The Many...Part 2

One of the more serious issues that arise from, the current church practice of corporate gathering is the lack of true relationship in the body. It can safely be said that 99% of our relationships in the current system are social or artificial at best. They are based upon acquaintance rather than experience.

Scripture commands us to know those that labor amongst us. It speaks of having intimate knowledge of those that you are yoked with. It is not a passing relationship. In fact the word know used here comes from a word that means to stare at. It describes the looking at something to the point of discernment.

Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ. (Galatians 6:2 KJV)
We are commanded in Galatians to bear each other's burdens. In the current corporate system this does not occur because the relationships are not formed. There is not a condition of true yoking around each other's lives. And Paul tells us that if this does not occur, the Law of Christ will not be fulfilled.

Staring at the back of someone's head for 2 hours a week does not build the body, as some would have us believe.

There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death. (Proverbs 14:12 KJV)

There is natural human inclination to follow the many. This tendency relates back to our creation when God saw that it was not good for man to be alone and created woman to be his mate. The word used to describe the function of this mate is ‘eze’r and means to aid. It comes from a root that means to surround, to succor and indicates the concept of providing a protection by companionship. Solomon wrote of the need for companionship.

And something else futile I observe under the sun: a person is quite alone. No child, no brother and yet there is no end to his efforts; his eyes can never have
their fill of riches.

For whom, then, do I work so hard and grudge myself pleasure? This too is futile, a sorry business. Better two than one alone, since thus their work is really rewarding. If one should fall, the other helps him up; but what of the person with no one to help him up when he falls? Again: if two sleep together they keep warm, but how can an one keep warm alone? Where one: alone would be overcome, two put up resistance; and a threefold cord is not quickly broken.
(Ecclesiastes 4:7)

Solomon speaks of the value of companionship; how without it we have no one to toil with; no one to share the fruits of our labor with. It's like the old adage concerning money; what good is it if you don't spend it. In this case; if you don't have someone to share your life and labors with; what joy is there? There is an ease of effort when two join together and labor in common. Yes there can be personal satisfaction in completing a project by yourself, but to whom do you share the conquest with? He also speaks of the support and protection that can come from two yoking together. Getting out of the ditch by your own efforts can be tough! And who hasn't had the cold night when the blanket doesn't provide enough warmth? But in either case an additional body fits the bill.

Companionship, whether intimate or of the social nature, is vital to our existence. God said: It is not good for man to be alone and He is absolutely right. But the concept behind the many is that if everybody's doing it, it must be right. (Wrong! Ask my mother!) That way of think is the foundational belief that creates the status quo mentality; the existing state of affairs.

The status quo believes "it's been this way for five hundred years, so why fix it if it ain't broken". But the truth of the matter is that they refuse to examine their current religious position at all for fear of disturbing the status quo. Many know deep down that the system is broken. Due to the status quo, they refuse to even challenge the simplest of ­doctrinal positions because it can cause great ripples in the ponds (or cesspools) of religion.

An absolutely perfect example can be found in John's gospel. In chapter nine we have the story of the man that was born blind. This man had been at the temple daily and everyone knew that he had been blind his entire life, but then of course Jesus comes on the scene and messes with the status quo. (Praise God!)

And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man which was blind from his birth. And his disciples asked him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind? (John 9:1-2 KJV)

First, this man had probably been around the Temple most of his life. We can derive this from his parents' later reaction. They were afraid of being "kicked out" of the synagogue. So it would be safe to say that this man had a "religious relationship" with the Father. Because of his surroundings he had been "born again" blind. He was saved according to the rule of the day, but he couldn't see the truth in his relationship with God. He knew that he was lacking something in his walk, but because of hypocrisy and false doctrine he was legally blind.
"Blinded by Law"

Second, notice the mentality of the status quo; who did the sin! The common position of the day was if someone was born with a defect it was caused by some hidden sin in his or her lives and/or in their families. This guy had been born blind so honestly what sin could he have committed in the womb? His family must have done some unpardonable sin for this kid to have to bear the brunt of it. But lets look at this from a slightly different angle.

The phrase blind from birth in verse one does not have the same meaning as born blind in verse two! The word birth is the word 'genete' and speaks of the natural birth: the actual bringing of a human being into this realm. Whereas born in the next verse is the word 'gennao' and means to procreate of the father, and speaks of regeneration. He was born of the Father in regenerated birth; He was born again blind! That's why he was at the Temple daily!

And what was Jesus' response to the charge of generational sin?

Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him. (John 9:3 KJV)

Jesus himself tells us that God had His hand in this mans infirmity. That God had a purpose in him being born blind. Even today this is contrary to current church beliefs. "God wouldn't do that"! Well if Jesus said that it occurred so that the works of God could be manifest, God had His hand in the mix regardless of what the system may believe. (Period!)

What happens next? Jesus continues his challenge to the status quo and without even sharing the gospel message with this blind guy: he spits on the ground, mixes up some mud and smears it on his face without even a thought of asking this guy it if would be okay! Let alone he hadn't called the prayer tower or even received a confirming word from his local prophet or permission from his pastor!

And what does this religious rebel tell the now muddy-faced blind guy?

And said unto him, Go, wash in the pool of Siloam, (which is by interpretation, Sent.) He went his way therefore, and washed, and came seeing. (John 9:7 KJV)

The word 'wash' used here does not mean to take a bath per say, rather it specifically means to wash the hands, the feet or the face. Which of course after having human spit made into mud smeared on yours, you would want to do anyway! But why specifically wash these areas?

In Matthew 18, Jesus tells us that if your hand, foot or eye offends you (cause you to move into sin or apostasy) cut them off. He was not saying to chop off your hand and gouge out your eyes. What he was telling us was:

1) If what you are doing (hand) causes you to move into error (sin), stop doing it!

2) If the path or the way you are walking (foot) causes you to move into error (sin), change the way you walk!

3) If the way you are looking (eye) at things (specifically Gods Word) causes you to move into error (sin), change your perspective!

So what is he telling our blind buddy?

Do all of the above!

Stop what you're doing, change your mode of transportation and open your eyes!

How? Go to the pool of Siloam and wash.

The word pool is the word 'kolumbethra' and means a diving-place, but comes from a word that means to plunge into the water. Water is a prophetic type of the Spirit. And in this case Jesus is telling our friend that his first paradigm shift will be from the natural to the spiritual and that this movement is something that he must do himself. "Go" is the command. But what makes this water so unique is that it is at Siloam! The word 'Siloam' means sent. In fact, in order to guide us towards this end, the interpretation was actually placed in the scripture itself, but due to status quo mentality, no one bothered to ask why?

The word sent is the word 'apostello' and is the word that we get apostle from. So now armed with this insight, what could Jesus have been telling our blind brother?

What Jesus was telling our brother was, to go and get under an apostolic anointing and allow the washing of water by the Word to free him from his enslaving religious position. The pool of Siloam represents a place where apostolic liberty brings us into a deeper relationship with God. Jesus was telling this guy to go get some fresh, present truth, apostolic doctrine and be changed by it. The current system had failed him and left him begging for his daily bread? If the system or status quo had been accurate in the things of God, why then was one of the children of God begging for bread in the first place?

I have been young, and now am old; yet have I not seen the righteous forsaken, nor his seed begging bread. (Psalms 37:25 KJV)

This should not be so, but is quite common in the systematic or status quo church environs.

Does it not say in Ephesians "Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word"? (Eph 5:26-27)

So our BB (Blind Buddy!) does as Jesus commands and his eyes are opened. Not just his natural eyes, but also his spiritual eyes are opened to the truth. And what happens when truth is revealed?

And where does the confrontation come from? His next-door neighbors of course!

The neighbours therefore, and they which before had seen him that he was blind, said, Is not this he that sat and begged? {9} Some said, This is he: others said, He is like him: but he said, I am he. (John 9:8-9 KJV)


What's so amusing about this narrative is the confusion it released in the neighborhood. They had seen this guy fumbling and feeling his way around the block for many years and now he comes down the street in an upright and normal fashion and they struggle to recognize that it's him! It looks like him they say, but he's not blind anymore. As funny as it may seem, this is the consequence when truth is revealed and our eyes are opened.

Many will struggle with your newfound vision and will be confused by it because it is contrary to the status quo that has been their security. One of the pat responses to their confusion will be that "God is not the author of confusion" and this is true. Confusion is brought about by not being mentally clear in what one believes. We may be confused if we do not understand why we believe what we believe. When the time comes that accurate doctrine is released into our lives, the inaccurate positions that we have held so dear and that we stand upon now become confusing.

It is true that God is not the author of confusion, but if you base your foundation upon any one of the many man-made doctrines that exist today, you author the confusion! Not God. God, in His mercy, sends the accurate to replace the inaccurate and if you choose not to accept it, you will become confused and destroyed in your confusion. This is the second group in the Parable of the Sower, who when tribulation and persecution arise for the Words sake, they fall away. God sends the accurate doctrine to persecute the inaccurate doctrine that you believe. If you refuse to accept it, the tribulation is sent to force you to turn to the truth. But ultimately it's up to you to accept it or reject it.

So when the confusion comes to the neighborhood, what do the well-intentioned neighbors do?

To the church is the charge!

"We better bring this guy to the church. The Pastor will make sense of all this for us". And off they go. Let the inquisition begin!

Then again, the Pharisees also asked him how he had received his sight. He said unto them, He put clay upon mine eyes, and I washed, and do see. Therefore ,said some of the Pharisees, This man is not of God, because he keepeth not the sabbath day. Others said, How can a man that is a sinner do such miracles? And there was a division among them. (John 9:15-16 KJV)

Take note that as the accuracy moves into the religious realm the accusations begin. "He can't be from God because he doesn't fit into our box". "He doesn't even come to our church!" and of course the "sinner" guilt box is thrown into the mix. But the beauty of the conflict is the resulting confusion. So much so that the group divides.

The word division used here is the word 'schisma' and defines a split. It is the word we get schism from and a 'schism' is aformal division in or separation from a religious body. In other words, a denomination had just been birthed! Denomination comes from the root word 'denominator' and defines that which divides. Exposure to the truth will always have division as a by-product.

Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division: (Luke 12:51 KJV)

The word used for division here is not the same word as used in the preceding passage, but can have a similar connotation. In Luke 12 the word for division is 'diamerismos' and means to have disunion of opinion and conduct. This is not just a disagreement of opinions, but is an opinion that will cause us to fall out of union with each other, disunion. Jesus said, 'I have come to challenge the status quo with a different opinion that also has new rules of conduct and application and you will fall out of union with the current system if you choose to follow me.' (para)

And the "Quo" was being challenged by our blind buddy!

Their next offensive was to challenge the man personally by raising questions of his infirmity and calling his parents in on the carpet.

But the Jews did not believe concerning him, that he had been blind, and received his sight, until they called the parents of him that had received his sight. And
they asked them, saying, 'Is this your son, who ye say was born blind? How then doth he now see?' (John 9:18-19 KJV)

Notice that they challenge the parents right off the bat. "You say that he was born blind". In other words they were saying, "Why should we believe you that he was born blind". It was a statement of intimidation, which is still used today when

challenges to doctrinal positions arise. It should also be seen that this interrogation was not behind closed doors, it was in the presence of the congregation. Even the neighbors that brought BB to the church were present and confusion reigned! This act of intimidation was magnified by its public expression. The use of the multitudes/congregation applies peer pressure to an already tense situation. The pressure of the many is applied to the few.

In this demonstration of manipulation is the releasing of a spirit of fear. "If anyone stands and associates with this new move or revelation of God, we will separate them from amongst us. We will "excommunicate them" [para]. Notice also that their tactic was to attack the family body. The spiritual principal is that a house divided cannot stand. Could this be insight into the technology that Jesus spoke of when he said:

And a man's foes shall be they of his own household. He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me. Matthew 10:36-38 (KJV)

The Pharisee's intention was to get the parents to cause the man to deny the manifestation of the "new move" of God, to quench the fire on the inside by using those closest to the receiving party. This also is a common tactic of the system today.

When Jesus said that a prophet was without honor in his own country and among his own kin, could he have been speaking of this type of scenario? Those that are closest to you may very well be the ones who will be used of the Pharisee spirit to try and dissuade you from pursuing the deeper things of God. Transition will always birth conflict and will never be an easy thing! Never.

His parents answered them and said, We know that this is our son, and that he was born blind: But by what means he now seeth, we know not; or who hath opened his eyes, we know not: he is of age; ask him: he shall speak for himself. (John 9:20-21 KJV)

Imagine for a moment the hurt that our friend was subjected to at this moment. Here is a man who has been blind his entire life and now has 20/20 vision. Instead of his parents rejoicing with him, they now abandon him for the system. They turn him over to the accusers.

In my own mind, if this were my son, he could say that Bozo healed him and I would have no reason to doubt, but in this case the parents just submit to the many. And why did they submit?

These words spake his parents, because they feared the Jews: for the Jews had agreed already, that if any man did confess that he was Christ, he should be put out of the synagogue. (John 9:22 KJV)

Truth didn't matter. Jesus came as the truth and they determined in advance that no matter what he said or did, if you agreed with him, you would be kicked out of church. Fear of separation is one of the main tactics of the system. And they do not hesitate in applying this type of intimidation especially when their doctrine is challenged.

Then again called they the man that was blind, and said unto him, Give God the praise: we know that this man is a sinner. He answered and said, Whether he be a sinner or no, I know not: one thing I know, that, whereas I was blind, now I see. (John 9:24-25 KJV)

"We know this man is a sinner"! Because of the erroneous standard (man made doctrines) that they built their system upon they could confidently affirm that Jesus was a sinner. And what was BB's reply: "I don't care about your standard! All I know is that I was blind and now I see". The evidence of sight, both natural and spiritual, caused a boldness to come forth. He knew in what he believed and no amount of intimidation was going to change his mind. Truth had set him free from the bondage of religious blindness and in that new boldness he begins to challenge the system. No longer on the defensive he moves into an offensive posture.

Then said they to him again, what did he to thee? How opened he thine eyes? He answered them, I have told you already, and ye did not hear: wherefore would
ye hear it again? Will ye also be his disciples? (John 9:26-27 KJV)

This was the ultimate slap in the face to the Pharisees. He (BB) stands up in the face of what would seem to be insurmountable odds, and challenges them directly and does so in the presence of the same witnesses that they had been using against him. This is a necessary move in order to allow for the acceptance or the rejection of the truth. These will be the very same words that will come back to haunt them at a time of their own judgment.

And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when ye depart thence, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against them. Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city. (Mark 6: 11 KJV)

BB begins to take a martyr's stance and the Pharisee's now turn to personal attacks and set up their "system" as the judge of what is of God and what is not. But what they cannot see is that the "Moses" system was now in the final throws of death and would very shortly become obsolete.

Then they reviled him, and said, Thou art his disciple; but we are Moses' disciples. 29 We know that God spake unto Moses: as for this fellow, we know not from whence he is. John 9:28-29 (KJV)

"We don't know where he is coming from " (para) The Pharisee's stand in this confrontation has now become obvious "it's the Moses system or it's not God"! Notice also that the same thing they relied upon [the written word of Moses] would be the very same thing that would later convict them of the error.

Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust. 46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me. 47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words? John 5:45-47 (KJV)

In effect, Jesus is telling the Pharisee's that those things that you misunderstood and misinterpreted will be the very same things that will be used as charges against you at a later time. They had allowed their "religious" beliefs to render the Word to a place of ineffectiveness. That is also the place where the many are today, a place of ineffectiveness.

The man answered and said unto them, Why herein is a marvellous thing, that ye know not from whence he is, and yet he hath opened mine eyes. Now we know that God heareth not sinners: but if any man be a worshipper of God, and doeth his will, him he heareth. Since the world began was it not heard that any man opened the eyes of one that was born blind. If this man were not of God, he could do nothing. John 9:30-33 (KJV)

Now we see our "empowered' brother making the ultimate challenge to their structure. "If this man were not of God, he could do nothing". His reasoning is simple; if any man submit and worship God and do what he has commanded them to do, God will hear them. Take note of the use ofthe word but in that scripture. "Now we know that God heareth not sinners: but.." ! Thank God for buts! If it were not for but, none of us could have ever have gotten saved!

BUT it was after this bold stance, that the Pharisee's carried forth on their threat. They cast him out of their midst. Kicked out of church he was! BUT not until they had ridiculed him in front of those present, as a means of securing their position of fear upon them. Notice their return to the previously held belief structure. "You are totally in error in your belief system because you were completely born in sin and you expect to teach us anything?" [para]

They answered and said unto him, Thou wast altogether born in sins, and dost thou teach us? And they cast him out. John 9:34 (KJV)

But bless God, Jesus was watching all along and came to him and confirmed the stand he had taken. We have a tendency of waiting for the manifestation of Christ before we take a stand, when in fact, the manifestation most likely will appear after we stand!

And Jesus said, For judgment I am come into this world, that they which see not might see; and that they which see might be made blind. John 9:39 (KJV)

Jesus tells the listeners of his purpose. The phrase "for judgment" is the Greek word 'krima', and it means the function or the effect of a decision and comes from the root word 'krino' which means to distinguish, to decide mentally or judicially. Jesus is telling us that he came to bring people to the place of decision. And the purpose was to separate those "who know that they cannot see" from those that "think that they know what they see".

And as was with Jesus and is generally the case with all who seek to move forward from established positions, the Pharisee's challenged his words.

And some of the Pharisees which were with him heard these words, and said unto him, Are we blind also? John 9:40 (KJV)

And Jesus answered their question in no uncertain terms.

Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth. John 9:41 (KJV)