Judges 16 shares the story of the Philistines trying to trap and capture Samson. The story sounds like an action movie today.
Now Samson went to Gaza and saw a harlot there, and went in to her. 2 When it was told to the Gazites, saying, "Samson has come here," they surrounded the place and lay in wait for him all night at the gate of the city. And they kept silent all night, saying, "Let us wait until the morning light, then we will kill him." 3 Now Samson lay until midnight, and at midnight he arose and took hold of the doors of the city gate and the two posts and pulled them up along with the bars; then he put them on his shoulders and carried them up to the top of the mountain which is opposite Hebron.
Can't you just see the story unfolding. His enemies were watching for a chance to capture and probably kill Samson. At lest they wanted to imprison him as they did at the end of his life. He had been a thorn in their sides for 20 years. (15:20)
So when he walked into Gaza, one of their own cities the time seemed opportune to spring their trap. Verse 2 almost sounds incredulous. "He is HERE." So they laid an ambush, waiting for him to walk out at daylight. "We will kill him."
Samson did not wait for light, however. He walked out at midnight. No sweat. Right? They probably had a spy watching, just to make sure that he did not sneak away. "We will just grab him as soon as he clears the gates."
This is hard to read without bursting out in wild guffaws. Just as calm as you please, he "took hold of the doors, and the two gate posts, and the bars...." The gates were 8 or 10 feet tall or more and several inches thick. If you have any experience with fences, you know that the posts are big and strong to hold the gates as they swing. They are buried deeply in the ground. Often the bar was a heavy beam designed to withstand a battering if enemies attempted to force the gates open. Most were so heavy that two or more men were required to lift them into place.
Samson picked up the gates, the posts, all of the hardware and carried them out of the city. The mountain Hebron is about 37 miles away. Some commentators surmise that the wording implied that the "mountain" was a smaller one in the area, but in the direction of Hebron.
Regardless of how you interpret that, it is an interesting feat of strength. (Ya think?) Let's listen in as the Philistines are lying in wait. "Here he comes! Get ready!"
And then Samson walks out–carrying the gates on his back. "Uh, what is that? My light is a little weak. What do you see?"
The word raced through the assembled assassins. "Maaayyybbbeee we ought to wait until he puts that down."
"Yeah. Great idea. Let's wait a minute. He will probably get tired and be easier to overcome."
Regardless of where the mountain was, no one left their places. And when the morning dawned, I surmise that Samson was not the only one who was gone.
What an interesting vignette. It would be a lot more inspiring had we not been given the perspective of verse 1. But the Bible does not pull any punches, even for His servants. That is why the story is so believable. The Lord takes ordinary dudes and dudesses and uses them to carry out His plans. And He provides the strength to do it.
Anyone up for a 40 mile stroll?
Monday, January 30, 2017
Sunday, January 29, 2017
Psalm 51:4, 5 Definitions
David was repentant for his actions and did not pull any punches when describing them.
V. 2, 3 Wash me thoroughly from my iniquity And cleanse me from my sin. 3 For I know my transgressions, And my sin is ever before me.
Last time we gave a quick definition of them and we will explore them in more detail now. Iniquity relates to our inner nature. Sin is the outward manifestation of the nature. And transgression is identifying the offended party, God.
"Iniquity, sin, transgressions," are his descriptions. Verse 4 has him going deeper into the problem. A lot of times, defining the problem helps to solve it. He continues by reversing the order. He begins with the transgression. He has broken the boundary of what God demanded.
4 Against You, You only, I have sinned And done what is evil in Your sight,
He gives us a three-fold description of his actions, then evaluates them: "Iniquity, sin, transgressions." And in verse 5 he defines the root cause. That is because David is working from the inside out.
5 Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, And in sin my mother conceived me.
Notice verse 5 says that he, and we also, were brought forth in iniquity. That does not mean that his mother was a prostitute and he was illegitimate. It means that he had a sin nature from his father. And his father got it from his father, and so on back to Adam. (Incidentally, the "creation understanding that says man arose from monkeys, even if God did "make the changes," has a hard time fitting Adam and his sin into the picture. Animals do not have sin natures, or consciences, even if we condition them to "look" like it or anthropomorphize their actions to mimic shame. Don't get to use the "a" word every day. But I digress.)
David recognized that he, and we, have a sin nature. It is called depravity. "Depravity" does not mean that we are as bad as we could be. It means that we are as bad OFF as we could be. Or as I like to say, we are hapless, helpless, and hopeless. (We don't know what to do. We could not do what we need to do, even if we knew. And we wouldn't do what we need to do if we knew what that was and could do it. We can summarize it as we do not have the knowledge, nor the power, nor the will to deliver ourselves.) (New acronym: KPW)
David recognizes that his sin nature is not just a proclivity to "fun stuff." It is a curse that drives all of us to rebel against what God desires. It leads to sins. We sin because we are sinners. But the key item here is against Whom we sin.
Verse 4 delineates it explicitly. "Against You, and You only...." He further evaluates his actions. They are evil. This is transgression. We have transgressed God's commandments. The list of the Ten that David broke includes just about all ten. "Transgress" means to pass or cross over. When we "transgress" the property line we are trespassers. We are in territory where we ought not to be.
Likewise, David was in forbidden territory when he committed adultery. He not only violated Uriah's "property rights," he was crossing the line that the Lord had drawn. (Incidentally, if man is just an elevated animal, why all the fuss about marriage? Animals do not commit adultery or even lust. That seems to be a uniquely human characteristic. Without trying to provide a rigorous definition, we can agree that all life has a body of some type. Animals have what would be called a primitive soul. They are conscious, and even somewhat sentient. They can carry out mental exercises. But only man has a spirit, which is from God. It is how we link to God. Our souls and spirits are related, but can be separated. Hebrews 4:12)
A second "trespass" would be in taking of life. David was way out of bounds in ordering the "murder by enemy combatant" of Uriah, Bathsheba's husband. I am sure that it exposed him to "extortion," even though subtle or implied from his army commander, Joab.
David recognized and confessed that he was a sinner, driven by iniquity, and out of bounds. He even tells us that he had been acutely aware of his condition. "My sin is ever before me." (More later.) His conscience was not seared or deadened. Do you think that he woke up in the morning, and seeing Bathsheba, did not reflect back on what he had done? We do not know how long the baby lived before Nathan's visit, but how could he be anything but another reminder?
David needed to be washed, cleansed, redeemed. Washing just takes off the surface dirt. Cleansing is a deeper, even internal cleaning. It could even mean sterilizing. In verse 10 he goes the final step. He needs a new heart, to be born again.
And just to finish the thought, he recognized that the Lord was present and in control.
So that You are justified when You speak And blameless when You judge.
In the following verses, David turned his focus to "You." The focus, beginning here, moves to the Lord. He is justified or accurate and without error when He judges. David recognized that even though the penalty was painful, God was not petty, mean, or careless in pronouncing it. (Careless in both meanings.)
Let's pray with David. "Wash me thoroughly from my iniquity and cleanse me from my sin. For I know my transgressions, and my sin is ever before me. Against You, You only, I have sinned and done what is evil in Your sight, so that You are justified when You speak."
David is broken and broken hearted. It is not because he "got caught," but because he did something that was so terrible that he needed to be caught. There is no pleading innocence or ignorance. He does not try to plea bargain. He accepts and admits his guilt. God is right.
The good stuff is yet to come. Stay tuned....
V. 2, 3 Wash me thoroughly from my iniquity And cleanse me from my sin. 3 For I know my transgressions, And my sin is ever before me.
Last time we gave a quick definition of them and we will explore them in more detail now. Iniquity relates to our inner nature. Sin is the outward manifestation of the nature. And transgression is identifying the offended party, God.
"Iniquity, sin, transgressions," are his descriptions. Verse 4 has him going deeper into the problem. A lot of times, defining the problem helps to solve it. He continues by reversing the order. He begins with the transgression. He has broken the boundary of what God demanded.
4 Against You, You only, I have sinned And done what is evil in Your sight,
He gives us a three-fold description of his actions, then evaluates them: "Iniquity, sin, transgressions." And in verse 5 he defines the root cause. That is because David is working from the inside out.
5 Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, And in sin my mother conceived me.
Notice verse 5 says that he, and we also, were brought forth in iniquity. That does not mean that his mother was a prostitute and he was illegitimate. It means that he had a sin nature from his father. And his father got it from his father, and so on back to Adam. (Incidentally, the "creation understanding that says man arose from monkeys, even if God did "make the changes," has a hard time fitting Adam and his sin into the picture. Animals do not have sin natures, or consciences, even if we condition them to "look" like it or anthropomorphize their actions to mimic shame. Don't get to use the "a" word every day. But I digress.)
David recognized that he, and we, have a sin nature. It is called depravity. "Depravity" does not mean that we are as bad as we could be. It means that we are as bad OFF as we could be. Or as I like to say, we are hapless, helpless, and hopeless. (We don't know what to do. We could not do what we need to do, even if we knew. And we wouldn't do what we need to do if we knew what that was and could do it. We can summarize it as we do not have the knowledge, nor the power, nor the will to deliver ourselves.) (New acronym: KPW)
David recognizes that his sin nature is not just a proclivity to "fun stuff." It is a curse that drives all of us to rebel against what God desires. It leads to sins. We sin because we are sinners. But the key item here is against Whom we sin.
Verse 4 delineates it explicitly. "Against You, and You only...." He further evaluates his actions. They are evil. This is transgression. We have transgressed God's commandments. The list of the Ten that David broke includes just about all ten. "Transgress" means to pass or cross over. When we "transgress" the property line we are trespassers. We are in territory where we ought not to be.
Likewise, David was in forbidden territory when he committed adultery. He not only violated Uriah's "property rights," he was crossing the line that the Lord had drawn. (Incidentally, if man is just an elevated animal, why all the fuss about marriage? Animals do not commit adultery or even lust. That seems to be a uniquely human characteristic. Without trying to provide a rigorous definition, we can agree that all life has a body of some type. Animals have what would be called a primitive soul. They are conscious, and even somewhat sentient. They can carry out mental exercises. But only man has a spirit, which is from God. It is how we link to God. Our souls and spirits are related, but can be separated. Hebrews 4:12)
A second "trespass" would be in taking of life. David was way out of bounds in ordering the "murder by enemy combatant" of Uriah, Bathsheba's husband. I am sure that it exposed him to "extortion," even though subtle or implied from his army commander, Joab.
David recognized and confessed that he was a sinner, driven by iniquity, and out of bounds. He even tells us that he had been acutely aware of his condition. "My sin is ever before me." (More later.) His conscience was not seared or deadened. Do you think that he woke up in the morning, and seeing Bathsheba, did not reflect back on what he had done? We do not know how long the baby lived before Nathan's visit, but how could he be anything but another reminder?
David needed to be washed, cleansed, redeemed. Washing just takes off the surface dirt. Cleansing is a deeper, even internal cleaning. It could even mean sterilizing. In verse 10 he goes the final step. He needs a new heart, to be born again.
And just to finish the thought, he recognized that the Lord was present and in control.
So that You are justified when You speak And blameless when You judge.
In the following verses, David turned his focus to "You." The focus, beginning here, moves to the Lord. He is justified or accurate and without error when He judges. David recognized that even though the penalty was painful, God was not petty, mean, or careless in pronouncing it. (Careless in both meanings.)
Let's pray with David. "Wash me thoroughly from my iniquity and cleanse me from my sin. For I know my transgressions, and my sin is ever before me. Against You, You only, I have sinned and done what is evil in Your sight, so that You are justified when You speak."
David is broken and broken hearted. It is not because he "got caught," but because he did something that was so terrible that he needed to be caught. There is no pleading innocence or ignorance. He does not try to plea bargain. He accepts and admits his guilt. God is right.
The good stuff is yet to come. Stay tuned....
Saturday, January 28, 2017
Psalm 51: A Spade
Psalm 51:2, 3 Wash me thoroughly from my iniquity And cleanse me from my sin. 3 For I know my transgressions, And my sin is ever before me.
Last time (Psalm 51: The Beginning) we examined David's plea for forgiveness. We follow that with verses 2 and 3. A remarkable thing here, is that David did not excuse, minimize, or rationalize what he had done. He did not call it a goof, an indiscretion, minor or otherwise, a mistake in judgment, an error, an oopsy, or a slip up. (Can you think of any more?) He called it by its right name. A spade is a spade. He used "iniquity, sin, transgression." We will not define those in detail, but suffice it to say, they are admissions of guilt. (Iniquity relates to our inner nature. Sin is the outward manifestation of the nature. And transgression is identifying the offended party, God.)
He did not even rationalize it. "Why was she taking a bath on the roof of her house?" Didn't she know that the king's house was next door, and taller? And the king, excuse the candor, is somewhat of a womanizer. Surely she knew that. He had a bunch of wives already and probably had a reputation for a "roving eye."
Some commentators place the "bath" on the ground level discretely hidden from view by a fence or shrub. It would be easily visible from a taller building, however, like the palace. It might have been on a lower roof with the water set out earlier in the day to take advantage of "solar heating" before the bath. The reason is not critical. Whether Bathsheba intended to "seduce" the king or not is also not an issue. David hit it on the head. "...my iniquity...my sin...my transgression." It was me. There was no Flip Wilson to teach him, "The devil made me do it."
But let's look at what Paul Harvey used to call, "The rest of the story." What, or better, who is behind this whole episode? We do not have to look far in the Scripture to find the prime mover in most, if not all, of the adverse events recorded. It goes back to Genesis 3:15 when the Lord promised a Seed to crush Satan's head.
During the Viet Nam war we learned a new phrase: preemptive strike. That meant to take out the enemy before they could launch an attack on us or on our allied forces. Satan launched a preemptive strike immediately. First Cain killed Abel. That took out two candidates for the "seed" in one stroke. God countered with Seth.
And the battle has continued throughout the ages. Another notable chapter was when the entire earth had been so polluted with sin that Satan was certain that he had won. Either God would have to relent and compromise His holiness in order to avoid killing the entirety of mankind, or let Satan have a second chance.
Actually, he did not want a "second chance." His motivation was to actually claim the prize that he had originally sought, to be above God. His reasoning was flawed, which is why either option was a disaster for the creation. Satan, then Lucifer, sought worship. He inferred this same base motivation to God. He reasoned that if God did not get the worship He desired or needed from man, that the Lord would have to let Satan have his way. Or God would be forever denied the adoration of man.
He did not, nor can he understand the Divine Mind. God did not create man so that He, God, would receive worship. Man was created so that man could participate in the wonder of being able to worship and adore the Divine Majesty. We join with the Trinity in the fellowship of adoration. So the "loser," in Satan's plan, was man. Either we would worship Lucifer or nobody. Neither was or is a good choice.
God's intervention at the flood and later the tower of Babel (Genesis 11) was to preserve the legacy for man to worship Him. And when the world was completely wicked, "Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord." (Genesis 6 and following) Doesn't that give you goose bumps?
The attack on the godly line of the seed touched David. Satan had already "postponed" the Messiah for ten generations by Judah having fathered his offspring with his daughter-in-law. The law required a ten generation hiatus before an illegitimate child could enter the sanctuary. So any "seed" would be disqualified from participating in the corporate worship with the people.
David was, himself, the tenth generation, so God's plan was "back on track." By introducing another illegitimacy, Satan was attempting to further delay and thwart God's redemption of man. (Aside: David's older sons were pretty unsuited for the task. One, Amnon, raped his sister, and in response his brother, Absalom, murdered him. (2 Samuel 13) Another "twofer.")
Again Satan had eliminated two candidates for the Seed. He was attempting to eliminate the third. God intervened and stopped David before any "more damage" could be done.
"Wash me...and cleanse me." David's plea was uncluttered by excuses or explanations. He was truly repentant. And God responds. I have to jump head a little here. "A broken and a contrite heart, O God, You will not despise." (Verse 17) And He didn't.
We can learn a lot from David. "Wash and cleanse me."
Last time (Psalm 51: The Beginning) we examined David's plea for forgiveness. We follow that with verses 2 and 3. A remarkable thing here, is that David did not excuse, minimize, or rationalize what he had done. He did not call it a goof, an indiscretion, minor or otherwise, a mistake in judgment, an error, an oopsy, or a slip up. (Can you think of any more?) He called it by its right name. A spade is a spade. He used "iniquity, sin, transgression." We will not define those in detail, but suffice it to say, they are admissions of guilt. (Iniquity relates to our inner nature. Sin is the outward manifestation of the nature. And transgression is identifying the offended party, God.)
He did not even rationalize it. "Why was she taking a bath on the roof of her house?" Didn't she know that the king's house was next door, and taller? And the king, excuse the candor, is somewhat of a womanizer. Surely she knew that. He had a bunch of wives already and probably had a reputation for a "roving eye."
Some commentators place the "bath" on the ground level discretely hidden from view by a fence or shrub. It would be easily visible from a taller building, however, like the palace. It might have been on a lower roof with the water set out earlier in the day to take advantage of "solar heating" before the bath. The reason is not critical. Whether Bathsheba intended to "seduce" the king or not is also not an issue. David hit it on the head. "...my iniquity...my sin...my transgression." It was me. There was no Flip Wilson to teach him, "The devil made me do it."
But let's look at what Paul Harvey used to call, "The rest of the story." What, or better, who is behind this whole episode? We do not have to look far in the Scripture to find the prime mover in most, if not all, of the adverse events recorded. It goes back to Genesis 3:15 when the Lord promised a Seed to crush Satan's head.
During the Viet Nam war we learned a new phrase: preemptive strike. That meant to take out the enemy before they could launch an attack on us or on our allied forces. Satan launched a preemptive strike immediately. First Cain killed Abel. That took out two candidates for the "seed" in one stroke. God countered with Seth.
And the battle has continued throughout the ages. Another notable chapter was when the entire earth had been so polluted with sin that Satan was certain that he had won. Either God would have to relent and compromise His holiness in order to avoid killing the entirety of mankind, or let Satan have a second chance.
Actually, he did not want a "second chance." His motivation was to actually claim the prize that he had originally sought, to be above God. His reasoning was flawed, which is why either option was a disaster for the creation. Satan, then Lucifer, sought worship. He inferred this same base motivation to God. He reasoned that if God did not get the worship He desired or needed from man, that the Lord would have to let Satan have his way. Or God would be forever denied the adoration of man.
He did not, nor can he understand the Divine Mind. God did not create man so that He, God, would receive worship. Man was created so that man could participate in the wonder of being able to worship and adore the Divine Majesty. We join with the Trinity in the fellowship of adoration. So the "loser," in Satan's plan, was man. Either we would worship Lucifer or nobody. Neither was or is a good choice.
God's intervention at the flood and later the tower of Babel (Genesis 11) was to preserve the legacy for man to worship Him. And when the world was completely wicked, "Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord." (Genesis 6 and following) Doesn't that give you goose bumps?
The attack on the godly line of the seed touched David. Satan had already "postponed" the Messiah for ten generations by Judah having fathered his offspring with his daughter-in-law. The law required a ten generation hiatus before an illegitimate child could enter the sanctuary. So any "seed" would be disqualified from participating in the corporate worship with the people.
David was, himself, the tenth generation, so God's plan was "back on track." By introducing another illegitimacy, Satan was attempting to further delay and thwart God's redemption of man. (Aside: David's older sons were pretty unsuited for the task. One, Amnon, raped his sister, and in response his brother, Absalom, murdered him. (2 Samuel 13) Another "twofer.")
Again Satan had eliminated two candidates for the Seed. He was attempting to eliminate the third. God intervened and stopped David before any "more damage" could be done.
"Wash me...and cleanse me." David's plea was uncluttered by excuses or explanations. He was truly repentant. And God responds. I have to jump head a little here. "A broken and a contrite heart, O God, You will not despise." (Verse 17) And He didn't.
We can learn a lot from David. "Wash and cleanse me."
Thursday, January 26, 2017
Psalm 51 The Beginning
The reason for Psalm 51 comes in the first five verses. Listen to verse 1:
Be gracious to me, O God, according to Your lovingkindness; According to the greatness of Your compassion blot out my transgressions.
King James uses "Have mercy on me," and both "gracious" and "have mercy" help. Grace is being treated in a manner that we do not deserve. Mercy is not being treated in the manner which we do deserve. Both ideas are relevant here.
The "back story" is that Nathan the prophet has come to David and pronounced, "You are the man!" He had told David about a rich man who took a neighbor's family pet lamb for his dinner guests. The King was so incensed that he proclaimed that "that man" should die for his effrontery, selfishness, and arrogance, not realizing that the story was about David, himself.
Once confronted, David broke down in confession and repentance. It is clear by the context that David was not cruising along with impunity. We will get to that later. The monstrosity of what he had done was bothering him and Nathan broke the dam by revealing that God was not pleased either.
David does not stonewall or offer excuses and rationalizations. The story is in 2 Samuel 11 and 12.It is not clear exactly when David wrote this Psalm of repentance, but it would make sense that it was right around this time. Since the baby has already been born, we know that at least nine months elapsed since the events in question.
The realization that the Lord was "displeased" with him seems to be the catalyst for David's confession and admitting that he was wrong. His sin was not secret. His appeal was to God's loving kindness. (One word) It is more than just being kind to a poor dumb animal. It is a combination of extreme love coupled with care and compassion. "Lovingkindness" can at times allow us to suffer. A child who burns his finger on a hot stove can be comforted and consoled, but the pain will have to dissipate over time. The memory of "hot" will not dissipate.
An, "I told you it was hot," will be more loving, in the long run, than, "Oh you poor baby. Let Mommy kiss it and make it all better. Here's a treat." Taking their mind off the pain will ultimately serve to, in some instances, entice them to try again. There was no soothing word for David.
In fact, the baby died. Before I had kids, I did not understand that. Now I do. David went through that several times. "Would that I had died, instead of you...." (2 Samuel 18:33) He understood grief and this was tearing him apart.
Notice the appeal is not to his previous "good behavior" or merit. It is based solely on, "Your lovingkindness; According to the greatness of Your compassion...." There is no other source of forgiveness that is sufficient. We will find out why later, but for now the two deaths, the destruction of a reputation or two, deceit and conspiracy, theft, adultery, lust, and probably a few others makes the list of infractions pretty daunting.
"...blot out my transgressions." Notice the foundation for the request. It is not based on David's past history or even his penitence. But according to "Your tender compassion" or "mercies." Note again, not a deserved benefit, but one given in lieu of what we do deserve.
David knew what he "deserved," and appealed to the Lord on the basis of Sovereign character. He also implies that a change has occurred. It would be presumptive to assume that he, or we, can just "confess" and then keep going right on down the same path. Inherent in the plea for forgiveness is the admission of guilt and, AND a change of direction.
The theological word is "repent" which means essentially to turn around and go the other direction. David was going the wrong way. He needed help. And that is the basis for the Psalm. In fact, David realized that this was not a one time only event. Read it again:
Be gracious to me, O God, according to Your lovingkindness; According to the greatness of Your compassion blot out my transgressions.
"Trans-gress-ionS." (Emphasis added.) There were more than one. The litany of the Ten that he broke here is almost overwhelming. And he was acknowledging and confessing each and every one. He was also in the "forsaking" business.
Let our prayer tonight begin, "Be gracious to me, O God...."
Be gracious to me, O God, according to Your lovingkindness; According to the greatness of Your compassion blot out my transgressions.
King James uses "Have mercy on me," and both "gracious" and "have mercy" help. Grace is being treated in a manner that we do not deserve. Mercy is not being treated in the manner which we do deserve. Both ideas are relevant here.
The "back story" is that Nathan the prophet has come to David and pronounced, "You are the man!" He had told David about a rich man who took a neighbor's family pet lamb for his dinner guests. The King was so incensed that he proclaimed that "that man" should die for his effrontery, selfishness, and arrogance, not realizing that the story was about David, himself.
Once confronted, David broke down in confession and repentance. It is clear by the context that David was not cruising along with impunity. We will get to that later. The monstrosity of what he had done was bothering him and Nathan broke the dam by revealing that God was not pleased either.
David does not stonewall or offer excuses and rationalizations. The story is in 2 Samuel 11 and 12.It is not clear exactly when David wrote this Psalm of repentance, but it would make sense that it was right around this time. Since the baby has already been born, we know that at least nine months elapsed since the events in question.
The realization that the Lord was "displeased" with him seems to be the catalyst for David's confession and admitting that he was wrong. His sin was not secret. His appeal was to God's loving kindness. (One word) It is more than just being kind to a poor dumb animal. It is a combination of extreme love coupled with care and compassion. "Lovingkindness" can at times allow us to suffer. A child who burns his finger on a hot stove can be comforted and consoled, but the pain will have to dissipate over time. The memory of "hot" will not dissipate.
An, "I told you it was hot," will be more loving, in the long run, than, "Oh you poor baby. Let Mommy kiss it and make it all better. Here's a treat." Taking their mind off the pain will ultimately serve to, in some instances, entice them to try again. There was no soothing word for David.
In fact, the baby died. Before I had kids, I did not understand that. Now I do. David went through that several times. "Would that I had died, instead of you...." (2 Samuel 18:33) He understood grief and this was tearing him apart.
Notice the appeal is not to his previous "good behavior" or merit. It is based solely on, "Your lovingkindness; According to the greatness of Your compassion...." There is no other source of forgiveness that is sufficient. We will find out why later, but for now the two deaths, the destruction of a reputation or two, deceit and conspiracy, theft, adultery, lust, and probably a few others makes the list of infractions pretty daunting.
"...blot out my transgressions." Notice the foundation for the request. It is not based on David's past history or even his penitence. But according to "Your tender compassion" or "mercies." Note again, not a deserved benefit, but one given in lieu of what we do deserve.
David knew what he "deserved," and appealed to the Lord on the basis of Sovereign character. He also implies that a change has occurred. It would be presumptive to assume that he, or we, can just "confess" and then keep going right on down the same path. Inherent in the plea for forgiveness is the admission of guilt and, AND a change of direction.
The theological word is "repent" which means essentially to turn around and go the other direction. David was going the wrong way. He needed help. And that is the basis for the Psalm. In fact, David realized that this was not a one time only event. Read it again:
Be gracious to me, O God, according to Your lovingkindness; According to the greatness of Your compassion blot out my transgressions.
"Trans-gress-ionS." (Emphasis added.) There were more than one. The litany of the Ten that he broke here is almost overwhelming. And he was acknowledging and confessing each and every one. He was also in the "forsaking" business.
Let our prayer tonight begin, "Be gracious to me, O God...."
Gideon and the Fleece
Have you heard the story about Gideon the believer? We all know the story about Gideon and his famous fleece in Judges 6. But why did he ask for the special sign? Reading the story gives a different impression than we often entertain.
My impression had been that Gideon was not sure about God and doing things, so asked for a verification of Who He was. Not so. Gideon had already obeyed the Lord's command to tear down the altar of Baal and remove the Asherah pole. Then he built an altar to the Lord and offered a sacrifice on that. He was committed to repelling the Midianites.
The famous or infamous fleece tale (or is it tail?) comes after Gideon had gathered men from his family, Manasseh, and from Asher, Zebulun, and Naphtali. This confederation came together and the question, for Gideon, at least, was, "Am I the right one to lead this army against the Midianites?"
So he was not doubting God at all. He was seeking confirmation that he was the one to lead the conquest of their enemies. He was not a timid Timothy or doubting Thomas looking for an escape hatch. He had already displayed his courage in destroying the altar of the false gods. (Granted he did it at night, but apparently not secretly enough to escape detection.) His demonstration of courage in rejecting the "popular" god of the time may have inspired the following that responded to his call for assistance.
Gideon was not questioning God's ability. He was reaffirming his own call to lead. He was obedient. He just wanted to make sure that he was on the right path. There are a couple of lessons here.
First, he was acting out of obedience. He was not looking for an "out" to avoid following the Lord. Asking for guidance when we are not obedient to what we have already be given is a sure way to get no answer. At times the Lord does repeat instructions, but He always waits for us to "catch up" with our obedience before He leads in the next step. Gideon was already there.
Second, we may even choose outlandish requests. Dare great things. Joshua asked the Lord to "stop the sun." Done. Moses asked the Lord to make a way in the Red Sea. Done. Moses asked for water to come out of a rock. Done. Later on, Elijah asked for fire to fall on a sodden sacrifice. Done. We can go on and on. But the key connector in all of these incidents was the willingness to obey once the verification was done. Gideon was ready and he obeyed, even in the face of common sense objections. "Three hundred against a zillion? You sure?"
Remember what happened next? God trimmed Gideon's army to 300 men. Whoa! It is a good thing Gideon had asked before, wasn't it? If he had not been convinced prior to this, he would probably joined the 31,700 who went home. Incidentally, the opposing army was numbered at about 135,000. The next chapter recounts that about 15,000 survived and 120,000 were killed.
When we obey what we know, God will work miracles on our behalf. And with this knowledge, we do not even have to put out a fleece. Thank you Gideon.
My impression had been that Gideon was not sure about God and doing things, so asked for a verification of Who He was. Not so. Gideon had already obeyed the Lord's command to tear down the altar of Baal and remove the Asherah pole. Then he built an altar to the Lord and offered a sacrifice on that. He was committed to repelling the Midianites.
The famous or infamous fleece tale (or is it tail?) comes after Gideon had gathered men from his family, Manasseh, and from Asher, Zebulun, and Naphtali. This confederation came together and the question, for Gideon, at least, was, "Am I the right one to lead this army against the Midianites?"
So he was not doubting God at all. He was seeking confirmation that he was the one to lead the conquest of their enemies. He was not a timid Timothy or doubting Thomas looking for an escape hatch. He had already displayed his courage in destroying the altar of the false gods. (Granted he did it at night, but apparently not secretly enough to escape detection.) His demonstration of courage in rejecting the "popular" god of the time may have inspired the following that responded to his call for assistance.
Gideon was not questioning God's ability. He was reaffirming his own call to lead. He was obedient. He just wanted to make sure that he was on the right path. There are a couple of lessons here.
First, he was acting out of obedience. He was not looking for an "out" to avoid following the Lord. Asking for guidance when we are not obedient to what we have already be given is a sure way to get no answer. At times the Lord does repeat instructions, but He always waits for us to "catch up" with our obedience before He leads in the next step. Gideon was already there.
Second, we may even choose outlandish requests. Dare great things. Joshua asked the Lord to "stop the sun." Done. Moses asked the Lord to make a way in the Red Sea. Done. Moses asked for water to come out of a rock. Done. Later on, Elijah asked for fire to fall on a sodden sacrifice. Done. We can go on and on. But the key connector in all of these incidents was the willingness to obey once the verification was done. Gideon was ready and he obeyed, even in the face of common sense objections. "Three hundred against a zillion? You sure?"
Remember what happened next? God trimmed Gideon's army to 300 men. Whoa! It is a good thing Gideon had asked before, wasn't it? If he had not been convinced prior to this, he would probably joined the 31,700 who went home. Incidentally, the opposing army was numbered at about 135,000. The next chapter recounts that about 15,000 survived and 120,000 were killed.
When we obey what we know, God will work miracles on our behalf. And with this knowledge, we do not even have to put out a fleece. Thank you Gideon.
Tuesday, January 24, 2017
Psalm 51 A New Heart
We will make a study of Psalm 51 in the next few thoughts, but we will begin with verse 10. This is not to change the divine order of the chapter, but because this part fits today's problem and will lead us into the remainder of this great meditation.
I know that the above was not the scintillating introduction necessary to draw in readers, but that is how it seems best to proceed. Leading with the sensational and titillating would perhaps draw more interest, but it would also send the wrong impression of what we are attempting to communicate. So settle back and enjoy the sensation.
A newly, less popular pundit recently tweeted (often we use twit and it seems appropriate here) that the youngest son of President Trump would probably end up being the first home school shooter. I hope I don't offend you, but I thought that comment was neither funny nor clever. The first thing that sprang into mind was that "out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks." (Matthew 12:34)
That heart needs to be cut out and thoroughly cleaned before replacement. Then I read Ps 51:
10 Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a right spirit within me.
And it struck me that a lot of hearts need to be re-created, and not just cleaned, mine included. (Aside: Kathie Hill wrote a nice little children's musical called "Dr. Newheart." If you are looking for material for children's ministry you cannot go wrong with that. My kids and wife sang, and perhaps still do sing, it for years after they learned it. But I digress.) We need a new heart.
Doctors today can transplant hearts and that might come to mind. But the "replacement" heart already has some miles on it. It is not "new" it is just different. And, unfortunately, that will not solve the problem. It is not the muscle in our chest that needs to be re-created.
A word study informs us that "heart" is the center of our emotion: The "me" that makes me, me. The heart that needs replacement is not physical, but spiritual. This is a bigger job than any physician can undertake.
David's prayer is seemingly coincidental with the description Paul penned in 2 Corinthians 5:17: a new creation. (Paul repeats that phrase in Galatians 6:15.) We are way past cleaning, just as my old t-shirt was after I changed the oil–and got some on me. It had to be retired to the rag-bag and replaced with a new one.
Paul and David both focus on the necessity of not just cleaning up, but of re-creating the old heart. But David does not stop there. "...and renew a right spirit within me." Notice the order of action. Trying to impose a different or right spirit onto the old frame is doomed to fail. We require a new heart, then a right spirit. Any other order would be akin to putting new decking boards on a rotten deck frame. The whole thing will come crashing down. (I am just filled with mechanical comparisons, today.)
Paul said we need a new start, a new heart. Jesus said the same thing to Nicodemus in John 3. Nic, and I, need a second chance, a new start, the new birth. Once that happens, as Paul reports, we are new creatures. And boy did David understand that. We will go back and look at his path to this realization. I can hardly wait.
Our final thought on the reckless tweet comes from Proverbs 12:16 without comment. (That is a comment in and of itself, isn't it?)
16 A fool's displeasure is known at once, but whoever ignores an insult is sensible.
I know that the above was not the scintillating introduction necessary to draw in readers, but that is how it seems best to proceed. Leading with the sensational and titillating would perhaps draw more interest, but it would also send the wrong impression of what we are attempting to communicate. So settle back and enjoy the sensation.
A newly, less popular pundit recently tweeted (often we use twit and it seems appropriate here) that the youngest son of President Trump would probably end up being the first home school shooter. I hope I don't offend you, but I thought that comment was neither funny nor clever. The first thing that sprang into mind was that "out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks." (Matthew 12:34)
That heart needs to be cut out and thoroughly cleaned before replacement. Then I read Ps 51:
10 Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a right spirit within me.
And it struck me that a lot of hearts need to be re-created, and not just cleaned, mine included. (Aside: Kathie Hill wrote a nice little children's musical called "Dr. Newheart." If you are looking for material for children's ministry you cannot go wrong with that. My kids and wife sang, and perhaps still do sing, it for years after they learned it. But I digress.) We need a new heart.
Doctors today can transplant hearts and that might come to mind. But the "replacement" heart already has some miles on it. It is not "new" it is just different. And, unfortunately, that will not solve the problem. It is not the muscle in our chest that needs to be re-created.
A word study informs us that "heart" is the center of our emotion: The "me" that makes me, me. The heart that needs replacement is not physical, but spiritual. This is a bigger job than any physician can undertake.
David's prayer is seemingly coincidental with the description Paul penned in 2 Corinthians 5:17: a new creation. (Paul repeats that phrase in Galatians 6:15.) We are way past cleaning, just as my old t-shirt was after I changed the oil–and got some on me. It had to be retired to the rag-bag and replaced with a new one.
Paul and David both focus on the necessity of not just cleaning up, but of re-creating the old heart. But David does not stop there. "...and renew a right spirit within me." Notice the order of action. Trying to impose a different or right spirit onto the old frame is doomed to fail. We require a new heart, then a right spirit. Any other order would be akin to putting new decking boards on a rotten deck frame. The whole thing will come crashing down. (I am just filled with mechanical comparisons, today.)
Paul said we need a new start, a new heart. Jesus said the same thing to Nicodemus in John 3. Nic, and I, need a second chance, a new start, the new birth. Once that happens, as Paul reports, we are new creatures. And boy did David understand that. We will go back and look at his path to this realization. I can hardly wait.
Our final thought on the reckless tweet comes from Proverbs 12:16 without comment. (That is a comment in and of itself, isn't it?)
16 A fool's displeasure is known at once, but whoever ignores an insult is sensible.
Monday, January 23, 2017
The Lord's Prayer (For His Disciples to Pray)
"Our Father Who art in heaven..." begins the Lord's prayer. (It is actually the Disciples' prayer that He taught them, and us, to pray. But for convenience and clarity, we will use the familiar name.) (Matthew 6:9-13)
Is this just a recognition of our Father's high and lofty position? Is is a bit of worship for the elevated nature of the One we revere? Does it recognize our relative position in not only this world, but within the universe? The answer is, "Yes...and No." All of the preceding are true, and we need to recognize them when we approach the throne of grace.
But there is an even more important reason for the statement. We find it in Matthew chapter 20:
16 So the last shall be first, and the first last.
This was pointed out to me during the last time I studied the prayer. Our prayer does not just recognize our position, it affirms and declares our subservience to Him. The word we are looking for is, "humility." I can recognize that someone else is better or more accomplished than I, but at the same time be proud of what I am. I may even flaunt my supposed humility.
The first phrase puts my attitude in tune with God's. Paul exemplified that when he called himself the "chief of sinners." There was no pride in that. It was with brokenness and a bitter spirit. Paul never forgot how far he had come. We all have, but just fail to remember.
"Heaven" is not the atmosphere, or even outer space, as majestic, incredible, and almost infinite as that is. Heaven is the perfect residence of the Perfect and Holy God. If we were invited to the White House or Buckingham Palace, we would not walk in swelling with pride, comparing it to our mobile home. Even if we lived in the best that the Trump empire has to offer, we would be humbled by the Palace.
Now put yourself into the shoes of a British subject, being shown into the entry way, then into the throne room. And the Queen beckons us forward. Knees buckling time, even for us Yanks. Any pride and self promotion that may have hitchhiked in the backpack are ejected.
This is not a pretentious, preening, pseudo-humility where we deliberately parade to a "lower" position at the feast for the purpose of being elevated by the host. This is an abject poverty of spirit recognizing that the lowest place is where I need to be and that I will be uncomfortable anywhere else.
Now go another step. The words that precede that really bring us to our knees. "Our Father." I am not a visitor to the throne room of the British Empire. I am an adopted son of the Sovereign of the universe.
"Our Father, Who art in heaven...."
Is this just a recognition of our Father's high and lofty position? Is is a bit of worship for the elevated nature of the One we revere? Does it recognize our relative position in not only this world, but within the universe? The answer is, "Yes...and No." All of the preceding are true, and we need to recognize them when we approach the throne of grace.
But there is an even more important reason for the statement. We find it in Matthew chapter 20:
16 So the last shall be first, and the first last.
This was pointed out to me during the last time I studied the prayer. Our prayer does not just recognize our position, it affirms and declares our subservience to Him. The word we are looking for is, "humility." I can recognize that someone else is better or more accomplished than I, but at the same time be proud of what I am. I may even flaunt my supposed humility.
The first phrase puts my attitude in tune with God's. Paul exemplified that when he called himself the "chief of sinners." There was no pride in that. It was with brokenness and a bitter spirit. Paul never forgot how far he had come. We all have, but just fail to remember.
"Heaven" is not the atmosphere, or even outer space, as majestic, incredible, and almost infinite as that is. Heaven is the perfect residence of the Perfect and Holy God. If we were invited to the White House or Buckingham Palace, we would not walk in swelling with pride, comparing it to our mobile home. Even if we lived in the best that the Trump empire has to offer, we would be humbled by the Palace.
Now put yourself into the shoes of a British subject, being shown into the entry way, then into the throne room. And the Queen beckons us forward. Knees buckling time, even for us Yanks. Any pride and self promotion that may have hitchhiked in the backpack are ejected.
This is not a pretentious, preening, pseudo-humility where we deliberately parade to a "lower" position at the feast for the purpose of being elevated by the host. This is an abject poverty of spirit recognizing that the lowest place is where I need to be and that I will be uncomfortable anywhere else.
Now go another step. The words that precede that really bring us to our knees. "Our Father." I am not a visitor to the throne room of the British Empire. I am an adopted son of the Sovereign of the universe.
"Our Father, Who art in heaven...."
Consecration Revisited
Rise up! Consecrate the people and say, "Consecrate yourselves for tomorrow." Joshua 7:13
The Bible does not stop talking to us. We looked at "consecration" (http://reflectionsfromjim.blogspot.com/2017/01/consecrate.html) previously in Joshua 3 and here it is again in chapter 7. This time, however, it is not so "friendly." The backdrop to this event is after the destruction of Jehrico. One of the soldiers, Achan, had taken some of the spoil for himself.
This caused God to remove His help from them and in fact to fight against them. Now recall the details. The Israelite army was over 600,000 armed men. When the story was over, they had wiped out the armies of Ai and the total number from the city, including men, women, and children, was 12,000. Even with an estimate that one in three were soldiers, the total army would have been generously estimated at about 4,000.
Aside: The initial conquest was "lost" because 36 of the Israelites were killed. The rest were so demoralized that they ran away. Talk about the "mouse that roared." In reality, we can see that God was fighting against Israel at this point to instill such terror into the entire army over the loss of 36 men.
Joshua was devastated and fell on his face before God to plead for explanation and further direction. And here is where the verse comes in.
League's version: "Get up! What you doin' on your face? You have some work to do. (Little foxes from the previous post. http://reflectionsfromjim.blogspot.com/2017/01/giants-and-foxes.html) Set yourselves apart to witness what God will do."
Again notice that this is not a good thing to witness, but it is instructive and edifying. We can learn from mistakes and failures. If nothing else, we can be like Thomas Edison and "know what does not work." (https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/t/thomasaed132683.html)
On occasion, we set ourselves apart to witness a great conquest. At other times we witness God's character in correcting and disciplining us. The old saying, "Please be patient with me, God is not finished yet," reflects His inexhaustible patience with molding and shaping us into servants who can bring praise to Him.
Either way, God is at work and we are well advised to be prepared. "Consecrate yourselves."
The Bible does not stop talking to us. We looked at "consecration" (http://reflectionsfromjim.blogspot.com/2017/01/consecrate.html) previously in Joshua 3 and here it is again in chapter 7. This time, however, it is not so "friendly." The backdrop to this event is after the destruction of Jehrico. One of the soldiers, Achan, had taken some of the spoil for himself.
This caused God to remove His help from them and in fact to fight against them. Now recall the details. The Israelite army was over 600,000 armed men. When the story was over, they had wiped out the armies of Ai and the total number from the city, including men, women, and children, was 12,000. Even with an estimate that one in three were soldiers, the total army would have been generously estimated at about 4,000.
Aside: The initial conquest was "lost" because 36 of the Israelites were killed. The rest were so demoralized that they ran away. Talk about the "mouse that roared." In reality, we can see that God was fighting against Israel at this point to instill such terror into the entire army over the loss of 36 men.
Joshua was devastated and fell on his face before God to plead for explanation and further direction. And here is where the verse comes in.
League's version: "Get up! What you doin' on your face? You have some work to do. (Little foxes from the previous post. http://reflectionsfromjim.blogspot.com/2017/01/giants-and-foxes.html) Set yourselves apart to witness what God will do."
Again notice that this is not a good thing to witness, but it is instructive and edifying. We can learn from mistakes and failures. If nothing else, we can be like Thomas Edison and "know what does not work." (https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/t/thomasaed132683.html)
On occasion, we set ourselves apart to witness a great conquest. At other times we witness God's character in correcting and disciplining us. The old saying, "Please be patient with me, God is not finished yet," reflects His inexhaustible patience with molding and shaping us into servants who can bring praise to Him.
Either way, God is at work and we are well advised to be prepared. "Consecrate yourselves."
Giants and Foxes
Joshua 11 has a "toss off" comment as it details the conquest of the promised land.
22 There were no Anakim left in the land of the sons of Israel; only in Gaza, in Gath, and in Ashdod some remained.
Then the narrative continues. Without a map and a little background, it might slip right past us. But when we apply history, we see an interesting situation. The Philistines had been around since the days of Abraham. He seemed to have a pretty amiable relationship with them. But when his children returned from Egypt several hundred years later, they were implacable enemies.
Notice where the Anakim, giants, were left as a residual population by Joshua's armies. There were five principle cities of the Philistines. The three mentioned along with Ashkelon and Ekron comprised the bulk of the nation. From before the time of the judge, Samuel they had been active adversaries to Israel. David even sheltered in one of their cities when Saul was chasing him. And to add to the irony, David went to Gath to escape Saul. (1 Samuel 27)
And of course, we all recognize their premier champion, Goliath of Gath. (Told you it was ironic.) So the remnants of Joshua's "oversight" remained around to harass the Israelites for many years afterward. In the same way, a small moral "indiscretion" will assuredly come back later as a giant to block our way.
Song of Solomon 2:15 has a comment that applies here.
"Catch the foxes for us, The little foxes that are ruining the vineyards, While our vineyards are in blossom."
The "little foxes," cute little guys, are very expensive to keep in the vineyard because they can ruin the crop. The little foxes eat the young grapes before they ripen and mature, leaving the vineyard devastated.
Incidentally the destructive potential of foxes is illustrated by Samson in Judges 15. He captured 300 foxes, tied them two by two together by their tails, and released them into the standing grain of the, guess who, Philistines, with torches tied to their tails. Notwithstanding the cruelty of this act, it illustrates how seeming innocuous items can and often do collaborate to cause major destruction.
Be careful with "minor" accounts. Don't let your foxes turn into giants.
22 There were no Anakim left in the land of the sons of Israel; only in Gaza, in Gath, and in Ashdod some remained.
Then the narrative continues. Without a map and a little background, it might slip right past us. But when we apply history, we see an interesting situation. The Philistines had been around since the days of Abraham. He seemed to have a pretty amiable relationship with them. But when his children returned from Egypt several hundred years later, they were implacable enemies.
Notice where the Anakim, giants, were left as a residual population by Joshua's armies. There were five principle cities of the Philistines. The three mentioned along with Ashkelon and Ekron comprised the bulk of the nation. From before the time of the judge, Samuel they had been active adversaries to Israel. David even sheltered in one of their cities when Saul was chasing him. And to add to the irony, David went to Gath to escape Saul. (1 Samuel 27)
And of course, we all recognize their premier champion, Goliath of Gath. (Told you it was ironic.) So the remnants of Joshua's "oversight" remained around to harass the Israelites for many years afterward. In the same way, a small moral "indiscretion" will assuredly come back later as a giant to block our way.
Song of Solomon 2:15 has a comment that applies here.
"Catch the foxes for us, The little foxes that are ruining the vineyards, While our vineyards are in blossom."
The "little foxes," cute little guys, are very expensive to keep in the vineyard because they can ruin the crop. The little foxes eat the young grapes before they ripen and mature, leaving the vineyard devastated.
Incidentally the destructive potential of foxes is illustrated by Samson in Judges 15. He captured 300 foxes, tied them two by two together by their tails, and released them into the standing grain of the, guess who, Philistines, with torches tied to their tails. Notwithstanding the cruelty of this act, it illustrates how seeming innocuous items can and often do collaborate to cause major destruction.
Be careful with "minor" accounts. Don't let your foxes turn into giants.
Saturday, January 21, 2017
Doxology
Now to Him who is able to keep you from stumbling, and to make you stand in the presence of His glory blameless with great joy, 25 to the only God our Savior, through Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory, majesty, dominion and authority, before all time and now and forever. Amen.
This is the doxology that Jude uses to finish his instructions and warning to the church. This is a prime candidate for memorization. And it is a wonderful thing to keep in mind all of the time, not just at the end.
King James says "Now unto Him that is able to keep you from falling...." First we identify who is being glorified. "Him." Just to make sure that we know Who, Him, is we identify that He is able. This "able" is not "possibly will or will not," but it means is fully capable and it has been done. "Keep you from falling," is KJV. NASB is better, "even from stumbling." We will not slip and fall. We will not even slip.
Some may ask if He is able, but will He? Is there anything that God can do, but will not do? The answer is, "No." A resounding, "NO!" Think with me. Can God save the lost without them believing on Jesus? That would surely be comforting. Again, No, a thousand times no.
That was displayed in the Garden of Gethsemane. Jesus asked three times if there was any other way. "Let this cup pass from Me." (Matthew 26:39) It was repeated three times. It was not to allow God to search the annals of eternity for the answer, He already knew it. It was repeated to emphasize it. A Hebrew literary device repeats things for emphasis, and a threefold repetition is iron-clad. It will not change.
There was no other way than for Jesus to endure the suffering on Calvary to save you and me. It is impossible for there to be any other way. Can He keep us from stumbling? Well, if He went through the anguish of crucifixion, does it make any sense that He would let us "slip" out of His fingers?
In fact, Jesus said that Himself in John 10:28 and 29.
I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand. 29... no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand.
"Him Who is able to keep you from stumbling...." He is able and He will. But that is not all.
...and to make you stand in the presence of His glory blameless with great joy....
King James says, "faultless." We will be presented, stand in His presence, perfect. Blameless, faultless, sinless. Not the old Jim as we all know. But the "new creation" Paul describes in 2 Corinthians 5:17. Not only "new" but perfect, blameless, faultless. And it is only to His glory.
And on my part, there is "great joy." But the joy is not on my part only. He gets great joy by keeping me from stumbling and being presented faultless. Think of that. He gets joy from us. Look at Zephaniah 3:17:
The Lord your God is in your midst, A victorious warrior. He will exult over you with joy, He will be quiet in His love, He will rejoice over you with shouts of joy.
This was directed to Israel, but verse 12 says that He is talking about a "humble and lowly" people. I want to be in that crowd. Imagine the Creator of the universe, exulting and rejoicing over us! It is almost incredible. It would be if He were not "able." The joy is two way. I have joy, He has joy. Glory!
With that in mind, Jude turns to the object of our praise. I like King James again. "To the only wise God...." All the other gods are dumb in both senses of the word. They cannot talk, hence, dumb. And they have nothing to say because they are just wood or rocks or metal. I do not worship a thing. I worship a "Who." "Now unto Him, WHO...."
The One, the only One Who is worthy of all "glory, majesty, dominion and authority...." We could spend another day on those, but would not even touch the surface. Maybe later.
"...before all time and now and forever." Notice the eternality of God. Before time began, He was there. He is now here. And He will be forever. And the last part, forever, is how long we will be presented to His glory. Glory.
"Amen." Del Tackett pronounces this, "Ah–main" or A-mein. A Jewish rabbi prayed at the recent inauguration and he pronounced it the same way. This is not just the caboose to let us know the end of the prayer has passed, like the end of train. It is a word of agreement.
When we "ah-main" something, we agree. In prayer, when we finish, we use Jesus' words from Matthew 26 again. "Not my will, but Thine be done." Ah-main. I agree with whatever Your will brings. Let it be to me as it is in heaven.
Ah-main and ah-main.
This is the doxology that Jude uses to finish his instructions and warning to the church. This is a prime candidate for memorization. And it is a wonderful thing to keep in mind all of the time, not just at the end.
King James says "Now unto Him that is able to keep you from falling...." First we identify who is being glorified. "Him." Just to make sure that we know Who, Him, is we identify that He is able. This "able" is not "possibly will or will not," but it means is fully capable and it has been done. "Keep you from falling," is KJV. NASB is better, "even from stumbling." We will not slip and fall. We will not even slip.
Some may ask if He is able, but will He? Is there anything that God can do, but will not do? The answer is, "No." A resounding, "NO!" Think with me. Can God save the lost without them believing on Jesus? That would surely be comforting. Again, No, a thousand times no.
That was displayed in the Garden of Gethsemane. Jesus asked three times if there was any other way. "Let this cup pass from Me." (Matthew 26:39) It was repeated three times. It was not to allow God to search the annals of eternity for the answer, He already knew it. It was repeated to emphasize it. A Hebrew literary device repeats things for emphasis, and a threefold repetition is iron-clad. It will not change.
There was no other way than for Jesus to endure the suffering on Calvary to save you and me. It is impossible for there to be any other way. Can He keep us from stumbling? Well, if He went through the anguish of crucifixion, does it make any sense that He would let us "slip" out of His fingers?
In fact, Jesus said that Himself in John 10:28 and 29.
I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand. 29... no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand.
"Him Who is able to keep you from stumbling...." He is able and He will. But that is not all.
...and to make you stand in the presence of His glory blameless with great joy....
King James says, "faultless." We will be presented, stand in His presence, perfect. Blameless, faultless, sinless. Not the old Jim as we all know. But the "new creation" Paul describes in 2 Corinthians 5:17. Not only "new" but perfect, blameless, faultless. And it is only to His glory.
And on my part, there is "great joy." But the joy is not on my part only. He gets great joy by keeping me from stumbling and being presented faultless. Think of that. He gets joy from us. Look at Zephaniah 3:17:
The Lord your God is in your midst, A victorious warrior. He will exult over you with joy, He will be quiet in His love, He will rejoice over you with shouts of joy.
This was directed to Israel, but verse 12 says that He is talking about a "humble and lowly" people. I want to be in that crowd. Imagine the Creator of the universe, exulting and rejoicing over us! It is almost incredible. It would be if He were not "able." The joy is two way. I have joy, He has joy. Glory!
With that in mind, Jude turns to the object of our praise. I like King James again. "To the only wise God...." All the other gods are dumb in both senses of the word. They cannot talk, hence, dumb. And they have nothing to say because they are just wood or rocks or metal. I do not worship a thing. I worship a "Who." "Now unto Him, WHO...."
The One, the only One Who is worthy of all "glory, majesty, dominion and authority...." We could spend another day on those, but would not even touch the surface. Maybe later.
"...before all time and now and forever." Notice the eternality of God. Before time began, He was there. He is now here. And He will be forever. And the last part, forever, is how long we will be presented to His glory. Glory.
"Amen." Del Tackett pronounces this, "Ah–main" or A-mein. A Jewish rabbi prayed at the recent inauguration and he pronounced it the same way. This is not just the caboose to let us know the end of the prayer has passed, like the end of train. It is a word of agreement.
When we "ah-main" something, we agree. In prayer, when we finish, we use Jesus' words from Matthew 26 again. "Not my will, but Thine be done." Ah-main. I agree with whatever Your will brings. Let it be to me as it is in heaven.
Ah-main and ah-main.
Friday, January 20, 2017
Why I am a Young Earth Creationist
I am a young earth creationist, but that puts me in an uncomfortable position concerning the practice of science. One hallmark of true science is that the data drives the theory and not vice versa. In other words, we do not decide what we want to prove, then look for evidence, we look at information, data, if you please, and decide what it says. We do this by organizing the data and looking for patterns or regularities. Then we try to verify that we have read it correctly by hypothesizing as to why the regularities exist. More experiments follow to check out other possibilities or confirm the one we have.
In the above outline of procedure, we assume that science begins with no information. That is not strictly true as we always have our training and our personal likes and dislikes. We also have the results of previous work. But ideally we start a "project" with a blank slate.
But when we come to Scripture, things are a little different. The beginning slate is not blank. We read what the text says, then look at the data to see if it lines up. If not, then we begin to look for explanations. Did I misinterpret the words? Is there an alternative "meaning" that I did not consider? Or have I applied the data incorrectly?
So when I say that I am a young earth creationist, I am affirming that I believe that creation and the earth happened within about the past 10,000 years. I do not believe it, thinking that it is therefore true, but rather, I believe it because it is true.
Six times Genesis 1 says, "evening and morning, one day." A first reading does not indicate that this is anything except a normal, 24 hour day. So any belief system that is different must have some external backing. Now, when we come to the Scripture we have to be careful that we do not read data into the Scripture, rather than allowing the Scripture to explain data. We have an advantage over "science" in that we have an all-knowing Author who gave us the story. So the story must be interpreted in light of what the Author of Scripture has said.
There is a theory or interpretation that proposes that the "day" in Genesis 1 is a figurative day, leaving room for vast periods of time to elapse and either evolution, or God-guided changes to occur as the evolutionary theory proposes. In other words, science tries to find ways to fit millions of years into the six days of Scripture. Young earth creation tries to find ways to explain seeming periods of time in the six days.
Aside: My first inclination is to worry about this line of reasoning, because the chain of events in the "long ages and evolution in general" is very uncertain, and changes all the time. One recent explanation is that instead of an evolutionary "tree" some now assert that it is a bunch of bushes. Instead of everything coming from one common ancestor, everything came from its own line which traces back to a multiplicity of "beginning" organisms. End aside.
The time element is constant, so the argument still applies. Looking at "natural data" it appears that the earth is billions of years old. So the Scripture word must mean long time periods. But this falls into the exact trap that I outlined before. The data is interjected into the Scripture and the "clear" meaning is reassessed.
So a valid reinterpretation of Scripture must be driven from another Scripture. The Day of the Lord is given as an example of an indeterminate time. In reality, the actual "Day" is determined. It will be almost instantaneous. But the schedule is undetermined. The phrase "you have your day" is also suggested as a usage that might indicate an indeterminate time. But I do not find that in the Scripture. Even when it says, "your day" it is describing a specific day, not a period of time.
Ezekiel 16:65 uses "your day of pride." But with over 200 other references all talking about a literal day, even if it is not specifies, as in "days to come," it is still talking about a normal day. There are references to the "days of Noah, days of John, or days of Herod," but they are not an indeterminate period. They can be calculated exactly.
When we look at "day," we are required to consider the normal meaning first and foremost. Without Scripture to guide in a different direction, we must be very careful about "adding to Scripture.
I have found one instance where "day" does not mean a 23 hour day. It is in Hosea 6:2
2 "He will revive us after two days; He will raise us up on the third day, That we may live before Him."
And here, even though it does not necessarily denote a 24 hour period, it seems to imply a short period, "two or three days." There is no indication that long periods of time are involved. (Some surmise that the "third day" may refer to the millenium, but even so, a one thousand year day does not allow for all the supposed millions of years being claimed.)
So is there a different explanation for the apparent age of the earth? Whether one accepts the interpretation, everyone must agree that there are viable explanations for the seeming discrepancies. The "old earth" argument must still overcome the six day limitation before rejecting the alternatives. And the more that I read and study, the more I am impressed with the alternatives both in their scientific rigor and theological consequence.
(An article below is referenced with the salient quotation excerpted.*)
The most telling argument is, "I would not want to worship a God Who would ‘trick' me with ‘seeming' or apparent age." The answer is that it is not a trick but an illustration of how things really are. For instance, Adam was created as a 35 year old man. (Just guessing based on speculation of others.) He was not a new born baby or even a fetus/embryo. He was fully developed.
The trees had rings just as if they had been around for many years. To do otherwise would have been dishonest. As Adam watched new trees grow and noted the growth patterns, he would see them reflected in the mature trees with which he was acquainted. To do otherwise would either confuse him, or perhaps convey some "special meaning and value" to the "original" creation over what grew up later.
And just as a final note, when I meet Jesus, I would rather explain to Him how I interpreted the day as 24 hours and that He would be able to do such a thing in six days than alternative. It would be a little uncomfortable if He says, "What part of ‘day' did you not understand?"
* "… so far as I know, there is no professor of Hebrew or Old Testament at any world-class university who does not believe that the writer(s) of Genesis 1–11 intended to convey to their readers the ideas that: a. creation took place in a series of six days which were the same as the days of 24 hours we now experience b. the figures contained in the Genesis genealogies provided by simple addition a chronology from the beginning of the world up to later stages in the biblical story c. Noah's flood was understood to be world-wide and extinguish all human and animal life except for those in the ark."
James Barr, Oriel Professor of the interpretation of the Holy Scripture, Oxford University, England, letter to David C.C. Watson, 23 April 1984.
http://askjohnmackay.com/biologos-stated-noahs-flood-was-only-a-local-event-and-is-only-a-theological-story-what-do-you-think/
In the above outline of procedure, we assume that science begins with no information. That is not strictly true as we always have our training and our personal likes and dislikes. We also have the results of previous work. But ideally we start a "project" with a blank slate.
But when we come to Scripture, things are a little different. The beginning slate is not blank. We read what the text says, then look at the data to see if it lines up. If not, then we begin to look for explanations. Did I misinterpret the words? Is there an alternative "meaning" that I did not consider? Or have I applied the data incorrectly?
So when I say that I am a young earth creationist, I am affirming that I believe that creation and the earth happened within about the past 10,000 years. I do not believe it, thinking that it is therefore true, but rather, I believe it because it is true.
Six times Genesis 1 says, "evening and morning, one day." A first reading does not indicate that this is anything except a normal, 24 hour day. So any belief system that is different must have some external backing. Now, when we come to the Scripture we have to be careful that we do not read data into the Scripture, rather than allowing the Scripture to explain data. We have an advantage over "science" in that we have an all-knowing Author who gave us the story. So the story must be interpreted in light of what the Author of Scripture has said.
There is a theory or interpretation that proposes that the "day" in Genesis 1 is a figurative day, leaving room for vast periods of time to elapse and either evolution, or God-guided changes to occur as the evolutionary theory proposes. In other words, science tries to find ways to fit millions of years into the six days of Scripture. Young earth creation tries to find ways to explain seeming periods of time in the six days.
Aside: My first inclination is to worry about this line of reasoning, because the chain of events in the "long ages and evolution in general" is very uncertain, and changes all the time. One recent explanation is that instead of an evolutionary "tree" some now assert that it is a bunch of bushes. Instead of everything coming from one common ancestor, everything came from its own line which traces back to a multiplicity of "beginning" organisms. End aside.
The time element is constant, so the argument still applies. Looking at "natural data" it appears that the earth is billions of years old. So the Scripture word must mean long time periods. But this falls into the exact trap that I outlined before. The data is interjected into the Scripture and the "clear" meaning is reassessed.
So a valid reinterpretation of Scripture must be driven from another Scripture. The Day of the Lord is given as an example of an indeterminate time. In reality, the actual "Day" is determined. It will be almost instantaneous. But the schedule is undetermined. The phrase "you have your day" is also suggested as a usage that might indicate an indeterminate time. But I do not find that in the Scripture. Even when it says, "your day" it is describing a specific day, not a period of time.
Ezekiel 16:65 uses "your day of pride." But with over 200 other references all talking about a literal day, even if it is not specifies, as in "days to come," it is still talking about a normal day. There are references to the "days of Noah, days of John, or days of Herod," but they are not an indeterminate period. They can be calculated exactly.
When we look at "day," we are required to consider the normal meaning first and foremost. Without Scripture to guide in a different direction, we must be very careful about "adding to Scripture.
I have found one instance where "day" does not mean a 23 hour day. It is in Hosea 6:2
2 "He will revive us after two days; He will raise us up on the third day, That we may live before Him."
And here, even though it does not necessarily denote a 24 hour period, it seems to imply a short period, "two or three days." There is no indication that long periods of time are involved. (Some surmise that the "third day" may refer to the millenium, but even so, a one thousand year day does not allow for all the supposed millions of years being claimed.)
So is there a different explanation for the apparent age of the earth? Whether one accepts the interpretation, everyone must agree that there are viable explanations for the seeming discrepancies. The "old earth" argument must still overcome the six day limitation before rejecting the alternatives. And the more that I read and study, the more I am impressed with the alternatives both in their scientific rigor and theological consequence.
(An article below is referenced with the salient quotation excerpted.*)
The most telling argument is, "I would not want to worship a God Who would ‘trick' me with ‘seeming' or apparent age." The answer is that it is not a trick but an illustration of how things really are. For instance, Adam was created as a 35 year old man. (Just guessing based on speculation of others.) He was not a new born baby or even a fetus/embryo. He was fully developed.
The trees had rings just as if they had been around for many years. To do otherwise would have been dishonest. As Adam watched new trees grow and noted the growth patterns, he would see them reflected in the mature trees with which he was acquainted. To do otherwise would either confuse him, or perhaps convey some "special meaning and value" to the "original" creation over what grew up later.
And just as a final note, when I meet Jesus, I would rather explain to Him how I interpreted the day as 24 hours and that He would be able to do such a thing in six days than alternative. It would be a little uncomfortable if He says, "What part of ‘day' did you not understand?"
* "… so far as I know, there is no professor of Hebrew or Old Testament at any world-class university who does not believe that the writer(s) of Genesis 1–11 intended to convey to their readers the ideas that: a. creation took place in a series of six days which were the same as the days of 24 hours we now experience b. the figures contained in the Genesis genealogies provided by simple addition a chronology from the beginning of the world up to later stages in the biblical story c. Noah's flood was understood to be world-wide and extinguish all human and animal life except for those in the ark."
James Barr, Oriel Professor of the interpretation of the Holy Scripture, Oxford University, England, letter to David C.C. Watson, 23 April 1984.
http://askjohnmackay.com/biologos-stated-noahs-flood-was-only-a-local-event-and-is-only-a-theological-story-what-do-you-think/
Consecrate
Joshua 3:5 records an interesting comment from Joshua as the people of Israel are on the cusp of entering the promised land after 40 years of wandering in the wilderness.
5 Then Joshua said to the people, "Consecrate yourselves, for tomorrow the Lord will do wonders among you."
That is a somewhat puzzling comment. The, "consecrate" part is not too hard to understand. It is actually translated as sanctify in other translations. I means specifically to set apart. Often it is set apart as particularly holy, but the concept is to be separated for a purpose, and, usually holy.
So the children of Israel were to set themselves apart. But it was not for the carrying out of God's work. Notice the words. "The Lord will do wonders among you." The setting apart is not to ready them to work for God. It is to ready them to observe, or witness, what God is going to do.
He does not need our help. We do not have to "clear the way" for Him to function. The Lord will do what He will do. What has to be cleared, or cleaned, is the observer. We do not interfere with God's "doing," but we may interfere with our witnessing of it. We may even participate in it, providing, again, that we are consecrated.
That is sobering, isn't it? How many times did God work, and we were not ready to receive or witness it? An old 60's joke went, "What if they gave a war and nobody came?"
Is that like a tree falling in the woods and nobody hearing? What if God works, and He does, but we are not prepared to witness it? We might even doubt that He worked. Consequently, we missed His work.
Joshua's injunction is relevant for us today, "Consecrate yourselves." You never know when God might work. Don't miss it.
5 Then Joshua said to the people, "Consecrate yourselves, for tomorrow the Lord will do wonders among you."
That is a somewhat puzzling comment. The, "consecrate" part is not too hard to understand. It is actually translated as sanctify in other translations. I means specifically to set apart. Often it is set apart as particularly holy, but the concept is to be separated for a purpose, and, usually holy.
So the children of Israel were to set themselves apart. But it was not for the carrying out of God's work. Notice the words. "The Lord will do wonders among you." The setting apart is not to ready them to work for God. It is to ready them to observe, or witness, what God is going to do.
He does not need our help. We do not have to "clear the way" for Him to function. The Lord will do what He will do. What has to be cleared, or cleaned, is the observer. We do not interfere with God's "doing," but we may interfere with our witnessing of it. We may even participate in it, providing, again, that we are consecrated.
That is sobering, isn't it? How many times did God work, and we were not ready to receive or witness it? An old 60's joke went, "What if they gave a war and nobody came?"
Is that like a tree falling in the woods and nobody hearing? What if God works, and He does, but we are not prepared to witness it? We might even doubt that He worked. Consequently, we missed His work.
Joshua's injunction is relevant for us today, "Consecrate yourselves." You never know when God might work. Don't miss it.
Monday, January 16, 2017
Choose Life 2 Chronicles 7:14
Most of us are familiar with 2 Chronicles 7:14:
...and My people who are called by My name humble themselves and pray and seek My face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, will forgive their sin and will heal their land.
Many of us learned it with an, "If," but the actual meaning is not a conditional, "if," but more of a "when," so NASB translated it as "...and." The verse (13) before explains why.
13 If I shut up the heavens so that there is no rain, or if I command the locust to devour the land, or if I send pestilence among My people, and My people...
God knows His people will "stray" and then return. This promise is that when they "humble themselves, pray, and seek His face," turning from the wicked ways of pride, not praying, and ignoring Him, then He will hear, forgive, and heal. This promise is not unique. In fact, Moses gave them the same thing twice in Deuteronomy. It was not as succinct, but the meaning was identical.
Deuteronomy 4 has the first warning. Basically, Moses warns them that they will be tempted to forget God, or at least add some other gods to His worship. Moses cautions them that it will not "go well" with them. (Verses 25-28) But look at verse 29.
But from there (exile) you will seek the Lord your God, and you will find Him if you search for Him with all your heart and all your soul.
In essence Moses promises that they will return and,
For the Lord your God is a compassionate God; He will not fail you nor destroy you nor forget the covenant with your fathers which He swore to them.
The same theme is repeated at the end of the book. Chapters 27 and 28 detail the curses and blessings that God promises will come on the people, depending on their obedience, once they enter the land. Then in Chapter 30 we read:
So it shall be when all of these things have come upon you, the blessing and the curse which I have set before you, and you call them to mind...and you return to the Lord your God and obey Him with all your heart and soul according to all that I command you today, you and your sons, 3 then the Lord your God will restore you from captivity, and have compassion on you, and will gather you again from all the peoples where the Lord your God has scattered you.
Doesn't that sound like the Chronicles passage? Here is the point of the discussion. Moses has completed the comparison of obedience and rebellion He finishes with this impassioned plea:
19 "I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. So choose life in order that you may live, you and your descendants."
The Israelites, like nations today, have the option of choosing God's way or their own. Note how Moses couched it: "I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing. Choose life!" The options are dire and destructive.
We personally have the same choice. We can forsake our wicked ways of not being humble, not praying, and not seeking God's face. The promise is that He will hear, forgive, and heal. What a promise.
Choose life.
...and My people who are called by My name humble themselves and pray and seek My face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, will forgive their sin and will heal their land.
Many of us learned it with an, "If," but the actual meaning is not a conditional, "if," but more of a "when," so NASB translated it as "...and." The verse (13) before explains why.
13 If I shut up the heavens so that there is no rain, or if I command the locust to devour the land, or if I send pestilence among My people, and My people...
God knows His people will "stray" and then return. This promise is that when they "humble themselves, pray, and seek His face," turning from the wicked ways of pride, not praying, and ignoring Him, then He will hear, forgive, and heal. This promise is not unique. In fact, Moses gave them the same thing twice in Deuteronomy. It was not as succinct, but the meaning was identical.
Deuteronomy 4 has the first warning. Basically, Moses warns them that they will be tempted to forget God, or at least add some other gods to His worship. Moses cautions them that it will not "go well" with them. (Verses 25-28) But look at verse 29.
But from there (exile) you will seek the Lord your God, and you will find Him if you search for Him with all your heart and all your soul.
In essence Moses promises that they will return and,
For the Lord your God is a compassionate God; He will not fail you nor destroy you nor forget the covenant with your fathers which He swore to them.
The same theme is repeated at the end of the book. Chapters 27 and 28 detail the curses and blessings that God promises will come on the people, depending on their obedience, once they enter the land. Then in Chapter 30 we read:
So it shall be when all of these things have come upon you, the blessing and the curse which I have set before you, and you call them to mind...and you return to the Lord your God and obey Him with all your heart and soul according to all that I command you today, you and your sons, 3 then the Lord your God will restore you from captivity, and have compassion on you, and will gather you again from all the peoples where the Lord your God has scattered you.
Doesn't that sound like the Chronicles passage? Here is the point of the discussion. Moses has completed the comparison of obedience and rebellion He finishes with this impassioned plea:
19 "I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. So choose life in order that you may live, you and your descendants."
The Israelites, like nations today, have the option of choosing God's way or their own. Note how Moses couched it: "I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing. Choose life!" The options are dire and destructive.
We personally have the same choice. We can forsake our wicked ways of not being humble, not praying, and not seeking God's face. The promise is that He will hear, forgive, and heal. What a promise.
Choose life.
Sunday, January 15, 2017
Jews and Jesus
Does it seem that controversy follows me or that I am looking for controversy? Maybe it is that doctrine is of such critical import that the defense of it from wrong ideas is natural. Here are two new ideas that recently came to the fore.
A critical rule in reading and interpreting Scripture is that if plain sense makes sense, do not seek another sense. For example, we can turn to Genesis 1 where is says, "...evening and morning, one day." This is repeated six times. There is some dispute over what "day" really means in some circles. This seems to be an illegitimate dispute. "Evening and morning," are pretty clear and so "no more sense" needs to be sought. It does not mean some indeterminate time.
Is Jesus God? This, again, seems to be a clear reading of the Scripture with over 100 specific instances point to that. A third point, held by fewer people, is that God is finished with the Jews. He has cut them off and is now working with the Church to bring about His will "on earth as it is in heaven." Again clear sense seems to say that He has not abandoned them.
I heard two more instances of these latter two doctrines clearly taught. Our pastor was reading in Revelation about the description of heaven. In chapter 5, John sees a seven-sealed book that no one is worthy of opening. He understands that this is the title deed to the earth and is required to reclaim earth from the usurper who has stolen it from Adam in Genesis 3.
Then the angel encourages him with the news that there is One Who is worthy. It is the "Lion of the tribe of Judah." Offhandedly the Pastor commented that people who are anti-Semitic will be pretty uncomfortable in heaven with this Descendent of a Jew, Judah, leading the program and every gate through which one may enter has the name of one of his brothers. (Revelation 21)
Just to finish off the argument he turned to Genesis 13:
14 The Lord said to Abram, after Lot had separated from him, "Now lift up your eyes and look from the place where you are, northward and southward and eastward and westward;
15 for all the land which you see, I will give it to you and to your descendants forever."
Abraham and his seed will be quite prominent in heaven, not only for the naming and Leader, but for the promise of land that lasts forever. Last time I checked, forever is a long time, and has not expired yet. Well, really not a long time, because there is no time there. Forever is a long...long....
We can add Revelation 5 and 21 to the list of passages that refute the replacement concept for the Jews. And while we are talking about the "Lion of the Tribe of Judah" let's turn to His pedigree. Another place we find it is in Philippians 2:9-11.
For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, 10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee will bow, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
Notice that we are talking about Jesus, but that is not the "Name" that will bring the world to its knees. The "of Jesus" does not tell us the Name, it identifies the one holding it. The Name is in v. 11. Again it is Jesus, but the Name is Lord. I am not making this up. "Every tongue will confess that Jesus is LORD." The Name that is honored is Lord.
This is important because we find that same wording in Isaiah 45:22 ff.
For I am God, and there is no other. 23 "I have sworn by Myself, The word has gone forth from My mouth in righteousness And will not turn back, That to Me every knee will bow, every tongue will swear allegiance."
What a powerful affirmation of the deity of Jesus. God, in the Old Testament was looking ahead to Revelation 21 (and 19) where every knee would bow. And the object is the Lord. Jesus is Lord. I guess we can say, "Over 101 specific instances affirming Jesus' deity."
God is not done working with the Jews because He is not done bringing Jesus, Lord, to the forefront of history, and of all eternity thereafter. Jesus is Lord. Hallelujah! And He is my Savior.
A critical rule in reading and interpreting Scripture is that if plain sense makes sense, do not seek another sense. For example, we can turn to Genesis 1 where is says, "...evening and morning, one day." This is repeated six times. There is some dispute over what "day" really means in some circles. This seems to be an illegitimate dispute. "Evening and morning," are pretty clear and so "no more sense" needs to be sought. It does not mean some indeterminate time.
Is Jesus God? This, again, seems to be a clear reading of the Scripture with over 100 specific instances point to that. A third point, held by fewer people, is that God is finished with the Jews. He has cut them off and is now working with the Church to bring about His will "on earth as it is in heaven." Again clear sense seems to say that He has not abandoned them.
I heard two more instances of these latter two doctrines clearly taught. Our pastor was reading in Revelation about the description of heaven. In chapter 5, John sees a seven-sealed book that no one is worthy of opening. He understands that this is the title deed to the earth and is required to reclaim earth from the usurper who has stolen it from Adam in Genesis 3.
Then the angel encourages him with the news that there is One Who is worthy. It is the "Lion of the tribe of Judah." Offhandedly the Pastor commented that people who are anti-Semitic will be pretty uncomfortable in heaven with this Descendent of a Jew, Judah, leading the program and every gate through which one may enter has the name of one of his brothers. (Revelation 21)
Just to finish off the argument he turned to Genesis 13:
14 The Lord said to Abram, after Lot had separated from him, "Now lift up your eyes and look from the place where you are, northward and southward and eastward and westward;
15 for all the land which you see, I will give it to you and to your descendants forever."
Abraham and his seed will be quite prominent in heaven, not only for the naming and Leader, but for the promise of land that lasts forever. Last time I checked, forever is a long time, and has not expired yet. Well, really not a long time, because there is no time there. Forever is a long...long....
We can add Revelation 5 and 21 to the list of passages that refute the replacement concept for the Jews. And while we are talking about the "Lion of the Tribe of Judah" let's turn to His pedigree. Another place we find it is in Philippians 2:9-11.
For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, 10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee will bow, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
Notice that we are talking about Jesus, but that is not the "Name" that will bring the world to its knees. The "of Jesus" does not tell us the Name, it identifies the one holding it. The Name is in v. 11. Again it is Jesus, but the Name is Lord. I am not making this up. "Every tongue will confess that Jesus is LORD." The Name that is honored is Lord.
This is important because we find that same wording in Isaiah 45:22 ff.
For I am God, and there is no other. 23 "I have sworn by Myself, The word has gone forth from My mouth in righteousness And will not turn back, That to Me every knee will bow, every tongue will swear allegiance."
What a powerful affirmation of the deity of Jesus. God, in the Old Testament was looking ahead to Revelation 21 (and 19) where every knee would bow. And the object is the Lord. Jesus is Lord. I guess we can say, "Over 101 specific instances affirming Jesus' deity."
God is not done working with the Jews because He is not done bringing Jesus, Lord, to the forefront of history, and of all eternity thereafter. Jesus is Lord. Hallelujah! And He is my Savior.
Thursday, January 12, 2017
Of Hogs and Demons Declaring Deity
The exciting thing about reading the Bible is that many times we read the same passage and it tells us something new. There are two examples of this today. They are in Luke. Luke 8 tells the story of the demoniac who had been possessed by "Legions" of demons. Jesus ordered them to leave and they went into a heard of hogs, which promptly raced off a cliff into the sea and drowned.
I have heard, and probably taught, that it is an interesting juxtaposition that the man would tolerate the indwelling of demons and the pigs would not. But that may be a little demeaning to the man and to the story itself.
Looking into the next chapter (Luke 9) we find the story of Jesus after he came down from the Mount of Transfiguration. He encounters another person who is afflicted with a demon. Verse 37 tells the story of how the demon abuses, and actually attempts to kill the boy. This is a common theme in demon possession. Matthew 17 expounds on this by reporting that the demon threw the boy into the fire and into water, evidently intent on "suicide" or homicide by demon.
In fact, most of the demon-possessed people Jesus encountered were also afflicted by other physical problems. The "indewlling presence" of a demon is never conducive to good health, either physically or spiritually.
Back to the hogs. When the demons entered them, the natural result was a self-destructive behavior on the part of the hogs. The man had been oppressed, but was able to resist the suicide impulses that the demons exerted. This may be a story of victory rather than one of humiliation.
The demons' ultimate goal, like that of Satan, himself, if to steal, kill, and destroy. We see that exposed in the behavior of demon possessed individuals. The end of the story is that he went all around his country proclaiming that Jesus had done, and could do wonderful things for those who came to him. Come.
The second story comes from the preceding events in Luke 9. After the Transfiguration, Peter blurts out that they should build three tabernacles on the mountain, one for Jesus, one for Moses, and one for Elijah. The Presence of the Lord immediately overshadowed them and The Father said, "This is My Son, My Chosen One; listen to Him!" (Verse 35)
Often we interpret this to be a rebuke to Peter for blurting out something instead of being in the "listening mode" for what the Lord would say. He was not wrong for honoring Jesus, Mo, and Eli, but there were more important things. We can also interpret his meaning to say that they would stay on the mountain and revel in the presence of this "big three." They needed to get back to the real world and interact with needy people, as the demon possessed boy we just viewed.
Today I read something that put a much more sinister and critical meaning on Peter's exclamation. He was not simply wishing to avoid the conflict of the world down there, he was equating Jesus with Moses and Elijah. Moses represented the Old Testament Law and Elijah represented the Prophets. Peter may have thought that he was honoring Jesus by giving Him equal billing with Moses and Elijah.
The Father immediately crushed that equation. Look at the words again. "This is My Son, My Chosen One; listen to Him!" The Father is not just telling Peter, James, and John to pay attention to Jesus, He is declaring that Jesus is superior to the other two. In fact, He is so far above them, that it is safe to declare that Jesus is the one and only Authority. We can learn from the others, but they are not authoritative at all, except as they reflect and repeat what Jesus said.
This is another of the more than 100 declarations of the deity and superiority of Jesus in the Scripture. If Jehovah, Himself, again, declared that we need to listen to Jesus, as a good follower of Jehovah, I am inclined to do so. No, I am compelled to do so.
Jesus is Lord.
I have heard, and probably taught, that it is an interesting juxtaposition that the man would tolerate the indwelling of demons and the pigs would not. But that may be a little demeaning to the man and to the story itself.
Looking into the next chapter (Luke 9) we find the story of Jesus after he came down from the Mount of Transfiguration. He encounters another person who is afflicted with a demon. Verse 37 tells the story of how the demon abuses, and actually attempts to kill the boy. This is a common theme in demon possession. Matthew 17 expounds on this by reporting that the demon threw the boy into the fire and into water, evidently intent on "suicide" or homicide by demon.
In fact, most of the demon-possessed people Jesus encountered were also afflicted by other physical problems. The "indewlling presence" of a demon is never conducive to good health, either physically or spiritually.
Back to the hogs. When the demons entered them, the natural result was a self-destructive behavior on the part of the hogs. The man had been oppressed, but was able to resist the suicide impulses that the demons exerted. This may be a story of victory rather than one of humiliation.
The demons' ultimate goal, like that of Satan, himself, if to steal, kill, and destroy. We see that exposed in the behavior of demon possessed individuals. The end of the story is that he went all around his country proclaiming that Jesus had done, and could do wonderful things for those who came to him. Come.
The second story comes from the preceding events in Luke 9. After the Transfiguration, Peter blurts out that they should build three tabernacles on the mountain, one for Jesus, one for Moses, and one for Elijah. The Presence of the Lord immediately overshadowed them and The Father said, "This is My Son, My Chosen One; listen to Him!" (Verse 35)
Often we interpret this to be a rebuke to Peter for blurting out something instead of being in the "listening mode" for what the Lord would say. He was not wrong for honoring Jesus, Mo, and Eli, but there were more important things. We can also interpret his meaning to say that they would stay on the mountain and revel in the presence of this "big three." They needed to get back to the real world and interact with needy people, as the demon possessed boy we just viewed.
Today I read something that put a much more sinister and critical meaning on Peter's exclamation. He was not simply wishing to avoid the conflict of the world down there, he was equating Jesus with Moses and Elijah. Moses represented the Old Testament Law and Elijah represented the Prophets. Peter may have thought that he was honoring Jesus by giving Him equal billing with Moses and Elijah.
The Father immediately crushed that equation. Look at the words again. "This is My Son, My Chosen One; listen to Him!" The Father is not just telling Peter, James, and John to pay attention to Jesus, He is declaring that Jesus is superior to the other two. In fact, He is so far above them, that it is safe to declare that Jesus is the one and only Authority. We can learn from the others, but they are not authoritative at all, except as they reflect and repeat what Jesus said.
This is another of the more than 100 declarations of the deity and superiority of Jesus in the Scripture. If Jehovah, Himself, again, declared that we need to listen to Jesus, as a good follower of Jehovah, I am inclined to do so. No, I am compelled to do so.
Jesus is Lord.
Tuesday, January 10, 2017
Of Storms and Earthquakes
The other day I saw a post that asked what would happen if the earth suddenly stopped spinning. Actually, if it did, the destruction would be phenomenal. At the equator, the rotational speed of the earth is 1036 mph. It is a little slower at the poles, but still pretty fast.
So if the earth stopped, everything on the surface would continue moving at about 1000 mpg. Just like a car running into another car or stationary object, the passengers continue their forward motion until a resisting force restrains them. Whack! Ouch!
Buildings and trees are more firmly attached to the planet, so they would probably not go quite as fast and we would collide with walls and stuff. If you live in a valley, you would probably end up buried in the hillside.
Why ask about that? In Luke 8:25 (and Matthew 8, Mark 4) we find the story of Jesus stilling the winds and waves on the Sea of Galilee. He said “Stop!” and the winds and waves immediately were still. That is pretty impressive. After an hurricane, the surf surges for days. This stopped instantaneously.
That reminds us of Joshua and his “long day.” (Joshua 10) The Bible does not tell us how that happened, or exactly what happened, but the day lasted nearly 24 yours longer than usual. Hezekiah asked for a sign from God and the shadow of the sun went back 10 degrees. (Isaiah 38 and 2 Kings 20)
That would be even more destructive than just stopping. It stopped, backed up, stopped, and then started again. Imagine that would cause a few earthquakes? But there does not seem to be any “unanticipated” effects in the previous events. Were they just imaginations of a primitive recorder, or fanciful inventions? A naturalistic world view has extreme difficulty with these events being literal.
(Aside, I was reading a new theory about the evolution of the moon, and the last sentence caught my eye. “The scenario involves several low probability events.” You don’t say. Actually they referred to about 20 earth-other body collisions, each producing a mini-moon which then agglomerated into the moon we have today. So accepting a supernatural view of events from creationists is not so really out to lunch, is it?)
So did God actually stop the earth? We know that He really did stop the storm. We have three witnesses. And the Scripture does not back away from miracles. But the real application, I believe, is in Revelation. In chapters 6, 8, 11, and 16 John predicts great earthquakes. The last being greater than any since man has been on the earth.
Could that be the Lord slowing or stopping the rotation, without the “extra care” that He showed in the past? If that happened, the earth would literally rip itself apart. Maybe the other events were just “practice” for the big show.
Regardless of how it will happen, it will get men’s attention. How much better it would be to listen now. Amen.
So if the earth stopped, everything on the surface would continue moving at about 1000 mpg. Just like a car running into another car or stationary object, the passengers continue their forward motion until a resisting force restrains them. Whack! Ouch!
Buildings and trees are more firmly attached to the planet, so they would probably not go quite as fast and we would collide with walls and stuff. If you live in a valley, you would probably end up buried in the hillside.
Why ask about that? In Luke 8:25 (and Matthew 8, Mark 4) we find the story of Jesus stilling the winds and waves on the Sea of Galilee. He said “Stop!” and the winds and waves immediately were still. That is pretty impressive. After an hurricane, the surf surges for days. This stopped instantaneously.
That reminds us of Joshua and his “long day.” (Joshua 10) The Bible does not tell us how that happened, or exactly what happened, but the day lasted nearly 24 yours longer than usual. Hezekiah asked for a sign from God and the shadow of the sun went back 10 degrees. (Isaiah 38 and 2 Kings 20)
That would be even more destructive than just stopping. It stopped, backed up, stopped, and then started again. Imagine that would cause a few earthquakes? But there does not seem to be any “unanticipated” effects in the previous events. Were they just imaginations of a primitive recorder, or fanciful inventions? A naturalistic world view has extreme difficulty with these events being literal.
(Aside, I was reading a new theory about the evolution of the moon, and the last sentence caught my eye. “The scenario involves several low probability events.” You don’t say. Actually they referred to about 20 earth-other body collisions, each producing a mini-moon which then agglomerated into the moon we have today. So accepting a supernatural view of events from creationists is not so really out to lunch, is it?)
So did God actually stop the earth? We know that He really did stop the storm. We have three witnesses. And the Scripture does not back away from miracles. But the real application, I believe, is in Revelation. In chapters 6, 8, 11, and 16 John predicts great earthquakes. The last being greater than any since man has been on the earth.
Could that be the Lord slowing or stopping the rotation, without the “extra care” that He showed in the past? If that happened, the earth would literally rip itself apart. Maybe the other events were just “practice” for the big show.
Regardless of how it will happen, it will get men’s attention. How much better it would be to listen now. Amen.
Friday, January 6, 2017
A New Song
While in college, I was privileged to be on a quartet that traveled around to represent the college. We took an extended tour during the summer of my sophomore to junior year, 1967. Whenever we introduced ourselves, we also gave a short testimony.
I always started with Psalm 40:2 and 3 (NKJV–notice. We used that back then, so....)
He also brought me up out of a horrible pit, Out of the miry clay, And set my feet upon a rock, And established my steps.
3 He has put a new song in my mouth—Praise to our God; Many will see it and fear, And will trust in the Lord.
The first verse is my personal story. Out of the miry clay. Have you ever worked around clay? I had some dirt brought in to back fill around the foundation of my house and a significant portion of the fill dirt was clay. I had it dumped next to the wall in the back yard, intending to distribute it to the appropriate location. And of course it rained.
So I was walking around digging up the dirt, putting it into a wheel barrow to move to where I wanted it, and dumping it. Did I mention that it rained? Well, every step into the wet clay came up with an inch or so clay clinging to my shoes. And if you keep walking, it builds up. I was probably 3 inches taller when I took a break to clean it off.
You cannot just “scrape or scuff” your feet to remove clay. It just slides along. In fact it might have packed tighter. And when you put your foot on the shovel to push it down for another shovelful, the clay slips off and a tumble ensues if you are not nimble. No falls today.
Did I mention that it had rained? So every “full” shovel of dirt that came out of the pile, clung to the shovel as it its life depended on it. I could not shake it or wiggle it off. If I slammed the handle of the shovel down on the side of the wheel barrow, it might slip a little bit off.
But you can see the problem. First, you are denting the top rim of the barrow, which will lead to other difficulties later on. And enough whacks on that shovel handle and it will splinter. At least you get some time off, then.
So miry clay is bad stuff. An aside. On Christmas day, my 20 month old grandsons came out to celebrate Jesus’ birthday with us. It was a nice day and we went out into the back yard to play. You got it. I was convulsed with laughter when one of the boys walked out from behind the deck with one foot coated with about a inch of clay. But I digress.
When the Psalmist talked about being “bogged down” in miry clay he knew whereof he spoketh. And it is extremely difficult to get that stuff off. (I did not help clean it off the boys’ shoes either. Grampa Prerogative) So being lifted up and placed upon a rock is a great relief.
And an “established step” implies that the gooey stuff has been removed. If you walk with it still adhering to your sole (no pun intended) you will slip and this can be a metaphor (pun intended) for our soul life.
Verse 3 was the prophesy for our tour. We had a new song. Actually about 50 total that we sang. That was a fun summer. The “song” was praise to our God. Our prayer was that our lives would be a song of praise.
And our reward? (Did I mention that we did not get paid? We did get a partial scholarship, but no cashola. Mom and Dad had to keep sending me money all summer so that I could keep my cell phone and download a couple of netflicks. In ‘67, get it?)
But the reward was far beyond any monetary financial consideration. “Many will see it and fear.” They actually would fear staying in the pit in which they found themselves. “And will trust in the Lord.” There is a way out!
This is not anything that we did, Lord knows. But we did have people come forward at the end of our concerts to either get saved or rededicate their lives to the Lord. Recently a second member of our group went home and I am sure that the two of them are rejoicing at all the results that they can see from our summer 50 years ago.
One of our songs had these words, “If you get to heaven before I do, tell all my friends that I’m a comin’ too.” Dennis is updating Dave, and probably vice versa today. The rest of us are not “anxious” to go, but we are ready and waiting. And, in a college vein, we are working to complete our GFS degree. (Good and Faithful Servant.)
He brought me up, set my feet, established my step. Now I sing a new song of praise and encouragement. See and sing along.
I always started with Psalm 40:2 and 3 (NKJV–notice. We used that back then, so....)
He also brought me up out of a horrible pit, Out of the miry clay, And set my feet upon a rock, And established my steps.
3 He has put a new song in my mouth—Praise to our God; Many will see it and fear, And will trust in the Lord.
The first verse is my personal story. Out of the miry clay. Have you ever worked around clay? I had some dirt brought in to back fill around the foundation of my house and a significant portion of the fill dirt was clay. I had it dumped next to the wall in the back yard, intending to distribute it to the appropriate location. And of course it rained.
So I was walking around digging up the dirt, putting it into a wheel barrow to move to where I wanted it, and dumping it. Did I mention that it rained? Well, every step into the wet clay came up with an inch or so clay clinging to my shoes. And if you keep walking, it builds up. I was probably 3 inches taller when I took a break to clean it off.
You cannot just “scrape or scuff” your feet to remove clay. It just slides along. In fact it might have packed tighter. And when you put your foot on the shovel to push it down for another shovelful, the clay slips off and a tumble ensues if you are not nimble. No falls today.
Did I mention that it had rained? So every “full” shovel of dirt that came out of the pile, clung to the shovel as it its life depended on it. I could not shake it or wiggle it off. If I slammed the handle of the shovel down on the side of the wheel barrow, it might slip a little bit off.
But you can see the problem. First, you are denting the top rim of the barrow, which will lead to other difficulties later on. And enough whacks on that shovel handle and it will splinter. At least you get some time off, then.
So miry clay is bad stuff. An aside. On Christmas day, my 20 month old grandsons came out to celebrate Jesus’ birthday with us. It was a nice day and we went out into the back yard to play. You got it. I was convulsed with laughter when one of the boys walked out from behind the deck with one foot coated with about a inch of clay. But I digress.
When the Psalmist talked about being “bogged down” in miry clay he knew whereof he spoketh. And it is extremely difficult to get that stuff off. (I did not help clean it off the boys’ shoes either. Grampa Prerogative) So being lifted up and placed upon a rock is a great relief.
And an “established step” implies that the gooey stuff has been removed. If you walk with it still adhering to your sole (no pun intended) you will slip and this can be a metaphor (pun intended) for our soul life.
Verse 3 was the prophesy for our tour. We had a new song. Actually about 50 total that we sang. That was a fun summer. The “song” was praise to our God. Our prayer was that our lives would be a song of praise.
And our reward? (Did I mention that we did not get paid? We did get a partial scholarship, but no cashola. Mom and Dad had to keep sending me money all summer so that I could keep my cell phone and download a couple of netflicks. In ‘67, get it?)
But the reward was far beyond any monetary financial consideration. “Many will see it and fear.” They actually would fear staying in the pit in which they found themselves. “And will trust in the Lord.” There is a way out!
This is not anything that we did, Lord knows. But we did have people come forward at the end of our concerts to either get saved or rededicate their lives to the Lord. Recently a second member of our group went home and I am sure that the two of them are rejoicing at all the results that they can see from our summer 50 years ago.
One of our songs had these words, “If you get to heaven before I do, tell all my friends that I’m a comin’ too.” Dennis is updating Dave, and probably vice versa today. The rest of us are not “anxious” to go, but we are ready and waiting. And, in a college vein, we are working to complete our GFS degree. (Good and Faithful Servant.)
He brought me up, set my feet, established my step. Now I sing a new song of praise and encouragement. See and sing along.
Tuesday, January 3, 2017
Hanukkah
Is it okay for the church or Christians to celebrate Hanukkah? It is not in the list of festivals that we find in Leviticus 23. Michael Rydelnick of Moody Bible Institute gave us an insight into that. (This might be considered a “guest lecturer” day, after referring to Warren Wiersby and Ravi Zacharias in previous posts.)
(http://reflectionsfromjim.blogspot.com/2017/01/saul-and-samuels-ghost.html
http://reflectionsfromjim.blogspot.com/2017/01/witnesses-and-doves.html )
But that is okay. I can vouch for these guys. (Smiley face) Hanukkah is actually from 165 BC. The Seleucid king, Antiochus IV, or Epiphanes, was defeated by the Maccabees who recaptured Jerusalem. They purified the Temple and rededicated it. Hanukkah is the Jewish word for "dedication." The celebration was inaugurated following the miraculous events accompanying this cleasnsing.
It is interesting to note that this was predicted in Daniel 8:11 and beyond. Verse 25 says that the king will die, but without human causes. (Check it out on Google.) These specific and precise prophesies have led to some claiming that Daniel 8 and 12 were inserted after the fact by some scribe, or that the entire book was written after 200 BC. (Daniel was written about 550 BC.)
This late date is dubious on many levels, but one that I will just outline here is that eight manuscripts of Daniel were recovered in the Qumran scrolls. (Dead Sea.) The community was destroyed in AD 68. So if Daniel had been written less than 100 years earlier, would the scholars in Qumran have considered them part of the Scriptures? That seems dubious. But I digress.
So Daniel predicts that the insolent king (Old Testament antichrist) would be defeated. This led to the celebration that continues even until today. Interestingly, there are two holidays in the Jewish calendar that are not in the Leviticus list. The feast of Purim, as described in Esther 9 is the other.
But, even if these are legitimate Jewish holidays, what do they have to do with the church? Recall the meaning of Hanukkah, “dedication.” Michael Rydelnik asked, “What would Jesus do?” That sounds good.
John 10:22 notes that Jesus went to the feast of dedication and it was winter. (Verse 23) So if Jesus celebrated Hanukkah, it stands to reason that it cannot hurt for anyone else to participate. And it falls on the 25th of the month that corresponds to November-December of our calendar. So if often corresponds to the Christmas season.
Is it okay for the church or Christians to celebrate Hanukkah? Heck yes!
Historical Note: Epiphanes was not the first, nor the last to attempt to eradicate the Jews. You can begin in Egypt with Pharaoh. Then a bunch of kings in the wilderness, culminating with Balaak. Haman, in Babylon gave it a try. Antiochus took his shot followed by Herod at Jesus’ birth. Through the centuries multiple attempts were made and failed. One notable one was “Andophus” Hitler. (Just embellished that for effect.) Hussein tried recently and more voices from the Middle East call for that every day.
As Dr. Phil would say, “How’s that workin’ for you?” Hanukkah is a current reminder that pigs don’t fly. (Sorry for the porcine metaphor, but the futile efforts continue.)
An ultimate attack will follow, as discussed in Ezekiel and Revelation. It is also destined to fail. Hanukkah merely looks forward to these impending failures as well.
Happy Hanukkah.
(http://reflectionsfromjim.blogspot.com/2017/01/saul-and-samuels-ghost.html
http://reflectionsfromjim.blogspot.com/2017/01/witnesses-and-doves.html )
But that is okay. I can vouch for these guys. (Smiley face) Hanukkah is actually from 165 BC. The Seleucid king, Antiochus IV, or Epiphanes, was defeated by the Maccabees who recaptured Jerusalem. They purified the Temple and rededicated it. Hanukkah is the Jewish word for "dedication." The celebration was inaugurated following the miraculous events accompanying this cleasnsing.
It is interesting to note that this was predicted in Daniel 8:11 and beyond. Verse 25 says that the king will die, but without human causes. (Check it out on Google.) These specific and precise prophesies have led to some claiming that Daniel 8 and 12 were inserted after the fact by some scribe, or that the entire book was written after 200 BC. (Daniel was written about 550 BC.)
This late date is dubious on many levels, but one that I will just outline here is that eight manuscripts of Daniel were recovered in the Qumran scrolls. (Dead Sea.) The community was destroyed in AD 68. So if Daniel had been written less than 100 years earlier, would the scholars in Qumran have considered them part of the Scriptures? That seems dubious. But I digress.
So Daniel predicts that the insolent king (Old Testament antichrist) would be defeated. This led to the celebration that continues even until today. Interestingly, there are two holidays in the Jewish calendar that are not in the Leviticus list. The feast of Purim, as described in Esther 9 is the other.
But, even if these are legitimate Jewish holidays, what do they have to do with the church? Recall the meaning of Hanukkah, “dedication.” Michael Rydelnik asked, “What would Jesus do?” That sounds good.
John 10:22 notes that Jesus went to the feast of dedication and it was winter. (Verse 23) So if Jesus celebrated Hanukkah, it stands to reason that it cannot hurt for anyone else to participate. And it falls on the 25th of the month that corresponds to November-December of our calendar. So if often corresponds to the Christmas season.
Is it okay for the church or Christians to celebrate Hanukkah? Heck yes!
Historical Note: Epiphanes was not the first, nor the last to attempt to eradicate the Jews. You can begin in Egypt with Pharaoh. Then a bunch of kings in the wilderness, culminating with Balaak. Haman, in Babylon gave it a try. Antiochus took his shot followed by Herod at Jesus’ birth. Through the centuries multiple attempts were made and failed. One notable one was “Andophus” Hitler. (Just embellished that for effect.) Hussein tried recently and more voices from the Middle East call for that every day.
As Dr. Phil would say, “How’s that workin’ for you?” Hanukkah is a current reminder that pigs don’t fly. (Sorry for the porcine metaphor, but the futile efforts continue.)
An ultimate attack will follow, as discussed in Ezekiel and Revelation. It is also destined to fail. Hanukkah merely looks forward to these impending failures as well.
Happy Hanukkah.
Monday, January 2, 2017
The End of Christmas
Well, Christmas and holidays are past. What now? Take a look at Luke 2:20
The shepherds went back, glorifying and praising God for all that they had heard and seen, just as had been told them.
Well, back to the grind, right? Wrong. Back, right. But they had been changed. They had seen and heard things that had been told them. They were not just spectators. (See Hebrews 12:1) They were the participants, the witnesses.
When we encounter the Living God, it fills us with glory and it “oozes” out. Praise God. It changes our outlook and our lives. These shepherds were never the same again. I am willing to bet on that.
And the last phrase is life changing. “...just as it had been told them.” This is how we keep our excitement. No, not hearing from angels every day. But hearing from God every day. If these guys could not read, I bet they found someone who could and they had them read to them as often as they could.
They had personal experience in hearing from heaven. And they knew where to find those messages. Recall Hebrews 1:1
God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways.
We have not had angel choirs serenade us, or had a personal message from on high, but we have more than they had. They heard from the fathers and prophets. But look at verse 2: “in these last days has spoken to us in His Son.” And we have His message to us right in our hands.
Think of that. The shepherds heard from angels. But we have a personal message from The Son. I’ll take it. As we return to the normal stream of events, we are confident that we have heard from on high. And we, like the shepherds, can look back at our “messages” and see that they have been “just as had been told them.” The New Year holds nothing that can upset us.
How will that change your outlook? It should drive us to renew the message every day. Read it. As the athletic company says, “Just do it.”
The “end” does not mean the finish, it means the result. Have a great New Year...in the Word.
The shepherds went back, glorifying and praising God for all that they had heard and seen, just as had been told them.
Well, back to the grind, right? Wrong. Back, right. But they had been changed. They had seen and heard things that had been told them. They were not just spectators. (See Hebrews 12:1) They were the participants, the witnesses.
When we encounter the Living God, it fills us with glory and it “oozes” out. Praise God. It changes our outlook and our lives. These shepherds were never the same again. I am willing to bet on that.
And the last phrase is life changing. “...just as it had been told them.” This is how we keep our excitement. No, not hearing from angels every day. But hearing from God every day. If these guys could not read, I bet they found someone who could and they had them read to them as often as they could.
They had personal experience in hearing from heaven. And they knew where to find those messages. Recall Hebrews 1:1
God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways.
We have not had angel choirs serenade us, or had a personal message from on high, but we have more than they had. They heard from the fathers and prophets. But look at verse 2: “in these last days has spoken to us in His Son.” And we have His message to us right in our hands.
Think of that. The shepherds heard from angels. But we have a personal message from The Son. I’ll take it. As we return to the normal stream of events, we are confident that we have heard from on high. And we, like the shepherds, can look back at our “messages” and see that they have been “just as had been told them.” The New Year holds nothing that can upset us.
How will that change your outlook? It should drive us to renew the message every day. Read it. As the athletic company says, “Just do it.”
The “end” does not mean the finish, it means the result. Have a great New Year...in the Word.
Witnesses and Doves
A question that is sometimes raised when a loved on dies, is, “Does our loved one see us now?” And many times, myself included, the “expert” refers to Hebrews 12:1 as an indication that they might. Ravi Zacharias had on interesting not on that a sermon that I heard. It makes a lot of sense.
Realize that verses 12:1-3 are best considered to be the end of chapter 11 and not a new thought. Also recall that “therefore” is always pointing back to the previous statement. Since there are all of these “witnesses” let us be as diligent in running our race as they were. It probably does not necessarily mean that they are watching us, but that we can see by their example that this faith stuff really works.
The word translated witnesses is an action word, not a passive one. They acted and by following their example, witness, we too can succeed. In other words, we do not run because they can see us, but because we can see in them how to run. (Ravi continued with the thought in Hebrews 12. “Lay aside the weight.” We will examine that in a later post.)
This will encourage us to engage life as they did. This is, seemingly, a better interpretation of the role of the witnesses than having them crowding around the arena and moaning or alternatively cheering as we stumble through life. They know God is in control and will ultimately bring things to His conclusion and having a “play by play” of our progress seems to serve no purpose.
It is not like they are just sitting up there with nothing else to do. Weak example coming up: It is almost like having the Dallas Cowboys taking a break from practice to watch a group of eight year old boys playing a pickup game in the neighboring park. They boys would be well advised to watch and emulate the “witnesses.”
Warren Wiersby inadvertently got in on our discussion with another comment. (I told you these were community contributions.) He was discussing Jesus and His baptism. Afterward, the Holy Spirit, as a dove, descended from heaven and landed on Him. (Matthew 3:16) Then Wiersby referred back to Noah in Genesis 8:12, when he released a dove that did not come back to him. We know that the specific dove probably found a place for a nest and did not return. But the picture or type of a dove coming from out of nowhere to land on Jesus is intriguing.
Wiersby continued that the dove, representing the Holy Spirit, could not land on the first Adam. He was a thief–stole someone else’s fruit. In fact no one in the Old Testament was worthy. David was an adulterer and murderer. Abraham lied about his wife. Isaac did also. Jacob, well, we don’t need to catalog Jacob’s failings. Moses struck the rock. And on and on. Daniel may have come the closest. But Exekiel tells us that if a man’s righteousness could deliver Jerusalem from coming judgment, even Noah, Daniel, and Job could only do themselves. (Ezekiel 14:14) (The picture is not works salvation, but that they had faith and it saved them, but could not be transferred.)
So only when Christ appeared on the scene did the Dove have a worthy object upon which to rest. Back to Ezekiel, if anyone is going to be saved, we need a Substitute who is able to save more than himself. He had “transferrable” faith.
Do these ideas have any correlation? The Dove, representing the Holy Spirit, left Noah and some of his post-flood “running” was not too relevant to be included in the witness accounts in Hebrews 11. But Jesus did sent that “Dove” back to us to encourage and empower our run. He called the Holy Spirit the “Paraclete,” also called our Helper or Counselor in English translations.
We have an advantage that Noah did not have. The Holy Spirit indwells us permanently. Noah only had two “witnesses” to guide him Enoch and Abel. We have all the rest of the list.
Run well. The witnesses are waiting.
Realize that verses 12:1-3 are best considered to be the end of chapter 11 and not a new thought. Also recall that “therefore” is always pointing back to the previous statement. Since there are all of these “witnesses” let us be as diligent in running our race as they were. It probably does not necessarily mean that they are watching us, but that we can see by their example that this faith stuff really works.
The word translated witnesses is an action word, not a passive one. They acted and by following their example, witness, we too can succeed. In other words, we do not run because they can see us, but because we can see in them how to run. (Ravi continued with the thought in Hebrews 12. “Lay aside the weight.” We will examine that in a later post.)
This will encourage us to engage life as they did. This is, seemingly, a better interpretation of the role of the witnesses than having them crowding around the arena and moaning or alternatively cheering as we stumble through life. They know God is in control and will ultimately bring things to His conclusion and having a “play by play” of our progress seems to serve no purpose.
It is not like they are just sitting up there with nothing else to do. Weak example coming up: It is almost like having the Dallas Cowboys taking a break from practice to watch a group of eight year old boys playing a pickup game in the neighboring park. They boys would be well advised to watch and emulate the “witnesses.”
Warren Wiersby inadvertently got in on our discussion with another comment. (I told you these were community contributions.) He was discussing Jesus and His baptism. Afterward, the Holy Spirit, as a dove, descended from heaven and landed on Him. (Matthew 3:16) Then Wiersby referred back to Noah in Genesis 8:12, when he released a dove that did not come back to him. We know that the specific dove probably found a place for a nest and did not return. But the picture or type of a dove coming from out of nowhere to land on Jesus is intriguing.
Wiersby continued that the dove, representing the Holy Spirit, could not land on the first Adam. He was a thief–stole someone else’s fruit. In fact no one in the Old Testament was worthy. David was an adulterer and murderer. Abraham lied about his wife. Isaac did also. Jacob, well, we don’t need to catalog Jacob’s failings. Moses struck the rock. And on and on. Daniel may have come the closest. But Exekiel tells us that if a man’s righteousness could deliver Jerusalem from coming judgment, even Noah, Daniel, and Job could only do themselves. (Ezekiel 14:14) (The picture is not works salvation, but that they had faith and it saved them, but could not be transferred.)
So only when Christ appeared on the scene did the Dove have a worthy object upon which to rest. Back to Ezekiel, if anyone is going to be saved, we need a Substitute who is able to save more than himself. He had “transferrable” faith.
Do these ideas have any correlation? The Dove, representing the Holy Spirit, left Noah and some of his post-flood “running” was not too relevant to be included in the witness accounts in Hebrews 11. But Jesus did sent that “Dove” back to us to encourage and empower our run. He called the Holy Spirit the “Paraclete,” also called our Helper or Counselor in English translations.
We have an advantage that Noah did not have. The Holy Spirit indwells us permanently. Noah only had two “witnesses” to guide him Enoch and Abel. We have all the rest of the list.
Run well. The witnesses are waiting.
Saul and Samuel’s Ghost
Did Saul really have a spiritist call up Samuel’s ghost? We find the story in 1 Samuel 28. Saul goes to a medium to get an answer from the Lord through his old “friend” Samuel since nothing else is working.
Aside: Saul had ignored and deliberately rebelled against the Lord, then expects God to jump to respond when Saul calls. The only prayer that would be effective would be repentance. And his resort to the prohibited practice of consulting the dead merely reaffirms his rebellious heart. Further, he worshiped the image when it appeared. Not a good sign.
But Saul did get a “message.” The question is who or what spoke to Saul? There are several answers but Dr. Rydelnik has a little different take on it. Some say that it was not really Samuel, but a demon who impersonated him. Another was that it really was Samuel, but it was like a “special dispensation” from the Lord since not even a demon possessed person could have “called” him.
Rydelnik noted that there were two possibilities. One the “witch” was really a fake and merely made up responses for her “clients” who requested insight from the spirit world, or that she did have a demon and the demon made up the responses. Neither would be a source that a reasonable person would consult for guidance.
The fact that she was “surprised” (understatement?) when someone appeared would support either interpretation. If she was a fake, any response would be unusual. And if she had a “familiar” spirit, she recognized that this was different.
The Lord may have given Saul a miraculous message. Note that the message, regardless of who delivered it, did not give Saul guidance as to what to do. The message reaffirmed Saul’s disobedience and accurately predicted that both Saul and his sons would die in the next day’s battle. And that was the extent of the message. That’s no help.
But Saul had removed himself from the “path” for which the Lord would have led him. We cannot expect God to change His plans when I refuse “Plan A.” But was it Samuel? Moses and Elijah appeared to Jesus and Peter, James, and John. That again was a miraculous encounter. And a much better outcome, one would surmise. (Matthew 17)
God cannot be confined to a “box” in His responses. Recall Balaam? (Numbers 22) God used a donkey to speak to him. It does appear that the message is from the Lord. And it was certainly 100% percent accurate.
Our lesson today should, then, focus on being in the place where God can talk to us instead of attempting to circumvent Him by constructing an alternative. It has been said that God stops leading us when we rebel. And the only way to reopen communication is to return to the place where we left the last legitimate instruction, complete that, and wait.
God does not have a plan B, nor will He bless my inventions. Saul learned the hard way. Be a wise man and learn from other people’s (i.e. Saul) mistakes.
(Ed. Note This medium is usually referred to as the Witch of En-dor. While in graduate school, I was conducting research on a process nicknamed ENDOR. The exact term escapes me, but it had something to do with electron double resonance. My professor made a note on my summary paper and asked whether this had anything to do with the witch of En-dor. My first realization that he was Biblically literate. We had some interesting conversations after that. That was fun.)
Aside: Saul had ignored and deliberately rebelled against the Lord, then expects God to jump to respond when Saul calls. The only prayer that would be effective would be repentance. And his resort to the prohibited practice of consulting the dead merely reaffirms his rebellious heart. Further, he worshiped the image when it appeared. Not a good sign.
But Saul did get a “message.” The question is who or what spoke to Saul? There are several answers but Dr. Rydelnik has a little different take on it. Some say that it was not really Samuel, but a demon who impersonated him. Another was that it really was Samuel, but it was like a “special dispensation” from the Lord since not even a demon possessed person could have “called” him.
Rydelnik noted that there were two possibilities. One the “witch” was really a fake and merely made up responses for her “clients” who requested insight from the spirit world, or that she did have a demon and the demon made up the responses. Neither would be a source that a reasonable person would consult for guidance.
The fact that she was “surprised” (understatement?) when someone appeared would support either interpretation. If she was a fake, any response would be unusual. And if she had a “familiar” spirit, she recognized that this was different.
The Lord may have given Saul a miraculous message. Note that the message, regardless of who delivered it, did not give Saul guidance as to what to do. The message reaffirmed Saul’s disobedience and accurately predicted that both Saul and his sons would die in the next day’s battle. And that was the extent of the message. That’s no help.
But Saul had removed himself from the “path” for which the Lord would have led him. We cannot expect God to change His plans when I refuse “Plan A.” But was it Samuel? Moses and Elijah appeared to Jesus and Peter, James, and John. That again was a miraculous encounter. And a much better outcome, one would surmise. (Matthew 17)
God cannot be confined to a “box” in His responses. Recall Balaam? (Numbers 22) God used a donkey to speak to him. It does appear that the message is from the Lord. And it was certainly 100% percent accurate.
Our lesson today should, then, focus on being in the place where God can talk to us instead of attempting to circumvent Him by constructing an alternative. It has been said that God stops leading us when we rebel. And the only way to reopen communication is to return to the place where we left the last legitimate instruction, complete that, and wait.
God does not have a plan B, nor will He bless my inventions. Saul learned the hard way. Be a wise man and learn from other people’s (i.e. Saul) mistakes.
(Ed. Note This medium is usually referred to as the Witch of En-dor. While in graduate school, I was conducting research on a process nicknamed ENDOR. The exact term escapes me, but it had something to do with electron double resonance. My professor made a note on my summary paper and asked whether this had anything to do with the witch of En-dor. My first realization that he was Biblically literate. We had some interesting conversations after that. That was fun.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)