raised the dead, womanhood played a prominent role every time. It was Jesus’ compassion and awareness of the thought of this woman that lead him to raise her son. In the case of Lazarus (John 11:1-46), Mary and Martha urgently had requested Jesus to come. In the case of Jairus it was his twelve-year-old daughter (Luke 8:41, 42, 49-56).
These things don’t just happen. If Jesus is dealing with mentality, if he is requiring much out of the patient’s thought, then there must be a receptivity in order to get a result.
I think that we can derive a certain conclusion about the receptivity of womanhood, especially on the subject of resurrection. For if you move ahead a few chapters in your thought right now, you will recall there was no man anywhere near the tomb, including those who are reputed to have been Jesus’ closest disciples. But the women were there and receptive to resurrection.”
“Luke, the Researcher,” by B. Cobbey Crisler**
DEMONSTRATE THE HEALING EFFECTS OF “BEING OF ONE ACCORD!
Cobbey Crisler on Acts 5:12-16/cit. B12 (plus “postlude” verses 17-19)
[Cobbey:] Acts 5, verse 12—after the ; — gives us our familiar phrase of unity. It’s what? “They were all with one accord in Solomon’s porch.” (See below)
Acts 5:12 And by the hands of the apostles were many signs and wonders wrought among the people; and they were all with one accord in Solomon’s porch.
You see, they’re still connected with the temple. It’s still effectively Judaism really.
Acts 5:13 And of the rest durst no man join himself to them: but the people magnified them.
Acts 5:14 And believers were the more added to the Lord, multitudes both of men and women.)
Now, Acts 5, verse 15, shows that healing is occurring all over. As a matter of fact, the indiscriminate public sense of it was “that even Peter’s shadow passing on people seemed to heal people.” (See below)
It was that easy in those early days.
Acts 5:15 Insomuch that they brought forth the sick into the streets, and laid them on beds and couches, that at the least the shadow of Peter passing by might overshadow some of them.
“Many came out bringing sick people,” in verse 16. (See below)
Acts 5:16 There came also a multitude out of the cities round about unto Jerusalem, bringing sick folks, and them which were vexed with unclean spirits: and they were healed every one.
[“Postlude” beyond the Lesson:] “And this stirs up – it seems like healing stir up Ecclesiastism more than anything else,” because Ecclesiastism isn’t capable of getting to the level (apparently) which permits them to do such healing. (See below)
Acts 5:17 Then the high priest rose up, and all they that were with him, (which is the sect of the Sadducees,) and were filled with indignation,
And, in Acts 5, verse 18, “they high priest gets up and they throw the apostles in a common prison.” (See below)
Acts 5:18 And laid their hands on the apostles, and put them in the common prison.
Acts 5, verse 19, look at the power of collective prayer — “It can open prison doors. And they go back to the temple, and they start talking.” (See below, Acts 5:19)
Acts 5:19 But the angel of the Lord by night opened the prison doors, and brought them forth…
“After the Master, What? The Book of Acts,” by B. Cobbey Crisler**
Accept the GEM of healing as prophesy fulfilled: Love the fulfillment at “your Lystra” of a lame man leaping! Cobbey Crisler on cit. B14/Acts 14:2-27, Paul sees the Isa. 35:6 prophesy fulfilled
“Acts, Chapter 14 begins with [the prequel of] “the unbelieving Jews” in Acts 14, verse 2, “stirring up the Gentiles.” … And we find now that this is close on the heels of all the success the church makes – a step forward and then a counter step trying to resist and destroy what has been achieved. … So, the “stirring up occurs.” Acts 14, verse 4, shows you a “division in the city, an actual assault is made” in Acts 14, verse 5, “to stone them.”
“And they leave the city going to Lystra and Derbe, and to the surrounding region to preach the gospel.” (Acts 14:6, 7) …
“In the midst of all this persecution and conflict, “there is a man at Lystra, a cripple, and born that way. He never had walked.” (Acts 14:8, NOT in cit. B14)
Acts 14:9 The same heard Paul speak: who stedfastly beholding him, and perceiving that he had faith to be healed,
“Now you remember what we said when Jesus looked at someone? “And Peter beheld someone.” … Here it says, “Paul, steadfastly beholding him.” The author means much more that staring at him, doesn’t he? “Steadfastly beholding him, perceiving” – you see it’s an inner sight – “perceiving he had faith to be healed.” (Acts 14:9, NOT in cit. B14)
“Now, if he hadn’t [perceived that he had faith], the implication is what? They were many that needed healing there, but receptivity – the patient has to be part of it apparently. Just as Jesus did not physically lift people to their feet so much as he said, “Pick up your bed and walk…stretch forth your hand” and so forth here.
“Paul, perceiving that he had faith to be healed “Said with a loud voice, Stand upright on thy feet. And he leaped and walked. (Acts 14:10, NOT in cit. B14)
“You notice that the first thing this man does also is what? He leaps before he walks. He never had walked, and “the first thing he did was leap.” …
And Isaiah, if you will recall the prophecy, it indicated “the lame man shall leap as an hart.” (Isa 35:6) … It is a fulfillment of prophecy. Therefore, it’s God’s idea, you see, not man’s healing.”
[“Chapter 14 ends with the exciting sequel of Paul being worshipped and then being stoned and raised by prayer and returning to where he was stoned….] … That shows you the extremes of human nature. You’re a god one moment, and they stone you the next. And that’s exactly what happened to Jesus if you recall the triumphant entry into Jerusalem – and one week later the crucifixion. So, avoid triumphal entries if you can at all help it.
“So, “Paul is stoned.” (Acts 14:19) … Now, remember later in a list of the things that he gives that he’s been through; he says he was stoned once, and this is the only record that we have of it. “They drag him out insensible, looking as if he is dead.” (Acts 14:19, in cit. B14)
“The disciples, instead of running, stand around about him.” (Acts 14:20 in cit. B14) “Howbeit, as the disciples stood round about him, he rose up, and came into the city: and the next day he departed with Barnabas to Derbe.”
“Now, I don’t know whether anybody in this room would have had the courage Paul did. Even if we rose up from the dead, would you have run back into the city? Didn’t you get the idea that you weren’t wanted?
“He comes back into the city. He would not be thrown out. He then leaves with Barnabas the next day,” normally, “to Derbe to preach there.” (Acts 14:20 in cit. B14)
Acts 14:21 And when they had preached the gospel to that city, and had taught many, they returned again to Lystra, and to Iconium, and Antioch (NOT in cit. B20)
“And Acts 14, verse 22, the last three lines, he indicates that “we must through great tribulation enter into the kingdom of God.” (NOT in cit. B20)
… “But he’s establishing churches as he goes. And think of the influence of his example in stamping the example to follow Christ in that early church. So, as he creates churches as he goes along, he comes back through. He retraces his steps and returns to Antioch in Syria, not the Antioch of Pisidia. He’s back home again
Acts 14:26 And thence sailed to Antioch, from whence they had been recommended to the grace of God for the work which they fulfilled.
“If you want to know how the church responded to the results of this first mission; they hold a special corporate meeting and “rehearsed” in Acts 14, verse 27, “all that God had done with them, and how he had opened the door of faith unto the Gentiles.” Look at that news, “the door of faith has been opened to the Gentiles.” (not in cit. B14) …
“That says something about the corporate body, especially if the New Testament remark “that the church is the body of Christ is correct. You can’t divide that body. If you try, you’re trying to break the body of Christ in that sense. This was tried on the cross.
“And collectively man is at one under one God if the Biblical theme is accurate. And that must include the Gentiles; it must even include those we may count among our enemies. And Paul’s approach here is a pioneering one.”
“AFTER THE MASTER, WHAT?” by B. Cobbey Crisler**
Affirm for YOURSELF too Paul’s Answered Prayer (AP) History of RAISING THE DEAD!
What cannot God do! Cobbey Crisler on Acts 20:6 -12/cit. B17
[Cobbey:] “Chapter 20, Verse 6. They’re getting ready to sail. Paul separates from them. At Troas, “We abode seven days.” Paul, and maybe Luke, were there seven days.
[Verse 9.] You know how long-winded Paul could be. And I hope I’m not repeating his example here, and I don’t want to find any Eutychae here in the audience, because “Eutychus, fell into a deep sleep.” Anyone here feel like entering into that condition? I hope not because “Eutychus sank down and fell from the third loft.”
Verse 10. If that wasn’t enough of a problem, “Paul ran down and fell on him as well, but announces, “Don’t trouble yourselves, his life is in him.” This looks like it may not have been as instant resuscitation or healing. It could have involved broken bones and everything.
[Verse 11.] Paul goes back, continues talking, breaks bread, and eats.
Verse 12. “At dawn they bring the young man alive, and were not a little comforted.” The man was alive and healed, no broken bones, apparently. There is, again, a major healing that we see.”
“After the Master, What? The Book of Acts,” by B. Cobbey Crisler**
HERE’s a KEN COOPER POETIC MONOLOGUE HE WROTE about this HEALING, called “The Mother of Eutychus.”
Feel the moving words of a mother who has been listening to the words and inspiration of Paul, when she is suddenly challenged to put Paul’s words into practice when her son appears to have died from a fall…
START & STAY IN THE ABSOLUTE WITH AFFIRMATIONS & DENIALS as does John 1:1 (citation B19) The “Scientific Statement of Being” also follows this pattern on page 468 of Science & Health]
[Cobbey Crisler:] “In the beginning was the Word… without (the Word of God) “was not anything made that was made.”
“John 1:1. John starts off unlike any of the preceding gospels. “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”
He starts off, as a matter of fact, as only one other book of the Bible begins. Notice Genesis 1:1: “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. ” Do you think the early readers of his gospel would have recognized that? Do you think that was John’s intent? That it should be recognized? …
“John 1:1 starts his gospel off, “In the beginning was the Word.” The Greek is, en arche hin ho logos. Does arche look familiar to you? It is the root word in “archeology.” It’s an exciting word. It doesn’t just mean when things begin or when they have started in a human way, so much as, translated by some scholars, as “the first principle” of things.
“For instance, when Jerome, in about 400 A.D. translates the Greek Bible into Latin, here’s how he does those opening words. “In principio,” which, of course, is our root of our word “principle,” in principio. He could have used another Latin expression which is “ab initio, ” which would have meant at the initial phases of things, but instead he chooses a Latin word which has a dual meaning which could be “principle,” the first principle, the origin, the basis of things.
“If we choose that particular Greek meaning for the opening of both Genesis and John, then it gives it an entirely different connotation. If, in principle, God created the heaven and the earth, or in principle, was the word, it starts out like many mathematical or scientific textbooks which start out with the statement of principle. Everything else derives from it. ….
“Let me give you a partial history of the word. What automatically occurs to you as the meaning of logos? We take this word, “Word,” and identify it with logos. This is likely being written at some point during the 1st century A.D. Way back in the 6th century B.C., Heraclitus at Ephesus was attempting philosophically to explain continuity amid all the flux around him. He resorted to logos as the eternal principle of order in the universe, the kind of reliable, unchanging law and order. This is several centuries prior to John’s use of it. (Interestingly enough, people think that the Gospel of John may have been written there.)
“From that period, we can trace the word logos through many, many different concepts. Zeno (of Elea, c 490 – c 430 B.C.), a Greek philosopher used it in the connotation of right reason, of reality within the mind, pure thought. Which leads me to what Professor Dodd has said, “It is only in Greek that a term is available which means both thought and word, and that’s logos.” Only in Greek have you that term that can convey both thought and word. So, when you’re talking about logos, even from the standpoint of word, if we are not giving to it what really is behind it, we’re losing something of the message, aren’t we?
“Why does the additional concentration on thought add to the definition of word? When you go behind the word to the thought, you’re dealing with ideas, concepts, and the meaning. It is where all human languages finally give up their fragmentation and meet, and become one, in a Pentecostal day of infinite communication. The “word” is but an instrument which we must meet at the thought or at the meaning. Then, no barriers, especially language barriers, can stand between us and comprehension of one another, of the universe, its laws, and the source of those laws.
“Dodd continues: “In Origen’s commentary on the 4th gospel which is being written, again very early in the history of the Christian church. In reading Origen’s commentary, there are interpretations in there, in the Greek that he’s writing, which absolutely depend upon taking logos not only in the sense of word, but it alternates without warning with the other sense of rational principles. So, the continual indication of this word principle is something that is significant.”
“Do you know where we use logos in the English language? Biology, physiology. Logos is the one that has been used to define the sciences in the English language. This was the comprehension at least of the lexicographers who developed our own language of the Greek term. Look how it’s lasted even in our language. We use it all the time without realizing it, taking it for granted. Is there a scientific connotation, then, that “In the beginning,” “In the first principle of things,” there is a scientific unvarying, inalienable, order that’s ruling. And that it’s not only being uttered as an expression or word, but behind it is the immense thought that also must be based on the same principle. Notice in Verse 1of Chapter 1 that it all related with and to God.
“John 1:3 continues with a statement that is quite absolute, “All things were made by him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.” Is there any reservation for qualifications? “All things were made by him. That is [an] enormous commitment to make at the beginning of a book. The theology of this book is therefore committed right squarely on what principle if we’re now defining the theological principle on which the Bible is based? Not only oneness of God, but the fact He’s one, also means He’s all. “All things were made by Him.” Everything is created by Him. That also poses problems, because all we have to do is open our eyes and look around us. And what we see, we’d rather not think was created by God. But as of now, we’ve just started the book. So, let’s see what the style of the author is and his theological commitments. “All things were made by Him.”
“He doesn’t leave it there. The very next sentence adds, “Without him was not any thing made that was made.” Why is he saying that? Doesn’t “all things were made by Him” take care of the other part? What is the difference? What’s the distinction that he is implanting in his readers’ thought right at the beginning of the book? “All things were made by Him.” What would you call that? That kind of statement is an absolute, but is it also an affirmation. It’s a real solid plus. This is a plus of the theological view of John. “All things were made by Him.”
“What have we got now? Denial. Here is how we’re going to deal with the minus element. The minus element is without Him, “without him was not any thing made that was made.” Any hint of a minus existing after the all-things-were-made-byhim being declared, is removed, because it is the other side of the same coin.
“The plus, the minus, the affirmation, the denial is a mathematical approach. Dealing with the plus, dealing with the minus and ending up with one, not dualism. One, so there’s no doubt that the key to the gospel is monotheism. It challenges the reader’s thought to see if he’s there at that altitude before he continues any further in the gospel. It forces the reader to get to that height in order to remotely communicate with what’s in the gospel.”
“Book of John, A Walk with the Beloved Disciple,” by B. Cobbey Crisler**
