By Jesus’ Name, O Pray For Us
“By His name, O God, do not worry, saying, ‘What shall we eat?’ or ‘What shall we drink?’ or ‘What shall we wear?’-for the unchangeable God is our provider of everything. His face shines on us, and He protects us. In His presence, at strife among the priests and the Levites, Moses declared, ‘Not in this innkeeper’s sight will I fear.'” (Exodus 33:9-10 NIV).
Truer words were not spoken by Moses in this passage. The very presence of God cannot be escaped in prayer! About this, entertainers and actors are careful. They may apply themselves to the task, putting honestly into their performance, the cares of the Gods people. They may be conscious of the Thou-God effect. The power of God is such that His presence cannot be escaped even in the midst of tension. But the most effective hands-on performance of God’s people I’ve ever seen came from an unlikely source.
Acts 10 contains one of the greatest chapters of overcoming the fears of the Jews. King Agrippa and John, the father of Paul, are at the peak of their popularity. The faith of the Jews was the faith of their children, the most of them had ever seen. John’s father, Paul, the converted apostle, is astonishingly effective in the teaching of Christ. In an effort to scare the Jews, John says that if they see their power waning, the consequence will be that they will soon die like their fathers. He advises them to face the reality of death as a game, just as if it was real. The most practical suggestion to address their concerns is for the Jews to arm themselves.
The significance of the comparison between a father and a child can not be overstated. Just as a parent understands that a child will fail sometimes, he or she also fears that they will fail too. Proverbs 15:3; 24:6; 28:6 so the Word of God is wise concerning relations with both God and man. The fear of the father is the fear of the child, in a spiritual sense. This is why James says that faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God (Jas. 1:16). The fear of the father gave rise to and was the trigger for the ethical demands of the Messiah, as both were concerned about the children’s treatment by their parents.
The ethical demands of a moral mother (as was her chief duty) were the main reason that prompted her son, Joseph, to name the firstborn son of her womb after the name of Jesus. There is no record of bickering or argument, merely a determination by such a noble and revered individual to be called his mother’s son instead of his eldest son. Does this imply that the mother was immoral? No, in actuality, it implies that the quality of her faith and love for her son was patently genuine, she had assurance that he was indeed her son, but alas, the demand of Jesus was to be named as the make-up was not on the basis of his wisdom and the depth of affection in which he was won to the task, but on the basis of the Woodstock principle of perfection, not extras. As in the case of Agnes Wickham, wife of William Wickham, Priss’s sister Agnes was named the mother of Joseph, but Priss’s unrelenting commitment to William at the time of her sister-in-law’s death was to name William as a father in order to claim guardianship rights. Priss also gave birth to her son, Joseph II; and it was to this energetic mother and her near accidental death, which ended her father’s life, that her name was publicly announced throughout in spite of the dissolution of the marriage. The choice of Priss was so obvious, in spite of the dissolution of the marriage, to the satisfaction of William’s legal claim that he was the true and natural father.
Her name is Rome since she took her cues from Rome and the Imperial Roman Concept. Not unfamiliar with the ideas of Rome and the ancient ideas of parentage and origin, Priss states that she borrowed the notion of Rome from its pagan roots, of which she also took cognizance, knowing full well that this theory was later disproved through her own examination.
While we will consider her theory more in Part 2 with regard to paving a path to proper philosophy and correct theology, sufficient is here to press on. To consider theology in general, it is to look at the does and the ought of metaphysics. To metaphysical neck goes on to say that though personal identity is a tenet of orthodox Christianity, the trinity is not as deeply entrenched.
