Transcription of a Cobbey Crisler talk on “The Walk to ” – part 1 of 2 Page 1 of 24 (Prior permission to share given by Janet Crisler to Warren Huff & CedarS Camps)

Walk to Emmaus – part 1 of 2 A Cobbey Crisler Talk – available in 2 CDs from The Daycroft School Foundation at http://www.daycroftschool.org/downloads/order-form31.pdf It’s a pleasure to introduce to you Mr. B. Cobbey Crisler. (Applause) Thank you, Mr. Dayo. How is the mic? All right? Okay?

We have to live with these things, you know. There’s even one [a mic] in heaven, according to the Book of Revelation. We’ll work on that. Plus he’s called an angel. And his full name is Michael, but you know, to his friends, he known as Mike. (Laughter) I know you wanted to get it, so I wanted to get it to you.

We should be equipped for a journey tonight. And it’s a very special journey, not requiring alpine equipment, sneakers, or anything else, that’s physical, because our journey is a mental one, and it’s a very special one. It’s one that we can repeat, one that is mentioned in the Bible. And tonight, together, we can embark on it.

I hope you all have your Bibles with you in your laps, open, to Luke 24. (That was a big hope, wasn’t it, with all those specifics?)

Why is it important to have your own Bible? Because, I want you to be sure I’m not making it up as I go along. (Laughter) Everyone should come to his or her own conclusions as we go through here. We’re dealing with discovery, which is the only real method of education. And religion, for so many years, forgot there was such a thing as discovery and dealt in dogma.

And I think if some of you have heard me remark before the little word that I work the hardest to hear is not even in The Oxford English Dictionary, and that word is “Wow!” Now why do I work to hear that one so hard, do you think? What does “Wow!” signify? (Murmurs) Something’s happening where? (Murmurs) Has it been implanted? Has it come from here to there? Or is it just something already within, that awakened? It’s discovery, isn’t it? Dogma never gives you discovery; therefore, dogma never gives you “Wow!” It gives you “bow-wow.” (Laughter from audience) Dogma is “bow-wow.” (More laughter)

Alright, now, Luke 24 gives us the only account of the walk to Emmaus in the Bible with the exception of one small verse in the last chapter of Mark. And that doesn’t mention Emmaus, it only mentions “two disciples and a walk in the country.”

Transcription of a Cobbey Crisler talk on “The Walk to Emmaus” – part 1 of 2 Page 2 of 24 (Prior permission to share given by Janet Crisler to Warren Huff & CedarS Camps) So, we can be very grateful to Luke. Because, if you read the invitation to tonight’s session, you will recognize that I am placing a major importance on this event. It’s not I that is placing that, but I feel the text, itself, is giving major importance to this walk to Emmaus.

And the theory with which I will present to you tonight is one none of you have to buy because that would be dogma, unless you discover it yourself as we go through.

The theory is that the spark that eventually caught flame in spreading throughout the known globe, started on that walk to Emmaus. Now, let’s see if we can prove that.

Starting in Luke, Chapter 24, verse 13, the narrative begins. Now, if we can do this tonight, all together go back these many centuries and begin to think like first century Jews. In other words, let’s get back to those times and see if we can actually feel the tenseness, the excitement, the adventure, the expectations, of that particular period. That may seem hard to do, but the Bible provides much to the environment, if we dig enough, to find it.

Where does this occur? It starts from what city? . What has occurred there, just this week-end? (Murmurs) Now, remember, we’re back to that period. The crucifixion – of whom? . And who is he? Now, all of you say he’s the Christ, but being first-century Jews, would all of you agree? (Murmurs)

Do you think that the city of Jerusalem was well aware of this event, maybe even turned on its ear? You don’t? There is an indication from the text that everyone should know about it. Because, remember, the two disciples even turned and rebuked Jesus, who they don’t know is Jesus. And said, “What are you, a stranger?” Luke 24:18 And the one of them, whose name was Cleopas, answering said unto him, Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things which are come to pass there in these days?

Remember?

So, the news is out. Now, what are these two disciples doing? They are leaving Jerusalem. Where’s the action as we know it? In Jerusalem. What does that tell you about the two disciples? (Murmurs) Well, it’s either something they know, or they don’t know. What do you think it might be? They’re heading in the opposite direction. (Answers unheard) Might be safer.

Well, just how much do they know, at this point in the narrative? We said the crucifixion has occurred. Has anything else occurred? (Answers) Okay, we know that, do they? (Murmurs) Yes, they’ve been told (raised). No. Are you sure? Are you sure? Transcription of a Cobbey Crisler talk on “The Walk to Emmaus” – part 1 of 2 Page 3 of 24 (Prior permission to share given by Janet Crisler to Warren Huff & CedarS Camps)

It’s important now to get the exact moment in history that this thing is occurring. And, Verse 10 tells us that the women had seen what? (Murmurs) No yet. They had seen the empty tomb, and they reported to the disciples. So, the news is out that there’s what? An empty tomb, we know.

Now, does human nature immediately say, “Ahah!”? (Murmurs) Jesus was raised from the dead. Is that the easiest conclusion? No. In fact, the easiest conclusion is what? Somebody stole the body. And you remember, that was actually mentioned at the end of one of the Gospels, one of the other Gospels, where the Jews were reported as paying the guards who had fallen asleep to spread the news that his disciples had stolen the body.

Well, let’s look at the text very carefully to see exactly where we are – whether they know the resurrection or not. We can all become Bible scholars by sticking very close to the text.

At least we can with some validity indication what the Bible account is saying, regardless of human opinions about the Bible account, who wrote it or anything else.

At least we can become so familiar with the account itself, that we’ll know some of these just shades of differences that may make a major difference before we’re through.

Luke, Chapter 24, verse 11 shows how they’d responded: “idle tales, didn’t believe.” (See below, Paraphrased)

Luke 24:10 It was Mary Magdalene, and Joanna, and Mary the mother of James, and other women that were with them, which told these things unto the apostles.

Luke 24:11 And their words seemed to them as idle tales, and they believed them not.

They didn’t believe the women. Isn’t that a funny reaction? (Laughter) And, do you think though, using common sense, in regarding the text – do you think those two disciples, if they had been fully aware that Jesus had been raised from the dead and was in Jerusalem, that they would be heading in the opposite direction? It doesn’t seem to make sense, does it?

So, regardless of what they were told, how much weight did they put behind the news? It sounds like it was nothing at all. And certainly that verse backs it up. Their words seem to them as “idle tales.” (See above, Luke 24:11) Transcription of a Cobbey Crisler talk on “The Walk to Emmaus” – part 1 of 2 Page 4 of 24 (Prior permission to share given by Janet Crisler to Warren Huff & CedarS Camps)

Who are these disciples, anyway? Only one is named, who is? Cleopas, and the other is not. Now, there’s a tradition around, and everywhere I give this, a lot of people say it’s Peter, or it’s Simon. It can’t be Peter. You know why it can’t be Peter? It’s all speculation anyway, but it can’t be Peter because later on we’re told that two disciples returned to Jerusalem and guess who’s behind closed doors? The eleven disciples. That would include Peter.

Now, there is a very early tradition. I think Eusebius in 300 A.D. records that an early tradition said that the other disciple’s name was Simon, and both Cleopas and Simon were among the seventy. That’s as good a theory as any, and yet, it’s still several hundred years from the event.

The text, if we’re going to stick to it, only gives one: Cleopas. And we note one thing: they are obscure disciples.

Now, that is a point to consider. Because, if we were Jesus, would we waste our time with obscure disciples heading in the opposite direction? (Murmurs)

What does one of Jesus’s parables recommend to his followers? “Go after the (Yes!) the one that was wandering and bring it back.” (See below, Parable)

Luke 15:4 What man of you, having an hundred sheep, if he lose one of them, doth not leave the ninety and nine in the wilderness, and go after that which is lost, until he find it?

That shepherd motive behind what Jesus did is basic, perhaps, to our understanding of this story. And it also shows something about his character. And compared with ours, we look kind of sad probably and wouldn’t have done the same thing.

But, there’s a divine purpose behind all of this, or Jesus would not have done it. He certainly told us he was dedicated to doing what was God’s will and not his own. So, God’s will is obviously being fulfilled in this event.

Now, these two disciples are so engrossed in talking, and talking about what? (Murmurs) Everything that had happened. Do you think it had made a deep impression on them? (Murmurs) I would imagine so.

Transcription of a Cobbey Crisler talk on “The Walk to Emmaus” – part 1 of 2 Page 5 of 24 (Prior permission to share given by Janet Crisler to Warren Huff & CedarS Camps) They may be just going off into the country just for…to get into the cool of the countryside, away from the white hot heat of what had just happened. An innocent man accused and criminally executed by the two finest forms of human law known to the ancient world: the Roman and the Jewish. And they’re so deeply engrossed in this.

And really, what do you think their mood must have been like? It says, “Sad” in Luke 15, verse 17, the last word in it, right? (See below, last word)

Luke 24:17 And he said unto them, What manner of communications are these that ye have one to another, as ye walk, and are sad?

But, it’s more than that; it’s more serious than that. What do you think they were…from what standpoint do you think they were discussing all of this?

From Jesus’s standpoint? (Audience says, “No.) Probably, their own.

And, when you’re kind of wrapped up in self like that, it’s very difficult to notice what’s going on around you. And guess who joins them? (Murmurs…”Jesus”)

And, they don’t recognize him. Now, don’t you think that’s a little odd?

Three years with their Master, or at least a portion of it, and they don’t recognize him.

Okay. (Murmurs) He was dead. How could he be there? Where were their expectations? (Murmurs) Where were they looking for him, if they were looking for him at all? In the tomb.

It reminds me of really of some of the objectives of archeology because, archeologically speaking, history is only confirmed if you can find something in the earth: a coin, with maybe the profile of a Herod or a Caesar. That’s great! Everybody gets extremely excited because it does date, pretty well, the level at which it’s discovered. Inscriptions are wonderful! At Caesarea, which is the dig that we participated in, the Italian archeologists found the first topographic evidence that Pilate was in Palestine, outside the Bible’s record in Josephus. Here was an inscription on stone; it was a reused stone, and it was found in the theater at Caesarea. And you’ve seen that theater on television if you’ve seen Leonard Bernstein conduct several performances there. In excavating that theater, they’ve found the stone which has Tiberius’s name of it, the Caesar at the time, and Pontius Pilate. So, now archeologists can say, “Yes. Pilate was there! We found the stone that said it.”

Transcription of a Cobbey Crisler talk on “The Walk to Emmaus” – part 1 of 2 Page 6 of 24 (Prior permission to share given by Janet Crisler to Warren Huff & CedarS Camps) Now, you know that if we really had to rely on that exclusively for evidence, how would we do as far as Jesus is concerned? Anybody found any coins for him? Any inscriptions? No architectural monuments? No books that have been dug up contemporaneously? We don’t have any…haven’t found his name, have we, in that early first century? Well, archeologically, Jesus then may be a non-entity by definition. And you know that many religionists have almost come to that conclusion, not too many years ago. In fact, the…even the idea introduced that Jesus was an invention. Fortunately, one major scholar, made the remark something similar to this: that it would be impossible to invent Jesus. He’s too unique.

Well, despite the fact that none of this evidence remains, and perhaps never did exist, what does that do for you vie-a-vie, Jesus? Are any doubts remaining about the possibility that he existed? How do you think Jesus would rather be remembered? Would he have told us? Were his disciples looking for him precisely in the place where archeologists would be looking for him? Could Christ Jesus found a church on that average view? In fact, as I thought about it, I realized that we can find Herod in the earth, and we can find Caesar in the earth, but we cannot find Jesus there, nor did he intend for anyone, apparently, to find him there.

That’s a whole new breakthrough for humanity – not to be found in the earth, not needing even earthly evidence. Now, if his disciples were looking for him there, maybe that’s one of the major points they needed straightening out on. Otherwise, how could Jesus have founded a church on an average point of view?

So, while they were still looking for him that way, he joins them, and he asks what they’re talking about. Do you think he knew? (Murmurs, Yes) So, why is he asking? (Murmurs) Is he playing a game? (Murmurs) No.

How long a time does he have with his disciples, by the way, between the resurrection and the ascension? (Answers) 40 days. That isn’t very long. Where did all his disciples kind of gone, after three years of a pretty heavy ministry with Jesus, day after day?

He was crucified and then what happened? (Answers from audience) They went fishing. They scattered. Where did Jesus find most of them? Fishing. Christianity was about to end where it began, in a fishing boat. But, here we all are tonight.

It did not end there, but that’s what was happening, despite the three years of active ministry with the disciples, which leads one to surmise that something radical must have occurred in the forty days’ period and was of extreme, vital, importance to Jesus and to his church. That occurred, and if so, we should be able to find where it is because the text should tell us.

Transcription of a Cobbey Crisler talk on “The Walk to Emmaus” – part 1 of 2 Page 7 of 24 (Prior permission to share given by Janet Crisler to Warren Huff & CedarS Camps) Now, I think Cleopas’ remark here is somewhat amusing in Luke 24, verse 18, tragically so. Because he turns to Jesus…can you imagine, after they find out it is Jesus? How they must have bit their tongue over several of the things that were said here? “Are you just a stranger here in Jerusalem; haven’t you been watching Eye Witness news, we’d say in the 20th century?” (Laughter) “Don’t you know what’s going on? Everybody knows what’s going on.” (See below, Paraphrased)

Luke 24:18 And the one of them, whose name was Cleopas, answering said unto him, Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things which are come to pass there in these days?

But, Jesus persists in inquiring: “What things?” Again, is it a game? What does he need to know? What is he after? He may know, but what is he really after? (Murmurs)

Exactly what is surfacing in their thought about this crucifixion? Where were their priorities? What lasted with them? What impressed them the most? Where were they mentally about it? Because Jesus apparently had to build there.

Well, they go through the details. It’s about the fact that it’s about Jesus and how he was condemned and crucified. And now, if we really want an insight into where they were mentally, Luke 24, verse 21, in all its unvarnished glory…up to the colon: “But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel:….”

Luke 24:21 But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel: and beside all this, to-day is the third day since these things were done.

What kind of attitude is that? Disappointment, disillusionment. It’s even stronger than that (maybe). (Murmurs) Hopelessness, discouragement. But, it’s even stronger. (Murmurs from audience, suggestion it is condemnation). Condemnation? Condemnation of whom?

Now, remember who they are talking to. And let the possible indication of where they are here, mentally, seep in. They say “we trusted.” (See above) Already, the implication is what? (Murmurs) We were let down. “We trusted that it had been....” (See above) All hope is gone, right? “It had been.” Closed, past. “It had been he which should have redeemed Israel.” (See above) That is a pretty hopeless thing. And it looks like it may be blaming Jesus directly. “We trusted, but we were let down; we’re betrayed” maybe. (See below, repeated Luke 24:21 for convenience.) Transcription of a Cobbey Crisler talk on “The Walk to Emmaus” – part 1 of 2 Page 8 of 24 (Prior permission to share given by Janet Crisler to Warren Huff & CedarS Camps) Luke 24:21 But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel: and beside all this, to-day is the third day since these things were done.

All right. We’re at that point. Now, let’s get back to our assuming the role of the first century Jew. And, exactly, what are we expecting? As first century Jews, what are we expecting as far a is concerned? What are you and I looking forward to? What have we been taught in Sabbath school all our lives?

What are we looking forward to? (Answers follow each question) Messiah. A Messiah who is a…who will be a king. What do you mean by a king? A ruler, a warrior, a political leader, to free them from the yoke of any oppressor; and primarily, since the currently one was Rome, Romans, that was to relieve them from that.

Was that the disciple’s view of the Messiah? It’s very important. Do you think that either disciple or average first-century Jew embraced within their expectation of the Messiah the fact that the Messiah would suffer and would end on a criminal’s cross? (Murmurs) Are you sure? This is…are you sure? All right (more murmuring answers from audience). Now, did he tell the disciples that? And yet, you are saying the disciples didn’t know it. They didn’t believe it; or they didn’t know it? (Audience: “They heard what they wanted to.”)

Okay, they heard what they wanted to hear. Of course, that never happens in the 20th century, does it? (Laughter) Isn’t that terrible of those disciples? We listen to everything that anyone tells us. And everybody listens to us, right?

Well, we’re going to prove this, step by step, as we go along, to see if Jesus told the disciples and also to see if the disciples had any idea that the Messiah would suffer – any expectation of that. Does it sound like they did, if the two disciples were so enwrapped in the tragedy of the event that they were heading in another direction? Does that sound like they comprehended their master was to go through some of this and emerge victorious? It doesn’t look like the comprehension was there, whatever Jesus had said to them earlier.

Well, they do announce that a rumor is around. And who’s spreading it? (Laughter, and indistinct comments) I heard a man very hesitatingly say that. (Laughter)

That’s right, but it does bring to light one of the customs of that age. Women were simply not permitted to bear witness in a court of law. Their word was not believed, unless they were backed up by the good-ole, reliable male. And this shows you something that’s very important, and I just developed a course called “Jesus and the Equality of Woman,” which, again, just from the text itself, shows how Jesus totally ignored the customs of his day and simply regarded womanhood as God regarded it.

Transcription of a Cobbey Crisler talk on “The Walk to Emmaus” – part 1 of 2 Page 9 of 24 (Prior permission to share given by Janet Crisler to Warren Huff & CedarS Camps) And, it’s interesting that even though women were not allowed to bear witness unless backed up by the man, that Jesus chose a woman to bear witness to his resurrection. And she carried the news to the disciples, despite the social custom of those days.

Now, you can see here, there’s a sort of apologetic tone: “Certain women made us astonished, and they came saying that they’d seen a vision of angels, which said that he was alive.” (See below) There’s a lot of conviction behind all of that! (Laughter)

Luke 24:22 Yea, and certain women also of our company made us astonished, which were early at the sepulchre;

Luke 24:23 And when they found not his body, they came, saying, that they had also seen a vision of angels, which said that he was alive.

And then, 24, Luke 24, verse 24, rushes in to back some of it up, in case the stranger thinks that they had been listening to these women. “Certain of then which were with us…” – those are the men – “went to the sepulcher and found it even so as the women had said; but him they saw not.” (See below)

Luke 24:24 And certain of them which were with us went to the sepulchre, and found it even so as the women had said: but him they saw not.

Now, that tells us exactly the state of the news, doesn’t it? Anything about…it says that “the angels had said he was alive,” that’s all. (See above)

And you remember, and you know why manhood is in such confusion at this hour? Because they ran, and womanhood stayed to find out.

If you’ll read John’s account, guess what happens? “Mary goes and tells Peter and John, and John takes great pains to tell us in his gospel, he outran Peter to the tomb.” (See below…John’s account)

And you can tell, he has to be the author of that passage. (Laughter) He beats Peter to the tomb. John 20:2 Then she runneth, and cometh to Simon Peter, and to the other disciple, whom Jesus loved, and saith unto them, They have taken away the Lord out of the sepulchre, and we know not where they have laid him.

John 20:3 Peter therefore went forth, and that other disciple, and came to the sepulchre.

John 20:4 So they ran both together: and the other disciple did outrun Peter, and came first to the sepulchre. Transcription of a Cobbey Crisler talk on “The Walk to Emmaus” – part 1 of 2 Page 10 of 24 (Prior permission to share given by Janet Crisler to Warren Huff & CedarS Camps) They don’t see a body and guess where they go? Home. (Laughter) They go home, but Mary stays. And Mary gets rewarded for staying because she sees Jesus and is the first one who does.

So, his disciples missed that point of being there firsthand, and they hear it from a woman. Now, at this point, with all of this social custom coming in, Verse 25, Jesus abruptly ends this whole line of attack. Starting a new one, he says, “O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken.” (See below)

Luke 24:25 Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken:

Now, you’ve got to decide which is…who’s more way out because the disciples have just been talking about current events, and Jesus is saying…he said that “they were slow because they didn’t believe the prophets.” (See above, Paraphrased)

Now, the prophets wrote hundreds of years before. Who goes back that far for an explanation of current events? The human mind doesn’t just quite buy that.

Even in the 20th Century, we don’t even believe our weather man. (Laughter) And that’s only 24 hours. (Laughter)

In fact, the human mind is simply not constituted to comprehend prophesy. And the more I thought of that, the more I found two major themes in the Bible that the human mind simply doesn’t comprehend. One is prophesy and the other is healing.

And the more I worked on that, the more it became clear that that’s quite obvious why the human mind doesn’t comprehend either prophesy or healing because the human mind cannot do either one. And what the human mind cannot do, it generally dismisses as incomprehensible, and therefore, maybe even impossible. And yet here we find the entire book known as the Bible, composed of so many other individual books, based squarely on prophesy and healing.

And here, Jesus goes back in an apparent explanation of current events, things that happened just this week-end, he is going back to document already hundreds of years old. Now, what is he assuming are in these documents that’s so important? Luke 24, Verse 26, he tells us some of it. Notice that point. He says what? Why is it the first point that “the Christ should suffer.” (See below, Paraphrased) He’s apparently finding this where? He says “it’s in the prophets.”

Luke 24:26 Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory? Transcription of a Cobbey Crisler talk on “The Walk to Emmaus” – part 1 of 2 Page 11 of 24 (Prior permission to share given by Janet Crisler to Warren Huff & CedarS Camps) He’s apparently finding this where? He says “it’s in the prophets.” (See below, Paraphrased)

Luke 24:27 And beginning at and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.

Well, isn’t that generally known? Why is it so novel? That we have to examine. Is it generally known? Remember, up there, we said the two disciples “trusted it should have been he that redeemed Israel”? (See below, Repeated)

Luke 24:21 But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel: and beside all this, to-day is the third day since these things were done.

That view is the general view we’ve already seen that the First Century Jew had: political leader, king.

Now, Jesus is saying that “they were slow not to have seen the prophets that the Christ was to suffer and enter into his Glory.” (See below, Luke 24:26 Repeated)

Luke 24:25 Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken:

Luke 24:26 Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?

The problem and the solution – the Cross and the Crown – in prophesy.

Now, if the disciples has only seen the crown, then they needed a Bible lesson, apparently.

And look in Luke 24, Verse 27, what Jesus does. He starts where? At Moses. And goes how far? “All the prophets….” And then what did he do? Give them a Bible lesson that “it had all started in seven days” and then “the water just poured in, and Noah built an ark that landed on Mount Ararat”?

Luke 24:27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.

What kind of a Bible lesson was he giving them? Very specific, isn’t it? Concerning himself.

Now, remember, forty he has with his disciples. His disciples had missed something essential, or they would not have scattered. Transcription of a Cobbey Crisler talk on “The Walk to Emmaus” – part 1 of 2 Page 12 of 24 (Prior permission to share given by Janet Crisler to Warren Huff & CedarS Camps) Is Jesus concentrating on what had been missed in a period, so that he could leave and Christianity was in good hands, prepared thought?

Well, it’s pretty clear what, according to Luke’s account, Jesus did. He went through the Scriptures on this walk to Emmaus.

Did the two that were walking with him know it was Jesus while they were getting this Bible lesson? They did not.

Now, before we go any further, I think we have to understand the Bible context of prophesy, because I mentioned a weather report just before. And, if you’ll turn to Amos, which you will have no difficulty locating. (Laughter) For those who may have difficulty, it may help to know it’s between Joel and Obadiah. (Laughter)

Now, Amos is often credited by scholars as being the first literary prophet; that is the first one who had his words recorded in a contemporary way – right after they were uttered, or very close to the time in which they were uttered. So, they became scripture in that way – something written, not just oral tradition.

So, it would be interesting to know what this literary prophet felt about prophesy and how he, himself, thought he got into the business.

So, Amos 3, verse 7, tells us something that if you just let it sink in, and tell me what you think it says, I think you will see how radical this verse is. Chapter 3, verse 7. Here is Amos’s view of prophesy. “Surely the Lord God will do nothing, except, but or unless, he reveals his secret unto his servants the prophets.” (See below, Paraphrased)

Amos 3:7 Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.

What is that really saying? I mean, if we take that to be literally true, what is Amos saying? At least we can say that Amos believes with full conviction that prophesy starts where? With God. And come via? The prophet, which we could say symbolizes those who were listening, right? The receptive thought of humanity. And apparently for whom? For humanity.

All right. Will God leave anything out? Not according to this. It says “surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he reveals it to the prophets.” (See above, Paraphrased)

Now, if that is honestly, literally, true, that means it will be like what to an engineer who is building a building? A blueprint, which he could constantly consult to even understand the fulfillment. Therefore, studying prophesy would apparently tell us when to expect fulfillment, or what fulfillment would look like. And studying fulfillment would Transcription of a Cobbey Crisler talk on “The Walk to Emmaus” – part 1 of 2 Page 13 of 24 (Prior permission to share given by Janet Crisler to Warren Huff & CedarS Camps) help to also locate and enrich prophesy, like a hand in glove, promise and fulfillment, all from the one source.

Well, that’s a pretty radical point of view. Do you and I regard prophesy that way? Do we really have that kind of conviction in prophesy?

Well, turn to Amos 7, and we’ll find another view of this prophet, about how he got into the business. And I love this because…you know, when we’re looking for a new job, we fill out a resume and do it on an IBM Executive Typewriter.

And we write it like we love to read it, right? Because we want our perspective boss to know exactly our best qualities. So, our best foot is forward in every paragraph.

And, Amos doesn’t write his resume in that way. Maybe that’s why none of us are prophets. But maybe we could be, as we understand what is takes to be a prophet.

“Amaziah was the priest at Beth-el, and he wanted to get rid of Amos like it was his first concern. Amos was stirring up everybody and saying things that he didn’t want anybody to hear. He wanted just a nice, soothing, calm relationship with the people. And besides, Amos came from the southern kingdom of Judah and now he’s up in Israel at Beth-el stirring things up. So, Amaziah politely, but firmly, suggests that Amos goes home. (Laughter)

Amos 7, verse 14, Amos hands Amaziah his resume. He says “I was no prophet.” Now, we’d never say that, would we? “Neither was I a prophet’s son.” (See below) I don’t even have that by the right of heredity. “But I was herdsman and gatherer of sycamore fruit.” (See below)

Amos 7:14 Then answered Amos, and said to Amaziah, I was no prophet, neither was I a prophet’s son; but I was an herdman, and a gatherer of sycomore fruit:

So guess what everybody else was doing that that period? Practically the same, especially around Toccoa. Even today the town of Toccoa is just simply an agricultural society. He was “an herdman…a gatherer of sycamore fruit.” (See above, Paraphrased)

So, whose idea? How did Amos get in the prophesy business? “The Lord took him.” (See below) Do you see that? It sounds like it almost by the scruff of his neck, in verse 15. “The Lord took me.” What it Amos’s idea? It was God’s idea, okay? That’s how he got into business.

Amos 7:15 And the Lord took me as I followed the flock, and the Lord said unto me, Go, prophesy unto my people Israel. Transcription of a Cobbey Crisler talk on “The Walk to Emmaus” – part 1 of 2 Page 14 of 24 (Prior permission to share given by Janet Crisler to Warren Huff & CedarS Camps) It’s God’s idea “as I followed the flock.” (See above, Partial) Just think of that shepherd motive. Of course that left us all out; we could never be prophets, right, because we…there’s just simply no room to keep sheep anymore. (Laughter)

Or is it? What is necessary mentally in keeping sheep that is a pre-requisite of being a prophet in thought?

And all you have to do – humility. All you have to do is make a list of the qualities it requires to stay up 24-hours with sheep. (Laughter)

And you’ll see how far we’re away from being maybe prepared to be a prophet. But it does something to thought; it introduces clarity. And things apparently become visible and appreciable to us, right here, that we didn’t see before because of “dull ears or blind eyes,” which Isaiah talks so much about. (See below, indented; samples of “eyes of the blind.”)

“Following the flock,” the shepherd motive. (See below, Repeated, Partial)

Amos 7:15 And the Lord took me as I followed the flock, and the Lord said unto me, Go, prophesy unto my people Israel.

Isa 29:18 And in that day shall the deaf hear the words of the book, and the eyes of the blind shall see out of obscurity, and out of darkness.

Isa 35:5 Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped.

Remember how often Jesus drew a contrast between the hireling and the shepherd, and made the distinction very clear, and we can apply that distinction right to our own profession. And I hope we aren’t in a profession; we’re rather in something that we can call practice rather than profession, because Jesus said “the hireling.” And a hireling is someone who works for a paycheck.

And you know how bright our eyes become when that Friday approaches – by-monthly, or whenever we may get it. But, Jesus said “the hireling fleeth because he is a hireling,” and here’s your distinction. “He careth not for the sheep.” The shepherd motive, then is what? One who really cares. (See below)

John 10:12 But he that is an hireling, and not the shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, seeth the wolf coming, and leaveth the sheep, and fleeth: and the wolf catcheth them, and scattereth the sheep.

John 10:13 The hireling fleeth, because he is an hireling, and careth not for the sheep. Transcription of a Cobbey Crisler talk on “The Walk to Emmaus” – part 1 of 2 Page 15 of 24 (Prior permission to share given by Janet Crisler to Warren Huff & CedarS Camps) I think this is partly what a lot of young people were feeling and maybe not expressing correctly in the last decade or so.

But the element of “caring” is so needed in our profession. Just bringing that to our job – really caring is the shepherd motive.

And certainly, what was Jesus’s motive out on that road to Emmaus with these two disciples if he didn’t care? He was not a hireling.

Well, it says “the Lord took me as I followed the flock, and the Lord said unto me, Go, prophesy….” (See below repeated)

Amos 7:15 And the Lord took me as I followed the flock, and the Lord said unto me, Go, prophesy unto my people Israel.

And what’s he doing, the very next line? “Now therefore hear thou the word of the Lord:….” (See below, Partial)

Amos 7:16 Now therefore hear thou the word of the Lord: Thou sayest, Prophesy not against Israel, and drop not thy word against the house of Isaac.

He drops everything and went. And you remember when Jesus appointed his disciples: “they dropped nets and went.” (See below, Paraphrased)

Matt 4:20:20 And they straightway left their nets, and followed him.

There’s another quality of being a prophet or a disciple. Are we ready for that one?

Now, turn to II Peter in the New Testament to get a much later view of prophesy, and let’s see if it coincides with the view that we have just seen in Amos.

You tell me whether it’s close to the one we saw in Amos. Because many scholars think Second Peter is the last book to enter the canon of our Scripture. So, in a way, we may be looking at bookends here with a lot of in between Amos and Second Peter.

And, in Chapter 1 of Second Peter, we have the author saying in verse 16: “we haven’t followed fables; as a matter of fact, we were what? Eye witnesses.” (See below, Paraphrased)

II Pet 1:16 For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.

Now, that’s a real favorite word right now, isn’t it? Because, what is considered the best evidence inside a courtroom? Eyewitness evidence, and yet would you like for Transcription of a Cobbey Crisler talk on “The Walk to Emmaus” – part 1 of 2 Page 16 of 24 (Prior permission to share given by Janet Crisler to Warren Huff & CedarS Camps) your life to depend upon somebody else’s eyewitness evidence? So, we say in one breath how great it is, and in the next breath, if our lives depended upon it, we’re not so sure of it.

Suppose we had to rely on eyewitness evidence for the validity of Jesus’s existence? Would it grow stronger or weaker as the years went on? (Murmurs) And it has, hasn’t it? Those who rely on eyewitness evidence for Jesus finally got to the point of even challenging his veracity.

Now, Peter says “Not fables, we’re eyewitnesses,” but he doesn’t rely on that. (See above, Paraphrased)

He goes to II Pet 1, Verse 19, and says up to the semi-colon “that something is much higher and more sure, or reliable, than eyewitness evidence….” And he calls it what? He calls it “prophecy.” (See below, Paraphrased)

II Pet 1:19 We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:

Would Amos have agreed with that? (Yes, from audience)

Would Jesus have agreed with that in going back in that walk to Emmaus and going through all those prophesies?

Now, there’s a high regard for prophesy for three rather important individuals in history, who were able to things with their lives that the average human being, even in the 20th Century, hasn’t been able to do – and maybe it’s the result of their outlook. Maybe it’s some understanding of what prophesy is all about, that may have permitted these things to occur.

II Peter, Chapter 1, Verse 20 – another view of prophesy. “The prophecy of the scripture is…” not what? …”of any private interpretation.” (See below, Paraphrased)

Isn’t that a relief? Isn’t that a great relief? No matter my opinion about the Scriptures, it doesn’t matter, or yours, because it’s not opinion, and it’s not private.

II Pet 1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

II Peter, Chapter 1, Verse 21 tells us what it is. Now, you see, we have to understand that here is prophecy being defined by the Bible itself. So, if we go into the Bible to criticize prophesy, we have to at least take it on its own terms. And both Amos and Peter are saying “that prophecy did not come by the will of man,” did it? (See below, Paraphrased) Transcription of a Cobbey Crisler talk on “The Walk to Emmaus” – part 1 of 2 Page 17 of 24 (Prior permission to share given by Janet Crisler to Warren Huff & CedarS Camps) II Pet 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

It wasn’t man’s idea. That’s how Amos said it; he didn’t get into business because it was his idea. He was picking fruit, and “wham.”

It didn’t come “by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.” (See above)

Now, the word “ghost” is “pneuma” in Greek, and it means “spirit,” “air,” “wind,” “ghost” – all of those things. Pneumatic tire, you know? That’s where it comes from. And apparently air and wind imply what? There’s action. There’s where the action is. It’s movement. And it says right here “that holy men of God spake as they were moved….” (See above, Partial) The initiative came from man. That’s why we don’t understand. It couldn’t be good if it didn’t come from man. That movement by the holy pneuma is what begins the Bible, because, if you remember in Genesis One, “The spirit or pneuma of God…” what? “moved.” And look at the action in Genesis One! (See below, Paraphrased)

Gen 1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

Now, if that’s the kind of movement we want to be part of, apparently we can’t be unless we’re in touch with what’s motivating prophesy. because the “holy men of God spake as they were moved.” (See below, Partial, Repeated)

II Pet 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

So, if we get involved with prophesy, then we’re going to be moved. Moved to do what? Who knows? But it’s God’s will being done according to the context of the Scripture.

Now, with that in mind, let’s go back to Luke 24 because we have kind of set our description and our definitions here. And we find that they stop to eat because they see a neon sign flashing that the Emmaus Hilton has a vacancy. (Laughter)

And they go on and eat, and they eat off a bowl somewhat similar to what you see here probably. This is, from all indications, maybe even earlier than Jesus’s period, it’s a wooden bowl make out of grape wood and found near one of the Dead Sea scroll caves. And it looks like it was made in the Philippines, right? But, it’s the same kind of classic shape. But, that is a food bowl of the period. Transcription of a Cobbey Crisler talk on “The Walk to Emmaus” – part 1 of 2 Page 18 of 24 (Prior permission to share given by Janet Crisler to Warren Huff & CedarS Camps)

And as they are eating, Jesus breaks break. And, of course, that’s an immediate identity back ____ because they were so used to that.

It says “their eyes were opened; they knew him.” And that means a lot, “and he vanished out of their sight.” (See below)

Luke 24:31 And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight.

Isn’t that peculiar? Once they know him, he vanishes. Do they need him physically anymore? (Murmurs) Look at how that mood has been changed.

“They compare notes about what they were feeling when Jesus was talking. And both of them say “that their hearts were burning within them.” (See below, Paraphrased) And that’s not the heartburn you hear on a television commercial. (Laughter)

Luke 24:32 And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the scriptures?

This is the kind of thing, right there, that I believe is the beginning of the Christian church – a burning heart.

Who needs to sell anybody else if you are sold? What happens when everyone else finds that you are sold? They come and want to know why? And that spark in one heart catches in another. And look what happened. And we’ll see that.

Their hearts were burning. And very frankly, Ladies and Gentlemen, if tonight in going through our “Walk to Emmaus,” our hearts don’t burn within us, we haven’t been on the walk. We’ll have to go on that eventually. Try hard tonight, so you don’t have to have it as a later effect, because we’re going to do the very same thing Jesus did with his disciples. Isn’t it marvelous we don’t have to look for Jesus in the earth any more than his disciples?

Isn’t it almost…it’s totally humanly unique, because time is telescoped. The disciples have no advantage over you or I (me). We both have the same scripture and agelessly we can find Jesus where? (Murmurs)

Transcription of a Cobbey Crisler talk on “The Walk to Emmaus” – part 1 of 2 Page 19 of 24 (Prior permission to share given by Janet Crisler to Warren Huff & CedarS Camps) That what he said. And that’s where he’s pointing his disciples to. Do you think he undertook that even his 20th Century followers could be as close to him as his immediate disciples? In that respect there’s virtually no materiality or earth depression left in the view of the followers towards the founder.

Now, it says that he opened the Scriptures. You know they weren’t tired anymore; they headed right back where they started, to Jerusalem. And maybe that’s what Jesus had wanted, because, back in Jerusalem the eleven disciples were quivering behind closed doors. And who were with them? Does it say?

Luke 24, verse 33, “it says “them that were with them.” (See below, Partial)

Luke 24:33 And they rose up the same hour, and returned to Jerusalem, and found the eleven gathered together, and them that were with them,

Who were “they”? Well, Luke if Volume 1 of a two-volume work. The 2nd volume being the Book of Acts. And, in that opening chapter of Acts, Luke tells of the very next meeting that is similar, and he not only names the disciples, he says “the women are there.” He says, “Mary is there, the mother of Jesus.” And he adds them all up and says, “120 were there.” Now, if it’s possible that there were that many there in that one room, what did it constitute? What was all there? The whole Christian church. It was the first church meeting. The first Christian church meeting, and it was being addressed by its founder shortly, but they didn’t know it.

And Jesus went out to get those two so they could be part of it; and, in fact, they got there just ahead of him. He even enabled them to make the announcement – what they’d seen on that road. But, it was not their privilege to tell them what Jesus was going to tell them.

And after he goes through a lot of exercising in showing them that he’s really Jesus – for instance, the hands and feet, they were all down with microscopes and everything else, to make sure that this could have been a man that went through crucifixion, and it was Jesus himself.

And still they didn’t get it. And, we really shouldn’t blame them, because I’m not so sure how we would have responded.

And finally, he asks if they have any meat, and he proceeds to eat a meal in front of them, “just to show that everything was working just fine, thank you,” (Laughter) -- just to get their fur up, focused on what he was really there for.

Transcription of a Cobbey Crisler talk on “The Walk to Emmaus” – part 1 of 2 Page 20 of 24 (Prior permission to share given by Janet Crisler to Warren Huff & CedarS Camps) Try that recipe: broiled fish and honey comb. (Laughter) I think it’s in my wife’s cookbook; at least, she made me eat it. And, it’s not bad; it’s not bad. It sounds kind of, you know, but, it’s alright.

Now, but he isn’t there to eat. In Luke 24, verse 44, in the same night, Jesus is doing something in verse 44 that should sound very familiar. Twice in the same night, he doing the identical thing, and you know he would not be going through this if it were not absolutely essential for his church to know. And he’s talking to his whole church at the moment. And what is it?

He goes back what’s different this time though? He goes “in the law of Moses, the prophets, and the psalms.” (See below, Paraphrased)

Luke 24:44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.

Well, don’t we all think of the Psalms as a book of poetry, not of prophesy? Who’s ever considered that Psalms was a book of prophesy? That’s what he says. And in Luke 24, verse 45, it says “he opened their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures…” Implying that until they got this, they wouldn’t comprehend the scriptures. (See below) They would lose the key.

Luke 24:45 Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,

And in Luke 24, verse 46, look; if this doesn’t sound like an engineer reading his blueprint. “It is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day.” (See below) “It’s written” and this is what must occur.

Luke 24:46 And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:

Again, the emphasis on Christ’s suffering. Now, just from a scholarly point of view, so that you know this, there’s really no scholarly evidence that you can bank on, that show’s anyone writing prior to the first century A.D. about a Messiah who would suffer, which means we may be looking at the first time the concept was ever introduced publicly. And, it came through Jesus. In other words, he read in the scripture something no one else had seen, or had known was there, or had applied to the Messiah.

Transcription of a Cobbey Crisler talk on “The Walk to Emmaus” – part 1 of 2 Page 21 of 24 (Prior permission to share given by Janet Crisler to Warren Huff & CedarS Camps)

Now is that true? Well, here is what Professor Davies says, which is rather interesting – he’s one of our top New Testament scholars – “It was scandalous enough to point to the figure of Jesus of Nazareth as the Messiah, but to point to a crucified Jesus as such was monstrous.” And he adds, “Most Jews had certainly not anticipated a Messiah who should suffer. No Jews, we may be certain, had anticipated a Messiah who should endure the shameful death of crucifixion. Such a death, in the light of Deuteronomy, placed Jesus under the condemnation of the law. To proclaim Jesus as Messiah was to proclaim that one whom the law had condemned was upheld by God.” (Prof. Davies)

That was the kind of thing Jesus faced on the cross. Ending his experience criminally in the eyes of humanity, how could he ever convince anyone that he was the Messiah with that kind of view of scripture? Maybe then, here is the density on the subject that this forty days must break. Maybe Jesus’s place in prophesy is the one important fact the disciples had failed to grasp. And maybe that was the one essential fact on which he must build his church.

Just test it. When Peter said to him, “Thou are the Christ…” what did Peter mean? (See below, Partial) Did he mean the suffering Christ? (pause, murmurs)

Matt 16:16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

Jesus commended his answer right? “Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona.” (See below, Partial)

Matt 16:17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar–jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

Because it’s the first breakthrough that his disciples had. The insane had had it before his disciples. They called him “The son of God…and the Messiah.” But, here suddenly his disciple breaks through and says, “You are the Christ.” (See above, Paraphrased)

Now, when you read that account in Matthew’s Gospel, you will find something very interesting. After Jesus commends Peter for what he said, and said “flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.” (See above, Partial) Now, remember, we’ve already seen Amos and Peter later talking about what the Father reveals, rather than flesh and blood. And prophesy’s got a lot to do with it.

Transcription of a Cobbey Crisler talk on “The Walk to Emmaus” – part 1 of 2 Page 22 of 24 (Prior permission to share given by Janet Crisler to Warren Huff & CedarS Camps) Well, Peter thought pretty highly apparently of himself in all of that. And Jesus said that “now is the time he might be able to tell his disciples.” And you know what happens in the very two verses? “Then Jesus spake to them plainly about his approaching betrayal, and that he would be turned over by the Jews to the Romans, and that he would be executed, and he would rise again from the dead.” (See below, Paraphrased)

Matt 16:21 From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day.

Now, we admitted that Jesus said these things. Where were the disciples? Were they hearing? Weren’t they listening? You know what Peter’s response was “Far be it from thee oh Lord what happened to you.” (See below, Paraphrased)

Matt 16:22 Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee.

And do you know what Jesus said to him, reversed his ???: “Get thee behind me Satan….thou savorest the things that be of men and not the things that be of God.” (See below, Paraphrased)

Matt 16:23 But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.

Now, that’s the exact reverse of what he said in the two verses previously. He said, “flesh and blood hath not reveal the point that he was the Christ, but the Father.” (See below, Paraphrase, Repeated.)

Matt 16:17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar–jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

But, now, when he said that “Jesus would not suffer,” he said “You’re not reading God’s word correctly; you’re savouring the things that be of men.” (See below, Paraphrased, Repeated)

Matt 16:23 But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.

Now, that’s quite interesting because it’s the reverse. So, it’s pretty obvious that Jesus didn’t found his church on the person who, as human nature does so regularly, can reverse its field without notice. Transcription of a Cobbey Crisler talk on “The Walk to Emmaus” – part 1 of 2 Page 23 of 24 (Prior permission to share given by Janet Crisler to Warren Huff & CedarS Camps) Now, what Jesus was commending, and what he said he would base his church on, was that vision that Peter did see that he was the Christ. Because the minute to say “Christ” to a first century Jew, you mean the one in The Old Testament. So, the only difference, apparently, between the disciples’ view and the first century Jews’ view of Jesus was what? Apparently, neither one recognized that the Messiah would suffer. But, the Jews were still expecting the Messiah, and the disciples said the Messiah was Jesus. And this extra point of the suffering and the complete overhauling of the scriptures in their thinking was left to “the walk to Emmaus” and what followed immediately afterward when his entire church met together and Jesus goes over the law of Moses, the prophets and the Psalms.

This point that he is making where he opens the scriptures to them, we want to test this out, because we said that the disciples didn’t comprehend it. So, let’s turn to John 20. Now, the twentieth Chapter of John is about the same point in the narrative of Jesus that the 24th Chapter of Luke, as far as the state of awareness of Jesus’s resurrection.

And, you see John 20, verse 9, where John says, “as yet,” important two words, “as yet they knew not the scripture, that he must rise again from the dead.” (See below) John 20:9 For as yet they knew not the scripture, that he must rise again from the dead. And, see the next verse: what happens to them? “That’s when they went home.” (See below, Paraphrased)

John 20:10 Then the disciples went away again unto their own home.

The implication is that if they knew the scripture, they wouldn’t have gone home. Now…but we have a question whether, really, did Jesus tell anybody? Did he really let his disciples in on this?

John 5, verse 39. This is again by way of trying to have the text answer these questions, rather than me or you. John 5, verse 39. I’m sure it’s familiar to everyone. He says there are two reasons for searching the scriptures: 1) what? “Eternal life,” 2) “They are they which testify of me.” (See below)

John 5:39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

So, what he was saying at Emmaus doesn’t sound totally novel, does it?

But, maybe he wasn’t that specific. Well, read John 5, verse 46.

Transcription of a Cobbey Crisler talk on “The Walk to Emmaus” – part 1 of 2 Page 24 of 24 (Prior permission to share given by Janet Crisler to Warren Huff & CedarS Camps) How more specific could you get, except chapter and verse. “Had ye believed Moses, you would have believed me; for…” (four words) “he wrote of me.”

John 5:46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me.

Now, if Jesus honestly believed that, he’s talking about someone who lived 1200 years prior to his own existence. And he is saying the highest figure in Jewish history wrote of him. Now, if you were a First Century Jew and you heard that, how would you feel? (Murmurs) I mean, would you take that lying down? In some cases, they didn’t. And yet, the conviction behind that is decidedly there. “He wrote of me.” (See above, Partial) (END OF CD1 OF 2 – “The Walk to Emmaus”)