We have looked at four of the ten love letters God sent to us in Exodus 20. We can look at them as if they were a post-nuptial contract between the Groom and His bride. I hope you enjoyed the first four as much as I did. Here are the final six.
Before we start let's consider one overarching attribute. All of the love letters reflect the nature and being (or face) of God. As we peruse them, we will find the character of God superimposed over each concept.
Number five: The Relational God. "Honor your father and mother." This is written specifically to the children of the marriage. Ephesians 6:2 tells us that this is the first command with a promise. And what a promise: "3 so that it may be well with you, and that you may live long on the earth." Try Googling "long life" and see how many responses come up. There are pages and pages. I did not check, but none of the first pages had anything about this.
Then this web site came up: http://www.bibloscope.com/content/long-life-scriptures. Now that is an impressive list. Far better than the three previous and untold following pages. (This is not an endorsement of this site. This page is valid. ED.)
Showing respect for father and mother then aids in transferring respect to others in authority. Teachers, a boss, police, even government leaders deserve respect and it is our responsibility to honor them. Not to get too political, but how many young men would still be alive if they had respected authority when they had an interaction with the police? If and when a police officer tells you to do something, do it. Long life is a tangible and measurable result in these events. (Or at least "longer" life.)
Look ahead. The next letters are all facilitated by a loving father and mother inculcating the love of God and the Scripture into their kids. Not only does it result in life for the kids, but also a less stressful life for Ma and Pa. Just as we honor God, and a wife honors her husband, the children extend the trail of respect and honor. Most of the problems of society would be solved by this. Start a new line today.
God's image is seen here. The Triune God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit have been in complete and unbroken communion and community from all eternity. They each play a role, most often in conjunction with the others. They are in complete agreement and cooperation as they respect each other and each others' participation in all they do. (Genesis 1 "Let US make man....") Our families can mirror this union and communion. It begins with respect or honor.
Number six: The Life Respecting God. "You shall not murder." God is life and life giving. Jesus said that He was "the Way, the Truth, and the Life." (John 14:6) Respect for life is part of God's being as much as holiness is. We see the nature of God reflected in all of creation. The variety and diversity is beyond our conception, even in the parts we cannot see. God takes pride in life. It is natural that we should emulate this in all of our actions.
Before going any farther, be sure to notice the wording. "Murder" does not imply all killing. We can dispense with that nonsense right away. Murder is the deliberate taking of a life with no justification. Other Scriptures delineate that clearly.
How does this fit into marriage? Life is precious. All life is precious. God values His bride and everyone as He has made them. And as His bride, we respect and love what He loves. This does have a practical aspect as noted before. No one wants to die unexpectedly and undeservedly. The lack of respect for live is frightening in our society. (See long life promise in five.)
And the value that God places on life is evident in the penalty delineated in Genesis 9:6. "Whoever sheds man's blood, By man his blood shall be shed," The price God puts on life is that anyone who takes the life of another will forfeit his own. As a bride, we can be secure in the wall of protection the Groom placed around the home and all of the family.
Ignoring or removing the hedge is disastrous. Modern murder rates are almost unbelievable as people act with impunity and total disregard for others' welfare. Our families are not reflecting God's concern for life. Mom and Dad, this is partly our fault. Not only do we respect lives in regard to life and death, we respect life when we treat people as they deserve. They are special creations of our Father and God. Jesus extended this from actually taking life to hating someone. John quoted this in 1 John 3:15.
We can actually turn this around and say that loving our family is the opposite of murder. God would never murder His children or bride. The bride should and must reflect this in our treatment of others. Think how this would revolutionize law enforcement.
Number seven: The Restricting God. "You shall not commit adultery." (This can be extended to any and all sexual interactions between people.) The Groom is totally, completely, and exclusively committed to His bride.
Again, God's nature is clearly on display here. First the Three would never be untrue to each other. And from our point of view, God is never untrue to us or any of His people. The book of Hosea illustrates that on a personal and a national level. We best reflect God's nature as we are true to our mates. What a privilege! Simple and practical, it is. (Yoda)
Number eight: The Supplying God. "You shall not steal." God recognizes and approves of property. The first clear indication of this is Abram being promised land. (Genesis 12) In Genesis 13 the Lord promised Abram all of the land that he could see and "walk over." Possessions do not pose a problem with God.
The inordinate love of them can lead to unhealthy and unholy desires. The principle of accumulation is not foreign to the Lord. But taking property from someone else is not part of God's original plan. God's nature is to provide. When we steal, we are expressing a lack of belief that the provision of the Lord will be sufficient.
We are driven by desire for prosperity, property, and prestige. When we take any of that from someone else we attempt to short circuit the Master's plans. An additional consideration is that we get paid for work, for expending part of our life in exchange for money. Spending money is an expression of trading our life for something else. The act of thievery, then, is stealing life. Check number six.
God's nature is to provide. By taking matters into our own hands, illegitimately, we are demonstrating a lack of trust. A bride who does not trust her Groom will use unethical methods to accumulate "stuff" in order to insure that her needs are met. We often witness situations where the Groom was going to provide that and more. Or conversely, the "stuff" is harmful and He, wisely forbore giving something that would cause damage..
Stealing denies God's sovereignty and care, but it also exerts our own desires to be in control. That didn't work out too well for Adam and Eve, nor for us. In fact, we can turn to Abram to see the folly of not waiting for God to provide. His fathering Ishmael may not always be seen as stealing, but it does illustrate not waiting for God to provide what He had promised. God's provision is sufficient and will come in His time.
Number nine: The God of truth. "You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.." The nature of God is glaringly evident here. Look back at John 14:6. Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life."
That applied directly in number six, "Life." The "way" can be discerned in respect and honor for our parents and waiting on God to provide instead of stealing. Proverbs 13:11 says, "Wealth obtained by fraud dwindles." Follow God's way. And here, we see truth is inherent in God's nature, just as holiness is. And finally, Truth is enshrined in Jesus and God. Any variation from absolute honesty should be recognized as denying God.
God did not have the Holy Spirit flip a coin and say,"Murder? Tails, nope."
How about adultery? "Tails again. No way."
Respect parents? "Heads, yes. Do it."
Stealing, coveting? "No again."
Lying? We know the answer to that. God's nature is displayed in all of these love letters. He would deny Himself if He tolerated any of them. And, as His bride, we deny His character if and when we engage in any of them.
Lying, along with murder, adultery, and stealing are all expressions of rebellion against God and His nature. They are not proscribed to restrict our fun or even options. They fly directly in the face of God's care and provision for us, His bride. A bride should never lie to her husband.
All of these are not merely expressions of ways to make the community and society function fairly and efficiently. If we interpret them as such, we both miss out on the beautiful display of God's love for us, and we miss the experience of resting in His care. A family that is slavishly forced to comply with these or any other commandments will not be a pleasant place to be. But one that follows them willingly, with wonder, will experience a joy and contentment that cannot be measured nor duplicated.
Number ten: The Complete God. "You shall not covet your neighbor's house; you shall not covet your neighbor's wife or his male servant or his female servant or his ox or his donkey or anything that belongs to your neighbor." The detail here almost makes us think that the Lord was covering all of the possible "loop holes," that anyone could concoct.
"Thou shalt not covet," seems to be pretty clear. But...you know me, and yourself. "What about...?" There are no escape clauses. "But I need...."
Nope, nada, nein, nyet. All eventualities are covered. And the reason why becomes obvious in Colossians 3:5 where Paul lists a group of sins and finishes with, "covetousness, which is idolatry." The letters have come full circle. Coveting or greed encompasses most of the final five and maybe more. Often murder is instigated by wishing to acquire others' property (theft), and fraudulent attempts to obtain it (lying) before outright taking the life (murder) of the one resisting. Adultery fits right up there in the initial listing, "neighbor's wife."
And the ultimate cause of all, is elevating my desires above God's. I have made my wishes superior to God's and supplanting Him with something or someone else. (One–no other gods or no gods before–above–Me.) This is idolatry.
God put it last to complete the circle. And by if we break the circle here, most of the rest will not become a problem. God's nature is not to want something "else." Actually, there is "nothing else" for God. He owns it all. But He does not utilize illegitimate or unscrupulous means to effect His will.
A bride must not desire or aspire to gain anything outside of what the loving Groom provides. Remember stealing? The object might already be on the way, or it might be ultimately harmful and the Groom is protecting His bride. Either way, do not make an idol of stuff. He is sufficient.
We have completed the circle of God's love letters. He is all we will ever need. And when we recognize that, He is all that we will ever want. We can see His face in all that He has given and spoken. His love is complete and comprehensive. Rest in that.
That finishes all ten of God's love letters. The enormity of His love is on full display. Now don't you kind of wish there were 20?
Sunday, February 26, 2017
Thursday, February 23, 2017
Ten Love Letters
Have you read the ten love letters from God to you in Exodus 20? "Wait," you say, "I thought Exodus 20 was the ten commandments." We have all heard sermons on this passage.
One: worship no other gods. Makes sense, there are no other gods, so worshiping a non-entity seems to be demeaning. Two: Make no images. Of course. God is a spirit and making an image of a spirit would not be representative of Him, but something else. See One.
Three: Do not take God's Name in vain. You do not revere anyone or anything that you curse with. Four: Keep the Sabbath holy. Logical. We do not want to work ourselves to death.
Five: Honor father and mother. After all, they brought you into the world and provide for you. They deserve respect. Six: Do not murder. No question about that or the next three. Seven: Do not commit adultery. This keeps the family (Number five) in order. Eight: Do not steal. My stuff is important to me. Likewise others value their own stuff. Nine: Do not lie. How else can we communicate and cooperate in this world? Ten: Do not covet. This kind of leads back to the others, particularly six, seven, and eight.
The end. These make lots of sense, but how do you get "love letters" out of this? Many sermons I have heard break them down into two sections, Getting along with God and getting along with man. So imagine my surprise when our pastor at my church in college announced that he was preaching on the Ten Commandments. He would take at least one sermon on EACH ONE!
I figured that I had ten weeks of a little extra sleep on Sunday morning. I do not have my notes from that series, but I was surprised at what he found in those commandments. I did not sleep during the messages, and I was disappointed when they were complete.
David Jeremiah reminded me of that when he commented that the Ten Commandments were ten love letters from God. We will not have an entire study on each one, although we could, but will try to just hit the high points.
Number one: The Jealous God. No other gods. Sometimes this is misinterpreted as God stoops to human jealousy. This is both demeaning and distinctly erroneous. God's jealousy is like that of a loving parent. We are jealous of our children's health and well being.
"You better not mess with my kid." This warning rings out from the earliest interaction with a newborn, to the school play ground, to college and job interactions, all the way to the parents' twilight years. This reflects, faintly, the love and care that God has for us.
He does know that there are no other gods, and if we worship anything or anyone but Him we are actually worshiping demons. (Psalm 96:5 and 1 Corinthians 20:10) That is worse than we originally thought. So the options are to worship the True God or to worship and be subjected to demons. I choose Jesus.
The Lord is jealous for our well being, both now and for eternity. The being that we worship will determine where we spend forever. The first letter is His declaration that He wants us with Him. He is like a husband guarding and corralling the affections of His bride. They are channeled in one direction, to Him.
Number two: The Exclusive God. No images. There is only one way to God (John 14:6) and it is clearly portrayed in the Scripture. The Substitute Sacrifice of the Old Testament is realized in the Lamb of God, Jesus. (John 1:36) Any image that can be crafted is a poor substitute for the Real Thing and the Lord wanted to make that clear in the beginning. God is a spirit, and no image can represent a spirit. So it, by default becomes an idol, a substitute.
The Groom again warns against any type of substitute for Him. He does not do this because there is any fault in Him and the bride is attempting to supplement her mate. But the bride does not understand the infinite nuances of the Groom and failing to recognize that, attempts to exchange an inferior substitute for the real thing. God's love demands only the best for us, and this warning is another illustration of His loving care. It is not a negative restriction meant to deprive us of value or meaning or later on, fun. It is positive and enhancing to our relationship.
Number three: The Respected God. Do not take the Name of the Lord in vain. Just as a bride takes the name of her husband, so we become children of God, Christians. If we use His Name in a demeaning manner, especially by lowering it to a curse word, we are actually talking about ourselves. Notice that any oath or curse uses excrement, or filth, or detritus. Ever hear anyone exclaim, "Oh diamonds?" Or gold, or platinum, or any other valuable object?
I do not have to be more explicit, but shameful and other devalued terms and actions are used in cursing. So taking God's Name, or Jesus Christ reflects the value the speaker places on that item, action, or Person. If we are the ones to do it, we are effectively naming ourselves as despicable. Why do we not hear the Prime Minister, or President, or King used as swear words?
Again, the love of God is displayed in His "fence" around our name. Just as we do not want our kids to share all of the dirty laundry of our extended family, God protects our identity. The analogy breaks down here, in that He has no shameful history. But we do and exposing it, by implication can reflect on Him as well.
Number four and last for this thought: The Restful God. Keep the Sabbath day holy. As kids we chafed under what we considered onerous restrictions on "Sunday activities." Some friends could not even swim on Sunday afternoon. Personally, I considered that a slight misinterpretation and still do. Recreation is re-creation or reviving. That seems to be one purpose of the day of rest.
The real meaning of Sabbath rest is not a relief from the rigors and tiring efforts of work. Labor was not meant to be onerous or repulsive. Look at the description again. As God "worked" for six days and rested, so we are to take a break.
Notice specifically the comparison. God created for six days. Do you think that He was tired or bored or was watching the clock like a hawk to jump out the door at the earliest possible moment? "Evening, I'm outa here."
It would seem, by looking around at the creation, that He took an extreme amount of joy and satisfaction from the creative process. From the most minute organism to the greatest, and even man, we see a level of craftsmanship that we cannot begin to emulate, let alone equal. Astronomers are continually discovering new facets of the solar system that literally has even the non-believers gasping in wonder. It is unbelievably intricate and complex .
God envisioned work as fulfilling and enjoyable. He was finished, so He could "rest." He was not exhausted or bored, and thus needed a break. The "work" was complete, so He ceased to labor. Likewise, our labor is to be fulfilling, challenging, and an enhancement to our well being. In other words, God planned work to be so much fun that we would literally work ourselves to death if we did not stop periodically.
The weekend is a time to reflect on how much He has blessed us with the opportunity to, like Him, create. Recall that Jesus said, the Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath. (Mark 2:27) Labor, our work, was meant to be a reflection of God's work. He graciously gave us the opportunity and ability to emulate Him. We would do it forever if left to our wishes.
The loving Groom desires to direct our attention to our relationship with Him, and not our mirroring of His work. It is possible that even doing "God's work" can wear us out, or worse distract us from contemplating Him.. So He prescribes a rest to rebuild and rejuvenate our lives. And how better to do that than spend it in His presence.
And subsequent to the fall, and the curse of "meaningless" work, man is even more in need of a respite. (The curse was not to have to work. It was to have to do meaningless work. Adam had to fight weeds in order to produce enough to survive and support his family. Adam had to sweat to eat, whereas before the fall, there was "work" but it was tending and harvesting the garden. Now he has to control weeds that sap the nutrients and diminish the yield. This "wasted labor" that produces no value was the curse.)
The temptation to "overwork" is even greater as there is no finish, no completion. The grind just keeps going and going and going.... The day of rest is even more vital to health than before.
The first four "love letters" have illustrated how God surrounded us with Himself and His wonder. Next time we will explore how this loving attitude extends to those with whom we interact.
Don't you just love this Book?
One: worship no other gods. Makes sense, there are no other gods, so worshiping a non-entity seems to be demeaning. Two: Make no images. Of course. God is a spirit and making an image of a spirit would not be representative of Him, but something else. See One.
Three: Do not take God's Name in vain. You do not revere anyone or anything that you curse with. Four: Keep the Sabbath holy. Logical. We do not want to work ourselves to death.
Five: Honor father and mother. After all, they brought you into the world and provide for you. They deserve respect. Six: Do not murder. No question about that or the next three. Seven: Do not commit adultery. This keeps the family (Number five) in order. Eight: Do not steal. My stuff is important to me. Likewise others value their own stuff. Nine: Do not lie. How else can we communicate and cooperate in this world? Ten: Do not covet. This kind of leads back to the others, particularly six, seven, and eight.
The end. These make lots of sense, but how do you get "love letters" out of this? Many sermons I have heard break them down into two sections, Getting along with God and getting along with man. So imagine my surprise when our pastor at my church in college announced that he was preaching on the Ten Commandments. He would take at least one sermon on EACH ONE!
I figured that I had ten weeks of a little extra sleep on Sunday morning. I do not have my notes from that series, but I was surprised at what he found in those commandments. I did not sleep during the messages, and I was disappointed when they were complete.
David Jeremiah reminded me of that when he commented that the Ten Commandments were ten love letters from God. We will not have an entire study on each one, although we could, but will try to just hit the high points.
Number one: The Jealous God. No other gods. Sometimes this is misinterpreted as God stoops to human jealousy. This is both demeaning and distinctly erroneous. God's jealousy is like that of a loving parent. We are jealous of our children's health and well being.
"You better not mess with my kid." This warning rings out from the earliest interaction with a newborn, to the school play ground, to college and job interactions, all the way to the parents' twilight years. This reflects, faintly, the love and care that God has for us.
He does know that there are no other gods, and if we worship anything or anyone but Him we are actually worshiping demons. (Psalm 96:5 and 1 Corinthians 20:10) That is worse than we originally thought. So the options are to worship the True God or to worship and be subjected to demons. I choose Jesus.
The Lord is jealous for our well being, both now and for eternity. The being that we worship will determine where we spend forever. The first letter is His declaration that He wants us with Him. He is like a husband guarding and corralling the affections of His bride. They are channeled in one direction, to Him.
Number two: The Exclusive God. No images. There is only one way to God (John 14:6) and it is clearly portrayed in the Scripture. The Substitute Sacrifice of the Old Testament is realized in the Lamb of God, Jesus. (John 1:36) Any image that can be crafted is a poor substitute for the Real Thing and the Lord wanted to make that clear in the beginning. God is a spirit, and no image can represent a spirit. So it, by default becomes an idol, a substitute.
The Groom again warns against any type of substitute for Him. He does not do this because there is any fault in Him and the bride is attempting to supplement her mate. But the bride does not understand the infinite nuances of the Groom and failing to recognize that, attempts to exchange an inferior substitute for the real thing. God's love demands only the best for us, and this warning is another illustration of His loving care. It is not a negative restriction meant to deprive us of value or meaning or later on, fun. It is positive and enhancing to our relationship.
Number three: The Respected God. Do not take the Name of the Lord in vain. Just as a bride takes the name of her husband, so we become children of God, Christians. If we use His Name in a demeaning manner, especially by lowering it to a curse word, we are actually talking about ourselves. Notice that any oath or curse uses excrement, or filth, or detritus. Ever hear anyone exclaim, "Oh diamonds?" Or gold, or platinum, or any other valuable object?
I do not have to be more explicit, but shameful and other devalued terms and actions are used in cursing. So taking God's Name, or Jesus Christ reflects the value the speaker places on that item, action, or Person. If we are the ones to do it, we are effectively naming ourselves as despicable. Why do we not hear the Prime Minister, or President, or King used as swear words?
Again, the love of God is displayed in His "fence" around our name. Just as we do not want our kids to share all of the dirty laundry of our extended family, God protects our identity. The analogy breaks down here, in that He has no shameful history. But we do and exposing it, by implication can reflect on Him as well.
Number four and last for this thought: The Restful God. Keep the Sabbath day holy. As kids we chafed under what we considered onerous restrictions on "Sunday activities." Some friends could not even swim on Sunday afternoon. Personally, I considered that a slight misinterpretation and still do. Recreation is re-creation or reviving. That seems to be one purpose of the day of rest.
The real meaning of Sabbath rest is not a relief from the rigors and tiring efforts of work. Labor was not meant to be onerous or repulsive. Look at the description again. As God "worked" for six days and rested, so we are to take a break.
Notice specifically the comparison. God created for six days. Do you think that He was tired or bored or was watching the clock like a hawk to jump out the door at the earliest possible moment? "Evening, I'm outa here."
It would seem, by looking around at the creation, that He took an extreme amount of joy and satisfaction from the creative process. From the most minute organism to the greatest, and even man, we see a level of craftsmanship that we cannot begin to emulate, let alone equal. Astronomers are continually discovering new facets of the solar system that literally has even the non-believers gasping in wonder. It is unbelievably intricate and complex .
God envisioned work as fulfilling and enjoyable. He was finished, so He could "rest." He was not exhausted or bored, and thus needed a break. The "work" was complete, so He ceased to labor. Likewise, our labor is to be fulfilling, challenging, and an enhancement to our well being. In other words, God planned work to be so much fun that we would literally work ourselves to death if we did not stop periodically.
The weekend is a time to reflect on how much He has blessed us with the opportunity to, like Him, create. Recall that Jesus said, the Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath. (Mark 2:27) Labor, our work, was meant to be a reflection of God's work. He graciously gave us the opportunity and ability to emulate Him. We would do it forever if left to our wishes.
The loving Groom desires to direct our attention to our relationship with Him, and not our mirroring of His work. It is possible that even doing "God's work" can wear us out, or worse distract us from contemplating Him.. So He prescribes a rest to rebuild and rejuvenate our lives. And how better to do that than spend it in His presence.
And subsequent to the fall, and the curse of "meaningless" work, man is even more in need of a respite. (The curse was not to have to work. It was to have to do meaningless work. Adam had to fight weeds in order to produce enough to survive and support his family. Adam had to sweat to eat, whereas before the fall, there was "work" but it was tending and harvesting the garden. Now he has to control weeds that sap the nutrients and diminish the yield. This "wasted labor" that produces no value was the curse.)
The temptation to "overwork" is even greater as there is no finish, no completion. The grind just keeps going and going and going.... The day of rest is even more vital to health than before.
The first four "love letters" have illustrated how God surrounded us with Himself and His wonder. Next time we will explore how this loving attitude extends to those with whom we interact.
Don't you just love this Book?
Wednesday, February 22, 2017
Be Strong and Courageous
"Don't be afraid," or some variant of that is used over 360 times in the Bible. A companion for many of those reassurances is "be strong and courageous." Most of them are good and positive admonitions.
But 2 Samuel 13:28 contains one with insidious undertones. Here is how Holman translates it:
28 Now Absalom commanded his young men, "Watch Amnon until he is in a good mood from the wine. When I order you to strike Amnon, then kill him. Don't be afraid. Am I not the one who has commanded you? Be strong and courageous!"
There is obviously a back story here, and it is one of extreme debauchery and callousness. Amnon was a son of David and the half brother of Absalom. Absalom had a beautiful sister, Tamar. Amnon fancied himself to be in love with her. (As God's gift to women, as some guys reason, they should all be honored that I favor them with my attention.) She did not feel honored.
Through some subterfuge, Amnon contrived to have her sent to his house and at the end of the encounter, raped her, and sent her away as a prostitute. She was humiliated, physically, emotionally, and presumably culturally. Amnon's servants were no dummies. They could put two and two together.
Absalom was beside himself in anger and wrath. David himself was "furious." (Verse 21) But he took no action. After two years Absalom struck. In a fitting twist of history, Absalom deceived David with his own bit of subterfuge and had Amnon sent down to his "shearing" party. Unknown to David and Amnon, the sheep were not the only ones who would be "sheared."
That brings us to our passage. Absalom is instructing his co-conspirators. They may have been unaware that they were involved to this point. That is not clear in the story, but they willingly and possibly enthusiastically participated in the assassination of the king's son.
Absalom's instructions are both ominous and insidious. "Don't be afraid." Most of the times we read this fortifying utterance from the Lord, or someone representing Him, they urge believers on to action. These are "good" actions, not cold blooded, premeditated murder. Absalom assumed the responsibility."Am not I the one who commanded you?"
We learned in Viet Nam and other places that illegal orders do not absolve the followers of responsibility for lawless acts. As far as we know, Absalom's helpers were not punished. David was reticent to chastize his son as well. Our focus, however is on the encouragement Absalom offered.
These hallowed words, "Be not afraid, be strong and of good courage," have echoed down the corridors of history. As mentioned before they occur hundreds of times as godly men and women are urged to more complete obedience and confidence in God's protecting and helping hand. To hear them subverted and probably perverted into such nefarious actions is jarring.
As we discussed earlier, (Christ Killers) words and meanings can be taken out of context and used in distinctly ungodly manners. The words themselves are not at fault. We can lay the blame at the foot of the manipulators.
And, personally, we must beware of taking God's words and using them for personal and selfish purposes. The third commandment says not to take God's Name in vain. We would not be too far afield to apply that to anything God says. He is not pleased when we misconstrue His words, especially for sinful purposes.
Using Scripture to justify wrong doing, well, call it sin, is a sin. We discussed oppressing the Jews on the wrongful interpretation of them as Christ killers as one example. Justifying slavery is a second one. And racial bias, based on the "lineage of Ham"is one more of this shameful trend. . God's Word is quick and powerful. (Hebrews 4:12) It is a two-edged sword. That means that it can, and does cut both ways.
Absalom placed himself in the place of God in encouraging his "helpers." He paid for that in life and possibly eternity. (Not going to judge.) We would be well advised to read carefully and like the Bereans, (Acts 17:11) examine what the Scripture says to see if what they heard was true. And we can read before we speak as well.
"Be careful little tongue what you say." "Don't be afraid. Be strong and courageous".
But 2 Samuel 13:28 contains one with insidious undertones. Here is how Holman translates it:
28 Now Absalom commanded his young men, "Watch Amnon until he is in a good mood from the wine. When I order you to strike Amnon, then kill him. Don't be afraid. Am I not the one who has commanded you? Be strong and courageous!"
There is obviously a back story here, and it is one of extreme debauchery and callousness. Amnon was a son of David and the half brother of Absalom. Absalom had a beautiful sister, Tamar. Amnon fancied himself to be in love with her. (As God's gift to women, as some guys reason, they should all be honored that I favor them with my attention.) She did not feel honored.
Through some subterfuge, Amnon contrived to have her sent to his house and at the end of the encounter, raped her, and sent her away as a prostitute. She was humiliated, physically, emotionally, and presumably culturally. Amnon's servants were no dummies. They could put two and two together.
Absalom was beside himself in anger and wrath. David himself was "furious." (Verse 21) But he took no action. After two years Absalom struck. In a fitting twist of history, Absalom deceived David with his own bit of subterfuge and had Amnon sent down to his "shearing" party. Unknown to David and Amnon, the sheep were not the only ones who would be "sheared."
That brings us to our passage. Absalom is instructing his co-conspirators. They may have been unaware that they were involved to this point. That is not clear in the story, but they willingly and possibly enthusiastically participated in the assassination of the king's son.
Absalom's instructions are both ominous and insidious. "Don't be afraid." Most of the times we read this fortifying utterance from the Lord, or someone representing Him, they urge believers on to action. These are "good" actions, not cold blooded, premeditated murder. Absalom assumed the responsibility."Am not I the one who commanded you?"
We learned in Viet Nam and other places that illegal orders do not absolve the followers of responsibility for lawless acts. As far as we know, Absalom's helpers were not punished. David was reticent to chastize his son as well. Our focus, however is on the encouragement Absalom offered.
These hallowed words, "Be not afraid, be strong and of good courage," have echoed down the corridors of history. As mentioned before they occur hundreds of times as godly men and women are urged to more complete obedience and confidence in God's protecting and helping hand. To hear them subverted and probably perverted into such nefarious actions is jarring.
As we discussed earlier, (Christ Killers) words and meanings can be taken out of context and used in distinctly ungodly manners. The words themselves are not at fault. We can lay the blame at the foot of the manipulators.
And, personally, we must beware of taking God's words and using them for personal and selfish purposes. The third commandment says not to take God's Name in vain. We would not be too far afield to apply that to anything God says. He is not pleased when we misconstrue His words, especially for sinful purposes.
Using Scripture to justify wrong doing, well, call it sin, is a sin. We discussed oppressing the Jews on the wrongful interpretation of them as Christ killers as one example. Justifying slavery is a second one. And racial bias, based on the "lineage of Ham"is one more of this shameful trend. . God's Word is quick and powerful. (Hebrews 4:12) It is a two-edged sword. That means that it can, and does cut both ways.
Absalom placed himself in the place of God in encouraging his "helpers." He paid for that in life and possibly eternity. (Not going to judge.) We would be well advised to read carefully and like the Bereans, (Acts 17:11) examine what the Scripture says to see if what they heard was true. And we can read before we speak as well.
"Be careful little tongue what you say." "Don't be afraid. Be strong and courageous".
Monday, February 20, 2017
Blessings: Answered Prayer
Answered prayer is one of the most exciting things we can consider. And when it is personal, that is a little nicer. God does not answer our prayers to make our lives easier. He does it to bring glory to Him and give us another chance to praise Him.
Case in point: On Thursday I lost, misplaced, or something a gift card for $150 in services at a local tire place. I discovered the loss on Friday morning and of course prayed, "Lord help me find it." I looked everywhere and called a couple of places. No one had seen it.
A second prayer was less selfish. "Lord I do not know where it is and if someone needs it worse than I do, please bless them with it. And whether or not I get it back, I will praise You for Your provision. Amen."
No card yet. But, on Saturday morning I had to order a water pressure relief valve and found one on Amazon. As I was checking out, I recalled an email from, of all people, "The Tennessean." I opened it out and they had awarded me $100 in Amazon credit for answering some questions on surveys that they had sent out. Wahoo!
Later in the afternoon I needed a bracket to mount an appliance and it was not with the kit we received. We looked it up on line and there it was, $90. A substitute was still $50. On a whim I went to Home Depot and they had nothing. Lowes was next and they also did not carry the item.
But the guy I talked to said, "I think I have some old ones in storage. We are going to throw them out. If it won't offend you, I will let you have it--for nothing."
I allowed as how I might be able to withstand the offense and he checked. He had one. A quick call to his supervisor produced approval for the "disposal" of the bracket. I walked out with my bracket and the $90 still in my pocket.
So the Lord, using Lowes and "The Tennessean," has blessed me with $190 or so. I wished the card I had "given up" had been larger. (Not really. Not presuming on this.)
God does provide over and above, even if our "offering" is inadvertent. But I will be more careful in the future.
Have a great day and God Bless America. Pray for our leaders.
Case in point: On Thursday I lost, misplaced, or something a gift card for $150 in services at a local tire place. I discovered the loss on Friday morning and of course prayed, "Lord help me find it." I looked everywhere and called a couple of places. No one had seen it.
A second prayer was less selfish. "Lord I do not know where it is and if someone needs it worse than I do, please bless them with it. And whether or not I get it back, I will praise You for Your provision. Amen."
No card yet. But, on Saturday morning I had to order a water pressure relief valve and found one on Amazon. As I was checking out, I recalled an email from, of all people, "The Tennessean." I opened it out and they had awarded me $100 in Amazon credit for answering some questions on surveys that they had sent out. Wahoo!
Later in the afternoon I needed a bracket to mount an appliance and it was not with the kit we received. We looked it up on line and there it was, $90. A substitute was still $50. On a whim I went to Home Depot and they had nothing. Lowes was next and they also did not carry the item.
But the guy I talked to said, "I think I have some old ones in storage. We are going to throw them out. If it won't offend you, I will let you have it--for nothing."
I allowed as how I might be able to withstand the offense and he checked. He had one. A quick call to his supervisor produced approval for the "disposal" of the bracket. I walked out with my bracket and the $90 still in my pocket.
So the Lord, using Lowes and "The Tennessean," has blessed me with $190 or so. I wished the card I had "given up" had been larger. (Not really. Not presuming on this.)
God does provide over and above, even if our "offering" is inadvertent. But I will be more careful in the future.
Have a great day and God Bless America. Pray for our leaders.
Friday, February 17, 2017
More on Old Earth Creation
During a discussion on creation, one of the speakers referenced a prominent scientist who noted that the "book of nature" is like the 67th book of the Bible. I have heard that before, but it had not registered with me. Last night, when I heard it my red flags perked up, along with several other mixed metaphors.
Time after time in both the New and Old Testaments we are cautioned not to add to God's Word. Now, does considering nature to be another book of the Bible rise to the level of "adding" to the Word? There are two ways to apply and interpret the message of nature. If we use the information we receive from nature to help understand the 66, it will be an acceptable reading.
However, if the "nature information" is used to reinterpret what the Bible says, and to even revise it, we are on dangerous territory. One example is the "billions of years old" interpretation of the age of the earth. By determining that long periods of time must be inserted into the Scripture account of creation, the "interpreter" is actually rewriting the text. One problem with this is purely practical. Dates and times of past events vary with additional "discoveries" or understandings, so the changed text must be changed again.
"Old ages" of the earth used to bother me. As I learned more about science, I discovered that the dating techniques involve preconceived notions or presumptions. These precursors have a major effect on the resulting conclusion. And there are scientifically reliable interpretations that conclude we inhabit a young earth. Consequently I can accept young earth analysis which seems to confirm and conform to the Scripture text. I continually discover more textual interpretations that persist in interpreting the six days as literal 24 hour days. (Bible Words.)
One critique claims that the first chapters of Genesis are figurative, to give us an overview of God's work, but not a specific play by play or day by day account of activities. The stories of Adam and Eve are merely figurative or mythical and are given to overview God's ultimate actions.
One example is the story about Eve and the serpent. It is just a figurative representation of the origin of sin and evil. If it is not literal, we are faced with, to my mind, a very uncomfortable result. Follow my thinking. Genesis 3:15 presents the ultimate solution for sin.
And I will put enmity Between you and the woman, And between your seed and her seed; He shall bruise you on the head, And you shall bruise him on the heel."
The Lord is addressing Satan and announces that there will be "warfare" between Eve and Satan and her offspring and Satan's "seed" or followers. This announces the initial glimpse of the crucifixion. The Seed of the woman will crush Satan's head. This represents a mortal and eternal defeat. Bruising the heel represents a minor and recoverable wound. Jesus did die, but the death only lasted for three days.
So if the story in Genesis 3 is only figurative, does that mean that the prophesy of the crucifixion and resurrection is merely a figurative story? No. Almost everyone agrees and accepts the literal death and resurrection. The parallel story in Genesis 3 must also be a literal story.
Back to our question. Does nature really show us about God? Absolutely. Romans 1 says that men can know about God in nature.
19 because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.
Notice what they can see. "His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature," are shown, which proves the existence of God. It does not tell about His love and grace and specifically how to know him.
If we try to learn about God from nature alone, we are doomed to have an incomplete understanding. There is a sign on the Interstate just outside of Smyrna, that says "Nashville 23 miles." That sign tells us where Nashville is, 23 miles down the road. It also tells us how far it is: 23 miles.
The sign does not tell us how long Nashville has been there. "Nashville 23 miles." It will not tell me how big it is or how it was built. "Nashville 23 miles." It will not even tell us how it is governed. "Nashville 23 miles." If I go up to it and ask any questions, the sign will answer, "Nashville 23 miles." That is all it will ever tell me.
In the same way, nature tells us that there is a God. It does not tell us how He made the world. It does not tell us how to get to Him or what He is like, or any other crucial information that we need to live forever with Him. To learn these life changing facts, we have to turn to the Scripture. There is not a substitute or even a complement. The Bible alone gives us this. Our understanding of "nature" may or may not confirm what the Bible says. If we find a conflict, it must be with our understanding of nature and not what the Bible says.
Our real question is not whether the earth is young or old. We must find the message that God has given us and respond to it. If we perceive any discrepancy between the Scripture and any other source of data the immediate reaction must be to re-examine the data. If perchance our understanding of Scripture is faulty, that will become clear. BUT, and I emphasize, but, we are never allowed to revise Scripture.
Believe it or not, I have misunderstood some aspects of Scripture. My faulty interpretation was exposed by other Scripture. Only cults change the Scripture to match their interpretation. The result of such effrontery is not good. Find your mistake. YOUR mistake. Scripture is never wrong.
One simple illustration will close our discussion. I took computer programing in college. One of the questions we asked the instructor was what to do about times the computer made a mistake.
He responded, "Apart from a major malfunction, and you will know when that happens, the computer will never make a mistake. It only does what you tell it to do. So if it does something that you do not expect, it is not a ‘computer mistake.' It is a computer programmer mistake. When you find your mistake, it will do what you want it to do."
There are no mistakes in Scripture. There are "programmer" mistakes and when we find them, we will have the ultimate solution that we seek. "Old earth or young earth" is only important in light of what it means to salvation. I am not basing my eternal existence on old or young earth conclusions. If neither one of them correlates with what the Bible says, I reject them both. It is not an intellectual exercise. It is a spiritual battle.
Conversely, if I reject what He clearly has told us, am I really a believer in anything else He says. This is my "test." I do not and will not apply that to anyone else. If they choose to reject whatever He says, He has already told us the result. "He who has the Son has life. He who does not have the Son does not have life." (John 3:36)
Choose life.
Time after time in both the New and Old Testaments we are cautioned not to add to God's Word. Now, does considering nature to be another book of the Bible rise to the level of "adding" to the Word? There are two ways to apply and interpret the message of nature. If we use the information we receive from nature to help understand the 66, it will be an acceptable reading.
However, if the "nature information" is used to reinterpret what the Bible says, and to even revise it, we are on dangerous territory. One example is the "billions of years old" interpretation of the age of the earth. By determining that long periods of time must be inserted into the Scripture account of creation, the "interpreter" is actually rewriting the text. One problem with this is purely practical. Dates and times of past events vary with additional "discoveries" or understandings, so the changed text must be changed again.
"Old ages" of the earth used to bother me. As I learned more about science, I discovered that the dating techniques involve preconceived notions or presumptions. These precursors have a major effect on the resulting conclusion. And there are scientifically reliable interpretations that conclude we inhabit a young earth. Consequently I can accept young earth analysis which seems to confirm and conform to the Scripture text. I continually discover more textual interpretations that persist in interpreting the six days as literal 24 hour days. (Bible Words.)
One critique claims that the first chapters of Genesis are figurative, to give us an overview of God's work, but not a specific play by play or day by day account of activities. The stories of Adam and Eve are merely figurative or mythical and are given to overview God's ultimate actions.
One example is the story about Eve and the serpent. It is just a figurative representation of the origin of sin and evil. If it is not literal, we are faced with, to my mind, a very uncomfortable result. Follow my thinking. Genesis 3:15 presents the ultimate solution for sin.
And I will put enmity Between you and the woman, And between your seed and her seed; He shall bruise you on the head, And you shall bruise him on the heel."
The Lord is addressing Satan and announces that there will be "warfare" between Eve and Satan and her offspring and Satan's "seed" or followers. This announces the initial glimpse of the crucifixion. The Seed of the woman will crush Satan's head. This represents a mortal and eternal defeat. Bruising the heel represents a minor and recoverable wound. Jesus did die, but the death only lasted for three days.
So if the story in Genesis 3 is only figurative, does that mean that the prophesy of the crucifixion and resurrection is merely a figurative story? No. Almost everyone agrees and accepts the literal death and resurrection. The parallel story in Genesis 3 must also be a literal story.
Back to our question. Does nature really show us about God? Absolutely. Romans 1 says that men can know about God in nature.
19 because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.
Notice what they can see. "His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature," are shown, which proves the existence of God. It does not tell about His love and grace and specifically how to know him.
If we try to learn about God from nature alone, we are doomed to have an incomplete understanding. There is a sign on the Interstate just outside of Smyrna, that says "Nashville 23 miles." That sign tells us where Nashville is, 23 miles down the road. It also tells us how far it is: 23 miles.
The sign does not tell us how long Nashville has been there. "Nashville 23 miles." It will not tell me how big it is or how it was built. "Nashville 23 miles." It will not even tell us how it is governed. "Nashville 23 miles." If I go up to it and ask any questions, the sign will answer, "Nashville 23 miles." That is all it will ever tell me.
In the same way, nature tells us that there is a God. It does not tell us how He made the world. It does not tell us how to get to Him or what He is like, or any other crucial information that we need to live forever with Him. To learn these life changing facts, we have to turn to the Scripture. There is not a substitute or even a complement. The Bible alone gives us this. Our understanding of "nature" may or may not confirm what the Bible says. If we find a conflict, it must be with our understanding of nature and not what the Bible says.
Our real question is not whether the earth is young or old. We must find the message that God has given us and respond to it. If we perceive any discrepancy between the Scripture and any other source of data the immediate reaction must be to re-examine the data. If perchance our understanding of Scripture is faulty, that will become clear. BUT, and I emphasize, but, we are never allowed to revise Scripture.
Believe it or not, I have misunderstood some aspects of Scripture. My faulty interpretation was exposed by other Scripture. Only cults change the Scripture to match their interpretation. The result of such effrontery is not good. Find your mistake. YOUR mistake. Scripture is never wrong.
One simple illustration will close our discussion. I took computer programing in college. One of the questions we asked the instructor was what to do about times the computer made a mistake.
He responded, "Apart from a major malfunction, and you will know when that happens, the computer will never make a mistake. It only does what you tell it to do. So if it does something that you do not expect, it is not a ‘computer mistake.' It is a computer programmer mistake. When you find your mistake, it will do what you want it to do."
There are no mistakes in Scripture. There are "programmer" mistakes and when we find them, we will have the ultimate solution that we seek. "Old earth or young earth" is only important in light of what it means to salvation. I am not basing my eternal existence on old or young earth conclusions. If neither one of them correlates with what the Bible says, I reject them both. It is not an intellectual exercise. It is a spiritual battle.
Conversely, if I reject what He clearly has told us, am I really a believer in anything else He says. This is my "test." I do not and will not apply that to anyone else. If they choose to reject whatever He says, He has already told us the result. "He who has the Son has life. He who does not have the Son does not have life." (John 3:36)
Choose life.
Bible Words
One problem with translating the Bible into new languages is the problem of words. The word "yom" from the Hebrew is the subject of intense debate. Does it mean a 24- hour day or a long period of time? And that interpretation has been used to drive a lot of doctrinal discussions.
Take for instance "awful" in English. It can mean terrible, horrible, repulsive, and the like or it can mean filled with awe or awe inspiring. Sometimes the usage gives a hint as to the desired meaning. "It was an awful sight." That does not help much.
"It was an awful sight. People turned away in horror and attempted not to get sick." This helps a lot. "It was an awful sight. People left the encounter in a worshipful mood and praised God for such a sight."
In the previous paragraph the meaning of "awful" was clearly established by the context. When that happens, the translation would be quite simple and straight forward. What happens when this is applied to "yom?"
To begin, realize that the Bible means what the Bible means, not what the words say. This is not contradictory nor silly. Imagine I said, "You are pulling my leg." Now translate that into a new language 1000 years in the future. Would the readers be correct in concluding that you had a hold on my foot and were trying to stretch my leg or separate my knee? (Rick Warren gave this example.) The erudite reader would look for context and other examples of that and interpret it as "teasing" or trying to fool or play a prank.
In Genesis 1, the word "day" comes from yom in Hebrew. You can find all types of hermeneutic gymnastics about how it means everything but a 24 hour day. But, a Hebrew-English lexicon* helps to explain. It has about seven different ways the word is used and lists a seeming exhaustive report on each. One of the divisions is: "day as defined by evening and morning." The specific texts are listed. Genesis 1:5,8,13,19,23,31; see also Genesis 2:2 (twice in verse); Genesis 2:3, Exodus 20:11 (twice in verse), Exodus 32:17 (twice in verse).
Now we can get into dueling authorities and get nowhere. But the specific verses all link a 24 hour day with "yom." So our critical question, is why attempt to define it in a different way? Does any Scripture either suggest or demand such a translation? Is the meaning absurd as the literal pulling of leg is? Does it correlate with other Scriptures? And finally, why would we want to interpret it in any other way?
*Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon, Unabridged, Electronic Database.
Copyright © 2002, 2003, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc.
Take for instance "awful" in English. It can mean terrible, horrible, repulsive, and the like or it can mean filled with awe or awe inspiring. Sometimes the usage gives a hint as to the desired meaning. "It was an awful sight." That does not help much.
"It was an awful sight. People turned away in horror and attempted not to get sick." This helps a lot. "It was an awful sight. People left the encounter in a worshipful mood and praised God for such a sight."
In the previous paragraph the meaning of "awful" was clearly established by the context. When that happens, the translation would be quite simple and straight forward. What happens when this is applied to "yom?"
To begin, realize that the Bible means what the Bible means, not what the words say. This is not contradictory nor silly. Imagine I said, "You are pulling my leg." Now translate that into a new language 1000 years in the future. Would the readers be correct in concluding that you had a hold on my foot and were trying to stretch my leg or separate my knee? (Rick Warren gave this example.) The erudite reader would look for context and other examples of that and interpret it as "teasing" or trying to fool or play a prank.
In Genesis 1, the word "day" comes from yom in Hebrew. You can find all types of hermeneutic gymnastics about how it means everything but a 24 hour day. But, a Hebrew-English lexicon* helps to explain. It has about seven different ways the word is used and lists a seeming exhaustive report on each. One of the divisions is: "day as defined by evening and morning." The specific texts are listed. Genesis 1:5,8,13,19,23,31; see also Genesis 2:2 (twice in verse); Genesis 2:3, Exodus 20:11 (twice in verse), Exodus 32:17 (twice in verse).
Now we can get into dueling authorities and get nowhere. But the specific verses all link a 24 hour day with "yom." So our critical question, is why attempt to define it in a different way? Does any Scripture either suggest or demand such a translation? Is the meaning absurd as the literal pulling of leg is? Does it correlate with other Scriptures? And finally, why would we want to interpret it in any other way?
*Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon, Unabridged, Electronic Database.
Copyright © 2002, 2003, 2006 by Biblesoft, Inc.
Amillennial Thoughts
There are some questions that make me wonder, "Why?" Why would you want to think that? One is the question of the millennium. An old, then discarded, now resurrecting idea is called amillennialism. It variously means different things to different people, who all call themselves, "amillennial."
For some, it is kind of a "post millennial" idea that Jesus will come back to set up His kingdom on earth at the end of the millennium. The actual definition of millennium is often fuzzy as well. One philosophy is that the millennium has already begun and we are in it.
This is particularly strange, in light of the many specific details about the millennium that are seemingly ignored or discounted. This thought is not so much designed to answer any such questions as it is to question why anyone would want to hold such an idea in the first place. There seems to be a problem with integrating the rapture into the time line, not to mention the tribulation as introduced in Daniel 9 (70 weeks) and fleshed out in Revelation 6 through 19. Revelation 20 portrays Satan as being bound, coincidentally, for 1000 years.
In a related question, the Pre-tribulation rapture has been pretty well defended. Why is there a push to move it to mid-tribulation or post-tribulation? The a-mill seems to be a further extension of this. Does it include a rapture at all? What reason is there for such a shift? I honestly do not know.
A second troubling dissent is the controversy between "old earth creation" and "young earth creation." A cursory reading of Genesis 1 and 2 seems to indicate that God created the earth in six literal days. (Bible Words) Why would any decision be made to discount the literal reading? Is there some other Scripture which drives this, or something out side of Scripture?
A third, and possibly trivial instance, but don't tell the participants, is whether Hosea is a literal or figurative. This is an account of a prophet who married a prostitute or a figurative picture of a hypothetical situation depicting the interaction of God and His people. They are acting the role of an adulteress.
The "millennium question" subsumes the rapture question to some degree. Daniel 9 tells of the 70 "weeks" (sevens) of years prophesy for Israel. (490 years) It began when Cyrus ordered the return of the Jews to the land and the commanded (or authorized) them to build, or rebuild the Temple. The time clock was shut off 483 years later with the cutting off of the Messiah. Then some time markers were inserted to help orient us to the next events.
Jerusalem was totally destroyed in A.D. 70, as prophesied by Jesus some 500 or so years after Daniel's words. Then the time clock would begin again with a seven year treaty with the Jews. The anti-Christ committed to protect them for seven years. At the midpoint, or three and one half year mark, he breaks his treaty and initiates the most cruel and comprehensive persecution of the Jewish nation in history. This ends with the coming of Christ (Revelation 19). This is followed by the millennium (Revelation 20) where the phrase "one thousand years" is repeated six times.
The teaching is outlined by our friends at gotquestions.org to help us get a handle on it. As best I can understand it, the amillennial position is focused on the concept that the church, believers, will be so effective in transforming the world that it will become "habitable" for Jesus and He will return and rule forever and ever. Or maybe transform it into heaven. Again, I have a hard time finding any definitive as to these details. I did find an explanation of the position by Hoekema.*
In essence, the "unfulfilled prophesies" that we see in the Old Testament are not literal, but will be "spiritually" fulfilled in the Kingdom, which began when Christ defeated Satan on the cross. We are in the millennium now and it will extend for an undetermined time, until Jesus comes back.
One salient characteristic is that the promises to Abraham about "his seed" will not be restricted to a literal fulfillment with the Jewish nation. They will include Jews and Gentiles in the new heaven and new earth where the King will reign and the "people" will be permanently planted in the land. (New heaven and new earth) The people are believers and the specific promises to Israel will be fulfilled in the promises to the church, or vise versa.
Again, I do not see where the Daniel prophesies are incorporated and the specific Revelation details are also lost in fog. The real puzzler, for me, is why go through such convoluted contortions to "help" God fulfill what He has said. Is that more or less believable than the idea that He will complete everything He said in a future series of events? Ones that have, incidentally, been at least sketched out in several specific passages ranging from Ezekiel on through Revelation?
Just one final thought. If the amillennial position had been "in vogue" during Daniel's time, would they have interpreted all of the promises of return to the land, a new temple, and even the advent of the Messiah as "spiritual" and would be "fulfilled" as the people settled down in Babylon and worked to make the world "suitable" for the Messiah to come and rule over the "world" of then?
Up until 1948 there was not nation of Israel, so a "spiritual" interpretation would make sense from the historical point of view. God could and would "restore" His people, along with Gentile believers, to a future kingdom. But the advent the nation in direct and specific fulfillment of some prophesies might, and does, elicit questions as to why the remainder will not also be literally enacted.
Why, to repeat the question, would an interpreter want to confuse and confound the picture by diverging from the simple understanding of what it says? And where is the basis for that view in Scripture? Sola Scriptura.
For some, it is kind of a "post millennial" idea that Jesus will come back to set up His kingdom on earth at the end of the millennium. The actual definition of millennium is often fuzzy as well. One philosophy is that the millennium has already begun and we are in it.
This is particularly strange, in light of the many specific details about the millennium that are seemingly ignored or discounted. This thought is not so much designed to answer any such questions as it is to question why anyone would want to hold such an idea in the first place. There seems to be a problem with integrating the rapture into the time line, not to mention the tribulation as introduced in Daniel 9 (70 weeks) and fleshed out in Revelation 6 through 19. Revelation 20 portrays Satan as being bound, coincidentally, for 1000 years.
In a related question, the Pre-tribulation rapture has been pretty well defended. Why is there a push to move it to mid-tribulation or post-tribulation? The a-mill seems to be a further extension of this. Does it include a rapture at all? What reason is there for such a shift? I honestly do not know.
A second troubling dissent is the controversy between "old earth creation" and "young earth creation." A cursory reading of Genesis 1 and 2 seems to indicate that God created the earth in six literal days. (Bible Words) Why would any decision be made to discount the literal reading? Is there some other Scripture which drives this, or something out side of Scripture?
A third, and possibly trivial instance, but don't tell the participants, is whether Hosea is a literal or figurative. This is an account of a prophet who married a prostitute or a figurative picture of a hypothetical situation depicting the interaction of God and His people. They are acting the role of an adulteress.
The "millennium question" subsumes the rapture question to some degree. Daniel 9 tells of the 70 "weeks" (sevens) of years prophesy for Israel. (490 years) It began when Cyrus ordered the return of the Jews to the land and the commanded (or authorized) them to build, or rebuild the Temple. The time clock was shut off 483 years later with the cutting off of the Messiah. Then some time markers were inserted to help orient us to the next events.
Jerusalem was totally destroyed in A.D. 70, as prophesied by Jesus some 500 or so years after Daniel's words. Then the time clock would begin again with a seven year treaty with the Jews. The anti-Christ committed to protect them for seven years. At the midpoint, or three and one half year mark, he breaks his treaty and initiates the most cruel and comprehensive persecution of the Jewish nation in history. This ends with the coming of Christ (Revelation 19). This is followed by the millennium (Revelation 20) where the phrase "one thousand years" is repeated six times.
The teaching is outlined by our friends at gotquestions.org to help us get a handle on it. As best I can understand it, the amillennial position is focused on the concept that the church, believers, will be so effective in transforming the world that it will become "habitable" for Jesus and He will return and rule forever and ever. Or maybe transform it into heaven. Again, I have a hard time finding any definitive as to these details. I did find an explanation of the position by Hoekema.*
In essence, the "unfulfilled prophesies" that we see in the Old Testament are not literal, but will be "spiritually" fulfilled in the Kingdom, which began when Christ defeated Satan on the cross. We are in the millennium now and it will extend for an undetermined time, until Jesus comes back.
One salient characteristic is that the promises to Abraham about "his seed" will not be restricted to a literal fulfillment with the Jewish nation. They will include Jews and Gentiles in the new heaven and new earth where the King will reign and the "people" will be permanently planted in the land. (New heaven and new earth) The people are believers and the specific promises to Israel will be fulfilled in the promises to the church, or vise versa.
Again, I do not see where the Daniel prophesies are incorporated and the specific Revelation details are also lost in fog. The real puzzler, for me, is why go through such convoluted contortions to "help" God fulfill what He has said. Is that more or less believable than the idea that He will complete everything He said in a future series of events? Ones that have, incidentally, been at least sketched out in several specific passages ranging from Ezekiel on through Revelation?
Just one final thought. If the amillennial position had been "in vogue" during Daniel's time, would they have interpreted all of the promises of return to the land, a new temple, and even the advent of the Messiah as "spiritual" and would be "fulfilled" as the people settled down in Babylon and worked to make the world "suitable" for the Messiah to come and rule over the "world" of then?
Up until 1948 there was not nation of Israel, so a "spiritual" interpretation would make sense from the historical point of view. God could and would "restore" His people, along with Gentile believers, to a future kingdom. But the advent the nation in direct and specific fulfillment of some prophesies might, and does, elicit questions as to why the remainder will not also be literally enacted.
Why, to repeat the question, would an interpreter want to confuse and confound the picture by diverging from the simple understanding of what it says? And where is the basis for that view in Scripture? Sola Scriptura.
Saul and Jebesh Gilead
There is an interesting vignette at the end of Saul's life that I have never understood. I think it was David Jeremiah who pointed out the significance of the story. It is in 1 Samuel 31. The Philistines had defeated Saul's army and killed his three sons and Saul. They discovered his body on the battle field and severed his head, taking it to their temple. That was pretty philistine action. (I have wanted to use that as an adjective for a long time. Big whoop.)
10 They put his weapons in the temple of Ashtaroth, and they fastened his body to the wall of Beth-shan. 11 Now when the inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead heard what the Philistines had done to Saul, 12 all the valiant men rose and walked all night, and took the body of Saul and the bodies of his sons from the wall of Beth-shan, and they came to Jabesh and burned them there.
I always wondered why the men of JG were so solicitous of this dead guy's honor and respect. After all, David was known to be the next king and why not ignore the deposed (and beheaded) despot and get on with life.
As Paul Harvey used to say, here is the rest of the story. And the "rest" also has a rest. This story is macabre and bizarre in the extreme. The "back story" is found in 1 Samuel 11. One tribe of Israel, Jabesh Gilead had been attacked by the Ammonites. JG surrendered, or offered to surrender. But the leader, Nahash, made one condition of their surrender to gouge out every man's right eye. (Talk about philistine. Got to use it twice.)
The Gileadites appealed to the rest of their brothers, Israel, to deliver them from such a barbaric and ignominious treatment. The Israelites were upset, but did not know what to do. Saul, who had been anointed King by Samuel not too long before, did know. (What Did He Know...) He called together the diverse tribes and attacked Nahash, delivering the people of Jabesh Gilead.
Some of the initial resistance to the rescue may have come from another "back story." For this we have to go back to Judges 21. Actually, it began in chapter 19 when a Levite was traveling through the territory of Benjamin and the men of Gibeah raped and abused his concubine to the point that she died. (Murder, I believe.) When the rest of the tribes demanded justice, the entire tribe of Benjamin defended their brothers.
This led to a "civil war" in which the entire tribe of Benjamin was wiped out, with the exception of 400 men who escaped. Then the import of the actions dawned on the rest of the tribes and they lamented having "wiped out an entire tribe."
Their solution was to identify a city which had not participated in the "cleansing" and steal enough women from this city to provide wives for the "orphaned" 400 and repopulate the tribe. The city which "provided" the brides was Jabesh Gilead. So it is not too far fetched for the people to be a little reticent to respond to the call for help.
It was probably more of shame, for the way they had treated JG than anything else. Another irony and "coming of full circle" was that the city from which Saul launched his rescue was Gibeah.
Story in short: Gibeah offended mightily, leading to the "discipline" of the rest, wiping out the tribe. Then the rest raided Jabesh Gilead to provide an avenue to rebuild the devastated tribe. This story was played out in the final three chapters of Judges (19-21) Is it any wonder that the book ends with, (25) "In those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did what was right in his own eyes." Then Saul, a member of the "resurrected" tribe, rescued JG from his base in Gibeah.
Now at the end of his life, the men of Jabesh Gilead felt honor bound to repay his kindness of delivering them from shame and disgrace by countering the abuse provided by the Philistines. And to complete the circle, Saul's remains were buried in Jabesh Gilead.
Once again, we see the Lord taking a real mess and turning it into a positive situation and a learning tool for us. He is able to take our failures and use them to bring good to us, to others, and ultimately, to His kingdom.
10 They put his weapons in the temple of Ashtaroth, and they fastened his body to the wall of Beth-shan. 11 Now when the inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead heard what the Philistines had done to Saul, 12 all the valiant men rose and walked all night, and took the body of Saul and the bodies of his sons from the wall of Beth-shan, and they came to Jabesh and burned them there.
I always wondered why the men of JG were so solicitous of this dead guy's honor and respect. After all, David was known to be the next king and why not ignore the deposed (and beheaded) despot and get on with life.
As Paul Harvey used to say, here is the rest of the story. And the "rest" also has a rest. This story is macabre and bizarre in the extreme. The "back story" is found in 1 Samuel 11. One tribe of Israel, Jabesh Gilead had been attacked by the Ammonites. JG surrendered, or offered to surrender. But the leader, Nahash, made one condition of their surrender to gouge out every man's right eye. (Talk about philistine. Got to use it twice.)
The Gileadites appealed to the rest of their brothers, Israel, to deliver them from such a barbaric and ignominious treatment. The Israelites were upset, but did not know what to do. Saul, who had been anointed King by Samuel not too long before, did know. (What Did He Know...) He called together the diverse tribes and attacked Nahash, delivering the people of Jabesh Gilead.
Some of the initial resistance to the rescue may have come from another "back story." For this we have to go back to Judges 21. Actually, it began in chapter 19 when a Levite was traveling through the territory of Benjamin and the men of Gibeah raped and abused his concubine to the point that she died. (Murder, I believe.) When the rest of the tribes demanded justice, the entire tribe of Benjamin defended their brothers.
This led to a "civil war" in which the entire tribe of Benjamin was wiped out, with the exception of 400 men who escaped. Then the import of the actions dawned on the rest of the tribes and they lamented having "wiped out an entire tribe."
Their solution was to identify a city which had not participated in the "cleansing" and steal enough women from this city to provide wives for the "orphaned" 400 and repopulate the tribe. The city which "provided" the brides was Jabesh Gilead. So it is not too far fetched for the people to be a little reticent to respond to the call for help.
It was probably more of shame, for the way they had treated JG than anything else. Another irony and "coming of full circle" was that the city from which Saul launched his rescue was Gibeah.
Story in short: Gibeah offended mightily, leading to the "discipline" of the rest, wiping out the tribe. Then the rest raided Jabesh Gilead to provide an avenue to rebuild the devastated tribe. This story was played out in the final three chapters of Judges (19-21) Is it any wonder that the book ends with, (25) "In those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did what was right in his own eyes." Then Saul, a member of the "resurrected" tribe, rescued JG from his base in Gibeah.
Now at the end of his life, the men of Jabesh Gilead felt honor bound to repay his kindness of delivering them from shame and disgrace by countering the abuse provided by the Philistines. And to complete the circle, Saul's remains were buried in Jabesh Gilead.
Once again, we see the Lord taking a real mess and turning it into a positive situation and a learning tool for us. He is able to take our failures and use them to bring good to us, to others, and ultimately, to His kingdom.
Friday, February 10, 2017
What Did He Know and When Did He Know It? 1 Samuel
How about a little more English? Our English teacher, Mrs. Cheney, drummed grammar and good writin' into our heads unmercifully. It paid off, as I got to skip a semester of English in college, and more important, was a semester ahead of the crowd. So when they were all rushing to finish their first college term paper in the second semester, I was taking another required subject in a small, off track class.
One of the things Mrs. Cheney pointed out time and time again in my high school writing was an unclear antecedent to a preposition. (uap) "Who does this ‘he' refer to?" (Oops, just about made another one: "To whom does this ‘he' refer?")
Here is an example. 1 Samuel 1: 27 finds Hannah explaining to Eli the "offering" she made.
"I prayed for this child, and the Lord has granted me what I asked of him. 28 So now I give him to the Lord. For his whole life he will be given over to the Lord." And he worshiped the Lord there.
Hannah just presented Samuel to the priest, Eli, to serve in the Lord's presence. And the last sentence is where we run into the uap. Was the "he" Samuel, who was now serving the Lord and being committed to this for life? Or was it Eli, the priest?
Both could be right and good, but bear with me. (Or is it bare? That one is missed quite often. And to much consternation and embarrassment.) But one might think that Samuel, as a young man might not be too inclined to worship as his mother leaves him. It would be quite a precocious child to do that.
What about Eli? Here is a spiritual leader, who we will find was betrayed by his own sons in the service of the Lord. Hannah rekindled his awe at God's provision, both of a son for the woman, and as a successor for the judge. And her commitment led to his worship in turn.
We may not always know how God will use our testimony or witness. That is even more reason for being faithful in every opportunity that we face.
You might guess that I am reading 1 Samuel. There is another question answered in 1 Samuel 9. I have been asked on several occasions if the prophets knew that they were prophesying and what it meant? One answer is here. 1 Peter 1:10
10 As to this salvation, the prophets who prophesied of the grace that would come to you made careful searches and inquiries, 11 seeking to know what person or time the Spirit of Christ within them was indicating as He predicted the sufferings of Christ and the glories to follow.
This seems to indicate that they may not have been fully aware of this. Many times the prophesy had a dual or even three-fold fulfillment. They may have understood part of it, but not all. When Isaiah prophesied this, he was probably perplexed. Isaiah 44:28
"It is I who says of Cyrus, ‘He is My shepherd! And he will perform all My desire.' And he declares of Jerusalem, ‘She will be built,' And of the temple, ‘Your foundation will be laid.'"
He probably understood that Jerusalem would be destroyed, since he prophesied that, but who is this Cyrus? This prophesy was made about 150 years before Cyrus was born. That is a pretty remarkable bit of foretelling. And the prophesy did not simply predict the leader, by name. It was of a foreign country, no less, and one that, at the time, was a mere blip on world history.
But 1 Samuel 9 gives a different insight to our question. Saul was looking for his father's donkeys. The chapter gives a remarkable tale of Samuel's understanding of his prophesy and acting on it. Follow this with me.
Verse 16 reports that the Lord spoke to Samuel the day before, describing his visitor and informing the seer* ahead of time of the events to transpire. In verse 17 the Lord identified the man. Verse 22 starts to get interesting.
22 Then Samuel took Saul and his servant and brought them into the hall and gave them a place at the head of those who were invited, who were about thirty men.
Saul was not even there yet, and Samuel had a banquet prepared. Notice the term, "of those who were invited." Samuel both believed that Saul was coming, and he had a celebration prepared. About thirty guys were hoping that Saul made it on time. Keep reading.
23 Samuel said to the cook, "Bring the portion that I gave you, concerning which I said to you, ‘Set it aside.'"
Samuel was not content with merely preparing a meal, he had an honored portion prepared for the honored guest. The next day he sent Saul on his way with more prophesies. Clearly Samuel did, indeed, know and understand his role and what he said.
It appears that the answer to our "did they know" question is, "Yes and no." Simple, huh? The key item that we take away from here, is that Samuel acted on what he knew. That is a good lesson for us. We may not understand everything, but we can be faithful to what we have been shown. Keep looking.
*I tried to find the etymology of seer, but since I was looking in English, the original Hebrew was not clarified. Here is what I think. "Seer" is "one who sees." Or we could say he was a see-er. And that is pretty cumbersome, so it was contracted into seer. Think what you choose. I like that.
One of the things Mrs. Cheney pointed out time and time again in my high school writing was an unclear antecedent to a preposition. (uap) "Who does this ‘he' refer to?" (Oops, just about made another one: "To whom does this ‘he' refer?")
Here is an example. 1 Samuel 1: 27 finds Hannah explaining to Eli the "offering" she made.
"I prayed for this child, and the Lord has granted me what I asked of him. 28 So now I give him to the Lord. For his whole life he will be given over to the Lord." And he worshiped the Lord there.
Hannah just presented Samuel to the priest, Eli, to serve in the Lord's presence. And the last sentence is where we run into the uap. Was the "he" Samuel, who was now serving the Lord and being committed to this for life? Or was it Eli, the priest?
Both could be right and good, but bear with me. (Or is it bare? That one is missed quite often. And to much consternation and embarrassment.) But one might think that Samuel, as a young man might not be too inclined to worship as his mother leaves him. It would be quite a precocious child to do that.
What about Eli? Here is a spiritual leader, who we will find was betrayed by his own sons in the service of the Lord. Hannah rekindled his awe at God's provision, both of a son for the woman, and as a successor for the judge. And her commitment led to his worship in turn.
We may not always know how God will use our testimony or witness. That is even more reason for being faithful in every opportunity that we face.
You might guess that I am reading 1 Samuel. There is another question answered in 1 Samuel 9. I have been asked on several occasions if the prophets knew that they were prophesying and what it meant? One answer is here. 1 Peter 1:10
10 As to this salvation, the prophets who prophesied of the grace that would come to you made careful searches and inquiries, 11 seeking to know what person or time the Spirit of Christ within them was indicating as He predicted the sufferings of Christ and the glories to follow.
This seems to indicate that they may not have been fully aware of this. Many times the prophesy had a dual or even three-fold fulfillment. They may have understood part of it, but not all. When Isaiah prophesied this, he was probably perplexed. Isaiah 44:28
"It is I who says of Cyrus, ‘He is My shepherd! And he will perform all My desire.' And he declares of Jerusalem, ‘She will be built,' And of the temple, ‘Your foundation will be laid.'"
He probably understood that Jerusalem would be destroyed, since he prophesied that, but who is this Cyrus? This prophesy was made about 150 years before Cyrus was born. That is a pretty remarkable bit of foretelling. And the prophesy did not simply predict the leader, by name. It was of a foreign country, no less, and one that, at the time, was a mere blip on world history.
But 1 Samuel 9 gives a different insight to our question. Saul was looking for his father's donkeys. The chapter gives a remarkable tale of Samuel's understanding of his prophesy and acting on it. Follow this with me.
Verse 16 reports that the Lord spoke to Samuel the day before, describing his visitor and informing the seer* ahead of time of the events to transpire. In verse 17 the Lord identified the man. Verse 22 starts to get interesting.
22 Then Samuel took Saul and his servant and brought them into the hall and gave them a place at the head of those who were invited, who were about thirty men.
Saul was not even there yet, and Samuel had a banquet prepared. Notice the term, "of those who were invited." Samuel both believed that Saul was coming, and he had a celebration prepared. About thirty guys were hoping that Saul made it on time. Keep reading.
23 Samuel said to the cook, "Bring the portion that I gave you, concerning which I said to you, ‘Set it aside.'"
Samuel was not content with merely preparing a meal, he had an honored portion prepared for the honored guest. The next day he sent Saul on his way with more prophesies. Clearly Samuel did, indeed, know and understand his role and what he said.
It appears that the answer to our "did they know" question is, "Yes and no." Simple, huh? The key item that we take away from here, is that Samuel acted on what he knew. That is a good lesson for us. We may not understand everything, but we can be faithful to what we have been shown. Keep looking.
*I tried to find the etymology of seer, but since I was looking in English, the original Hebrew was not clarified. Here is what I think. "Seer" is "one who sees." Or we could say he was a see-er. And that is pretty cumbersome, so it was contracted into seer. Think what you choose. I like that.
Christ Killers
We probably all heard the anti-Semitic term, "Christ killers," applied to Jews. That came to mind as I re-read the story of Jesus' trial before Pilate in Matthew 27. Pilate attempted to dodge the question but was resisted. So...
24 When Pilate saw that he was accomplishing nothing, but rather that a riot was starting, he took water and washed his hands in front of the crowd, saying, "I am innocent of this Man's blood; see to that yourselves." 25 And all the people said, "His blood shall be on us and on our children!"
That last phrase was seized by people though out history as a justification for persecuting the Jews. Logic refutes that decisively. The context is quite helpful here. When Pilate declared that he was "innocent of this Man's blood," did it absolve him? No. So did the "assumption" of guilt on behalf of their progeny bind future generations? No.
I like Abraham Lincoln's response to a question about how many legs a dog has if we call his tail a leg. Lincoln's typical homespun wisdom prevailed. "Four. Calling a tail a leg does not make it a leg." Likewise the pronouncement of guilt on their "children" was not binding nor even logical.
Pilate can claim innocence for all of eternity, but he was, and is guilty. So apply the same analysis to the Jewish leaders. Did their short sighted outburst actually make their children responsible for their acts?
On top of that we can appeal to the Bible here. It is helpful. (As it often is.) Deuteronomy 24:16
"Fathers shall not be put to death for their sons, nor shall sons be put to death for their fathers; everyone shall be put to death for his own sin.
We can't get much clearer than that, can we? Ezekiel just puts a spike in that nonsense. 18:20
20 The person who sins will die. The son will not bear the punishment for the father's iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son's iniquity; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself.
That sounds like he was quoting Moses, doesn't it? He probably did. The key thing here is that foolish people (using a nice word here) do and say foolish things. They, and we, would be well served and wise to think twice before flapping our jaws.
If you ever encounter the term, "Christ killers," you have my permission, and Moses' and Ezekiel's to unload a little Scripture on them. They are not compliant with either Scripture or logic. Let that be enough.
How many times does the Old Testament bail us out of troublesome times? Keep reading.
24 When Pilate saw that he was accomplishing nothing, but rather that a riot was starting, he took water and washed his hands in front of the crowd, saying, "I am innocent of this Man's blood; see to that yourselves." 25 And all the people said, "His blood shall be on us and on our children!"
That last phrase was seized by people though out history as a justification for persecuting the Jews. Logic refutes that decisively. The context is quite helpful here. When Pilate declared that he was "innocent of this Man's blood," did it absolve him? No. So did the "assumption" of guilt on behalf of their progeny bind future generations? No.
I like Abraham Lincoln's response to a question about how many legs a dog has if we call his tail a leg. Lincoln's typical homespun wisdom prevailed. "Four. Calling a tail a leg does not make it a leg." Likewise the pronouncement of guilt on their "children" was not binding nor even logical.
Pilate can claim innocence for all of eternity, but he was, and is guilty. So apply the same analysis to the Jewish leaders. Did their short sighted outburst actually make their children responsible for their acts?
On top of that we can appeal to the Bible here. It is helpful. (As it often is.) Deuteronomy 24:16
"Fathers shall not be put to death for their sons, nor shall sons be put to death for their fathers; everyone shall be put to death for his own sin.
We can't get much clearer than that, can we? Ezekiel just puts a spike in that nonsense. 18:20
20 The person who sins will die. The son will not bear the punishment for the father's iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son's iniquity; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself.
That sounds like he was quoting Moses, doesn't it? He probably did. The key thing here is that foolish people (using a nice word here) do and say foolish things. They, and we, would be well served and wise to think twice before flapping our jaws.
If you ever encounter the term, "Christ killers," you have my permission, and Moses' and Ezekiel's to unload a little Scripture on them. They are not compliant with either Scripture or logic. Let that be enough.
How many times does the Old Testament bail us out of troublesome times? Keep reading.
Thursday, February 9, 2017
Psalm 51 Separation
We are playing a little "leap frog" here. We started in verse 10, then went back to verse 1. So now we are back to verse 11.
10 Create in me a clean heart, O God, And renew a steadfast spirit within me. 11 Do not cast me away from Your presence And do not take Your Holy Spirit from me. 12 Restore to me the joy of Your salvation And sustain me with a willing spirit.
After David's repentance and request for forgiveness (v. 1-10) we come to what is a uniquely Old Testament prayer. David was painfully aware of Saul's problems. Saul had, at one time, been God's choice for the king. The Lord had even sent the Holy Spirit on Saul to prophesy. The Holy Spirit left him. But worse, God's choice was also rescinded. (1 Samuel 15 and 16)
David had a holy horror of being "cast away" from God's presence. In addition, he was aware of his dependence on the Holy Spirit. David saw the direct results in Saul's " madness" caused by a demon, either possessing Saul or at least oppressing Him. This was not a condition that David wished to emulate. A life separate from the Lord and estranged from the Holy Spirit was terrifying to him–and almost everyone.
He was also aware of Samson's life as a judge and that the Holy Spirit had left him as well. This story is in Judges 16. (Verse 20) The Holy Spirit will not leave a New Testament Christian because Jesus promised that He would never leave us nor forsake us. (Hebrews 13:5)
But most telling is the story in 1 Samuel 16:13. Samuel has just anointed David as the next King.
13 Then Samuel took the horn of oil and anointed him in the midst of his brothers; and the Spirit of the Lord came mightily upon David from that day forward. (Emphasis added.)
David had experienced the indwelling presence of the Lord personally. We would be accurate when we surmise that the Holy Spirit did not remain on David through all of his shenanigans. And now, at this juncture of his life, he was acutely aware of what he had lost. He wanted it back and he wanted it permanently. That is a great attitude and prayer.
At Pentecost the Spirit began a new and different ministry. Previously, He had been sent on an "as needed" or ad hoc basis. Every example of His appearance in the Old Testament confirms this. He came upon an individual, performed the required task and left. There were probably some "long term" presences, like Samson and possibly David, but none of them were permanent.
Furthermore, the Holy Spirit will never leave us either. He is described as the "earnest" of our inheritance or a non-refundable deposit or pledge. (Ephesians 1:14) The Holy Spirit will be in us until we go home to be with the Lord, or Jesus takes Him, and us, out of this world at the Rapture. We will be taken "out of the way," according to 2 Thessalonians 2:7, in order for the man of sin, the anti-Christ to be revealed.
David's prayer, in this instance, is not a model for us, but a reminder of the unparalleled blessing that we enjoy. We are walking demonstrations of "Christ in you, the hope of glory." (Colossians 1:27) Show hope today.
10 Create in me a clean heart, O God, And renew a steadfast spirit within me. 11 Do not cast me away from Your presence And do not take Your Holy Spirit from me. 12 Restore to me the joy of Your salvation And sustain me with a willing spirit.
After David's repentance and request for forgiveness (v. 1-10) we come to what is a uniquely Old Testament prayer. David was painfully aware of Saul's problems. Saul had, at one time, been God's choice for the king. The Lord had even sent the Holy Spirit on Saul to prophesy. The Holy Spirit left him. But worse, God's choice was also rescinded. (1 Samuel 15 and 16)
David had a holy horror of being "cast away" from God's presence. In addition, he was aware of his dependence on the Holy Spirit. David saw the direct results in Saul's " madness" caused by a demon, either possessing Saul or at least oppressing Him. This was not a condition that David wished to emulate. A life separate from the Lord and estranged from the Holy Spirit was terrifying to him–and almost everyone.
He was also aware of Samson's life as a judge and that the Holy Spirit had left him as well. This story is in Judges 16. (Verse 20) The Holy Spirit will not leave a New Testament Christian because Jesus promised that He would never leave us nor forsake us. (Hebrews 13:5)
But most telling is the story in 1 Samuel 16:13. Samuel has just anointed David as the next King.
13 Then Samuel took the horn of oil and anointed him in the midst of his brothers; and the Spirit of the Lord came mightily upon David from that day forward. (Emphasis added.)
David had experienced the indwelling presence of the Lord personally. We would be accurate when we surmise that the Holy Spirit did not remain on David through all of his shenanigans. And now, at this juncture of his life, he was acutely aware of what he had lost. He wanted it back and he wanted it permanently. That is a great attitude and prayer.
At Pentecost the Spirit began a new and different ministry. Previously, He had been sent on an "as needed" or ad hoc basis. Every example of His appearance in the Old Testament confirms this. He came upon an individual, performed the required task and left. There were probably some "long term" presences, like Samson and possibly David, but none of them were permanent.
Furthermore, the Holy Spirit will never leave us either. He is described as the "earnest" of our inheritance or a non-refundable deposit or pledge. (Ephesians 1:14) The Holy Spirit will be in us until we go home to be with the Lord, or Jesus takes Him, and us, out of this world at the Rapture. We will be taken "out of the way," according to 2 Thessalonians 2:7, in order for the man of sin, the anti-Christ to be revealed.
David's prayer, in this instance, is not a model for us, but a reminder of the unparalleled blessing that we enjoy. We are walking demonstrations of "Christ in you, the hope of glory." (Colossians 1:27) Show hope today.
Tuesday, February 7, 2017
Conjunctions
Conjunctions are a significant part of grammar. We will have a little English lesson here. (Hello, Mrs. Cheney.) We often encounter a conjunction, usually "and," and have to interpret it. (Notice the live illustration.)
Some "ands" link two equal and correlating words or phrases. A second situation occurs when two equally important parts of the sentence are joined, but the actual meanings are not equal or of equal probative force. The dominant, usually first in the sentence, is the superior term and the following one supports or modifies it.
There are many arguments about one such example. It is in Mark 16:16.
He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved;
We find somewhat the same message in Acts 2:38
Peter said to them, "Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins;"
There are many other instances in the New Testament where the act of believing, or being saved, is followed, almost immediately, by baptism. So does that teach that salvation is a two part process: belief followed by baptism? And by implication, believing alone is not sufficient. If a new "believer" does not follow through with baptism, he is not saved?
There are many clear (in my opinion) and compelling arguments to reject that analysis. Our old friend, John 3:16 comes to mind. (3:15 repeats this theme. I guess it actually previews it.)
"For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.
No mention of baptism by Jesus. Notice that even though the two terms, believe and baptism, appear in conjunction (sorry, no pun) with each other, the term "baptism" is far outnumbered by the instances of where "believe" is used alone. Before we look at our English lesson, consider that every instance where the New Testament refers to saved persons, it uses "believer" or "those who believe." It never uses "the baptized."
Now for some English. Some "ands" are equivalent and interdependent. "I will graduate from law school and take the bar exam to become a lawyer." These two are both critical. Neither will stand alone to produce a lawyer.
A second situation is where the "and" is between primary and subordinate words or phrases. The subordinate word or phrase may accompany the precursor but the precursor can stand alone. "I will graduate from law school and get a new car before beginning my career." The graduation in both instances is the critical path. Nothing can happen without it. But in the second "and" this phrase is not prerequisite to the final goal.
The "and" in Mark and Acts is subordinate. The following phrase is an accompaniment and not a primary factor in the outcome. I have quoted several verses below where believing and salvation are required, but baptism is not included. It seems like they are independent. And for final verification of this read Acts 16:31:
And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.
Paul tells the jailer that belief is what is required. Now the next verse reports that everyone was baptized, but the "and" seems clearly not to be the requirement one. Look at the end of the verse. "...thou shalt be saved, and thy house." (Sorry for the KJV. It flows nicely.) But the point is that if the "and" here, "and thy house" is a compulsory one, then everyone in the house was saved because the father believed.
John 4:53 gives us an additional example of that. The father had asked Jesus to heal his son, and Jesus did, from a distance. The father returned home to find his son indeed completely whole.
So the father knew that it was at that hour in which Jesus said to him, "Your son lives"; and he himself believed and his whole household.
Is this another instance of whole households being saved because of the father's belief? I am pretty sure that the "baptism" crowd will not accept a "one for all" salvation. It is really awkward when we have to ask if they had to be baptized or was his belief sufficient. And did he get baptized?
I think our point is pretty clearly demonstrated. Salvation is by faith alone. And to top off the debate listen to Ephesians 2:8-9:
8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; 9 not as a result of works, so that no one may boast.
Paul seems to eliminate any human contribution to the salvation process. And for good reason, I surmise. Can't you just hear us in heaven. "I was baptized in real water, in a lake–or river, not that fake baptismal pool in the front of the church." "Oh ho! Hold on there, buddy. I was baptized in THE JORDAN RIVER. So there."
I have been baptized, (in a pool, by the way) and I recommend it to everyone I meet who has not followed the Lord's example. But that makes me no more saved than being splashed with Mario Andretti's motor oil makes me an Indy race car driver. (Maybe I should use Darrell Waltrip here.)
"Jesus paid it all. All to Him I owe. Sin had left a crimson stain, He washed it white as snow." Nothing more, nothing less. Amen. Or looking back a couple of thoughts, "Ah main."
Luke 8:12 Those beside the road are those who have heard; then the devil comes and takes away the word from their heart, so that they will not believe and be saved.
Acts 15:11 But we believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, in the same way as they also are."
Romans 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.
Romans 10:9 that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; 10 for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation.
Some "ands" link two equal and correlating words or phrases. A second situation occurs when two equally important parts of the sentence are joined, but the actual meanings are not equal or of equal probative force. The dominant, usually first in the sentence, is the superior term and the following one supports or modifies it.
There are many arguments about one such example. It is in Mark 16:16.
He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved;
We find somewhat the same message in Acts 2:38
Peter said to them, "Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins;"
There are many other instances in the New Testament where the act of believing, or being saved, is followed, almost immediately, by baptism. So does that teach that salvation is a two part process: belief followed by baptism? And by implication, believing alone is not sufficient. If a new "believer" does not follow through with baptism, he is not saved?
There are many clear (in my opinion) and compelling arguments to reject that analysis. Our old friend, John 3:16 comes to mind. (3:15 repeats this theme. I guess it actually previews it.)
"For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.
No mention of baptism by Jesus. Notice that even though the two terms, believe and baptism, appear in conjunction (sorry, no pun) with each other, the term "baptism" is far outnumbered by the instances of where "believe" is used alone. Before we look at our English lesson, consider that every instance where the New Testament refers to saved persons, it uses "believer" or "those who believe." It never uses "the baptized."
Now for some English. Some "ands" are equivalent and interdependent. "I will graduate from law school and take the bar exam to become a lawyer." These two are both critical. Neither will stand alone to produce a lawyer.
A second situation is where the "and" is between primary and subordinate words or phrases. The subordinate word or phrase may accompany the precursor but the precursor can stand alone. "I will graduate from law school and get a new car before beginning my career." The graduation in both instances is the critical path. Nothing can happen without it. But in the second "and" this phrase is not prerequisite to the final goal.
The "and" in Mark and Acts is subordinate. The following phrase is an accompaniment and not a primary factor in the outcome. I have quoted several verses below where believing and salvation are required, but baptism is not included. It seems like they are independent. And for final verification of this read Acts 16:31:
And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.
Paul tells the jailer that belief is what is required. Now the next verse reports that everyone was baptized, but the "and" seems clearly not to be the requirement one. Look at the end of the verse. "...thou shalt be saved, and thy house." (Sorry for the KJV. It flows nicely.) But the point is that if the "and" here, "and thy house" is a compulsory one, then everyone in the house was saved because the father believed.
John 4:53 gives us an additional example of that. The father had asked Jesus to heal his son, and Jesus did, from a distance. The father returned home to find his son indeed completely whole.
So the father knew that it was at that hour in which Jesus said to him, "Your son lives"; and he himself believed and his whole household.
Is this another instance of whole households being saved because of the father's belief? I am pretty sure that the "baptism" crowd will not accept a "one for all" salvation. It is really awkward when we have to ask if they had to be baptized or was his belief sufficient. And did he get baptized?
I think our point is pretty clearly demonstrated. Salvation is by faith alone. And to top off the debate listen to Ephesians 2:8-9:
8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; 9 not as a result of works, so that no one may boast.
Paul seems to eliminate any human contribution to the salvation process. And for good reason, I surmise. Can't you just hear us in heaven. "I was baptized in real water, in a lake–or river, not that fake baptismal pool in the front of the church." "Oh ho! Hold on there, buddy. I was baptized in THE JORDAN RIVER. So there."
I have been baptized, (in a pool, by the way) and I recommend it to everyone I meet who has not followed the Lord's example. But that makes me no more saved than being splashed with Mario Andretti's motor oil makes me an Indy race car driver. (Maybe I should use Darrell Waltrip here.)
"Jesus paid it all. All to Him I owe. Sin had left a crimson stain, He washed it white as snow." Nothing more, nothing less. Amen. Or looking back a couple of thoughts, "Ah main."
Luke 8:12 Those beside the road are those who have heard; then the devil comes and takes away the word from their heart, so that they will not believe and be saved.
Acts 15:11 But we believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, in the same way as they also are."
Romans 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.
Romans 10:9 that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; 10 for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation.
Monday, February 6, 2017
Instantaneous Salvation
Our previous consideration was an overview of salvation in Psalm 51. There were several steps. And though some of them may have been "in development" for a period of time, like David's suffering of guilt, the actual event was virtually instantaneous. I believe that I can prove that from Scripture. If not, then we might be looking at an "adding to Scripture" activity. We do not want to ever do that. If it ain't there, don't say it.
We outlined a series of seven steps in the previous meditation and the culmination was a redeemed, restored, recommitted, and recommissioned servant. Hopefully that will describe us also. We can see an illustration of this wonder in Acts 10. (Below) Peter had a vision and was called to visit a Gentile, Cornelius.
When he got there, Peter began to preach. (Verse 34) He began with a recognition and declaration that God does not show partiality. God revealed Himself first to the Jews but now is showing that revelation to everyone. Now set the stage. He is preaching to an eager and hungry for truth group.
They knew what had happened in Galilee and Judea. (Verse 37) John proclaimed Jesus and all that Jesus did. (You have to read this to get the building sense of anticipation). (Verse 38) And we witnessed all of these good things that Jesus did. Then the Jewish leaders put Him to death. (Verse 39) God raised Him up on the third day and we along with many others witnessed Him as He ate and drank after He arose. And He ordered us to preach about Him and that He is the Judge of the living and the dead. He was also the one about Whom the prophets spoke.
"Yeah, yeah, we know all of that. How do we get to know God?" The sense of anticipation was high when he walked in. Four days ago Cornelius sent for Peter and he is here. "What do we do?"
Peter was not a very good salesman. He had to finish his "spiel" before he gave his test close. (Actually, that is probably not a bad idea as you want the client to understand what the product does before he decides. They had decided.)
"...all the prophets bear witness that through His name everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins." Three words stand out here. "Believe in Him." That was what they were waiting to hear.
Verse 44 "While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who were listening to the message."
"Believe on Jesus? Yes, I believe!" That rippled through the collective consciousness and the Holy Spirit showed up, right on cue. Poor Peter. He did not get to give his closing invitation and sing, "Just as I am." I am sure that he was not sad.
My point is, however, that the steps of salvation were completed in one fell swoop. And, just as the Holy Spirit redeemed, indwelled, and sealed the believers on Pentecost, He did the same here with the Gentiles. He does that same thing today when anyone asks Him to do so. "Believing on Jesus" includes recognizing our condition, repenting, and requesting forgiveness. It also involves depending on Jesus' sacrifice for our sins as the whole, complete, and eternal provision for me. There is no other way and I choose Him.
It happened in the blink of an eye for Peter. It happened in a blink of an eye for Cornelius and his guests. It happened in a blink of an eye for me. It can happen in the blink of an eye for you. Just ask Jesus to take over your life, forgive your sins, and make you a new creation.
It can happen today. Why not now?
34 "I most certainly understand now that God is not one to show partiality, 35 but in every nation the man who fears Him and does what is right is welcome to Him. 36 The word which He sent to the sons of Israel, preaching peace through Jesus Christ (He is Lord of all)— 37 you yourselves know the thing which took place throughout all Judea, starting from Galilee, after the baptism which John proclaimed. 38 You know of Jesus of Nazareth, how God anointed Him with the Holy Spirit and with power, and how He went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, for God was with Him. 39 We are witnesses of all the things He did both in the land of the Jews and in Jerusalem. They also put Him to death by hanging Him on a cross. 40 God raised Him up on the third day and granted that He become visible, 41 not to all the people, but to witnesses who were chosen beforehand by God, that is, to us who ate and drank with Him after He arose from the dead. 42 And He ordered us to preach to the people, and solemnly to testify that this is the One who has been appointed by God as Judge of the living and the dead. 43 Of Him all the prophets bear witness that through His name everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins."
44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who were listening to the message.
We outlined a series of seven steps in the previous meditation and the culmination was a redeemed, restored, recommitted, and recommissioned servant. Hopefully that will describe us also. We can see an illustration of this wonder in Acts 10. (Below) Peter had a vision and was called to visit a Gentile, Cornelius.
When he got there, Peter began to preach. (Verse 34) He began with a recognition and declaration that God does not show partiality. God revealed Himself first to the Jews but now is showing that revelation to everyone. Now set the stage. He is preaching to an eager and hungry for truth group.
They knew what had happened in Galilee and Judea. (Verse 37) John proclaimed Jesus and all that Jesus did. (You have to read this to get the building sense of anticipation). (Verse 38) And we witnessed all of these good things that Jesus did. Then the Jewish leaders put Him to death. (Verse 39) God raised Him up on the third day and we along with many others witnessed Him as He ate and drank after He arose. And He ordered us to preach about Him and that He is the Judge of the living and the dead. He was also the one about Whom the prophets spoke.
"Yeah, yeah, we know all of that. How do we get to know God?" The sense of anticipation was high when he walked in. Four days ago Cornelius sent for Peter and he is here. "What do we do?"
Peter was not a very good salesman. He had to finish his "spiel" before he gave his test close. (Actually, that is probably not a bad idea as you want the client to understand what the product does before he decides. They had decided.)
"...all the prophets bear witness that through His name everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins." Three words stand out here. "Believe in Him." That was what they were waiting to hear.
Verse 44 "While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who were listening to the message."
"Believe on Jesus? Yes, I believe!" That rippled through the collective consciousness and the Holy Spirit showed up, right on cue. Poor Peter. He did not get to give his closing invitation and sing, "Just as I am." I am sure that he was not sad.
My point is, however, that the steps of salvation were completed in one fell swoop. And, just as the Holy Spirit redeemed, indwelled, and sealed the believers on Pentecost, He did the same here with the Gentiles. He does that same thing today when anyone asks Him to do so. "Believing on Jesus" includes recognizing our condition, repenting, and requesting forgiveness. It also involves depending on Jesus' sacrifice for our sins as the whole, complete, and eternal provision for me. There is no other way and I choose Him.
It happened in the blink of an eye for Peter. It happened in a blink of an eye for Cornelius and his guests. It happened in a blink of an eye for me. It can happen in the blink of an eye for you. Just ask Jesus to take over your life, forgive your sins, and make you a new creation.
It can happen today. Why not now?
34 "I most certainly understand now that God is not one to show partiality, 35 but in every nation the man who fears Him and does what is right is welcome to Him. 36 The word which He sent to the sons of Israel, preaching peace through Jesus Christ (He is Lord of all)— 37 you yourselves know the thing which took place throughout all Judea, starting from Galilee, after the baptism which John proclaimed. 38 You know of Jesus of Nazareth, how God anointed Him with the Holy Spirit and with power, and how He went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, for God was with Him. 39 We are witnesses of all the things He did both in the land of the Jews and in Jerusalem. They also put Him to death by hanging Him on a cross. 40 God raised Him up on the third day and granted that He become visible, 41 not to all the people, but to witnesses who were chosen beforehand by God, that is, to us who ate and drank with Him after He arose from the dead. 42 And He ordered us to preach to the people, and solemnly to testify that this is the One who has been appointed by God as Judge of the living and the dead. 43 Of Him all the prophets bear witness that through His name everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins."
44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who were listening to the message.
Psalm 51 Salvation
A quick summary of Psalm 51 is in order here. It is a perfect picture of salvation. It begins with a plea for mercy and grace. It is followed, twice, by the cry for cleansing (verse 2 and 7). Let's break it down. (Note: Some verses have been previously covered and others will come later.)
First is a recognition of our condition. We will share David's steps for they apply to us too. We need mercy, but more we must have grace to overcome our condition. Recognizing our condition is just the first step. Then we acknowledge that we require cleansing.
Verses 2 and 7 repeat that. Perhaps David, like us, was so filthy that it took a double wash. At least he and we are aware that we are extraordinarily soiled. A deep cleansing begins with this confession. Even verse 7 starts with hyssop then follows it with a washing.
I washed dishes for the school cafeteria when I was a junior in high school. I would wash the dishes by hand, then put them in the sanitizer which washed them again with nearly boiling water followed by a sanitizing bath. David invented that here for the soul.
We recognize our condition, we require cleansing, we refuse to continue in the iniquity. Verses 3 and 4 are the declaration that we have offended the Lord God, and the commitment to terminate such rebellion.
Fourth we respond in contrition and beg for forgiveness. This is more than just overlooking our faults. We must have a supernatural intervention to impute a righteousness to our account that we do not possess or deserve. (Verse 9 and 14)
This is followed by a restoration of contentment. (Verse 8 and 10) Joy and gladness, healing, a new heart and a right spirit all contribute to our enjoyment of the Lord's presence in our lives.
Sixth, we have the renewing of commission. David and all believers are charged with reporting God's gracious acts in our lives to those we encounter. Every day, we encounter someone who needs to hear this good news. If God can do it for a sinner like David and me, He can and will do it for you too.
And finally we realize a commitment. This is not a passing event. Verses 13 through 17 complete a description of our actions and attitudes for the rest of our lives. This is a permanent change of direction. Our goal is to emulate David and earn the accolade of "man after God's own heart," and good and faithful servant. (Acts 13:32 and Matthew 25:19, 22)
Our "R C" is not to assuage our thirst, but to purify and direct our hearts and lives.
First is a recognition of our condition. We will share David's steps for they apply to us too. We need mercy, but more we must have grace to overcome our condition. Recognizing our condition is just the first step. Then we acknowledge that we require cleansing.
Verses 2 and 7 repeat that. Perhaps David, like us, was so filthy that it took a double wash. At least he and we are aware that we are extraordinarily soiled. A deep cleansing begins with this confession. Even verse 7 starts with hyssop then follows it with a washing.
I washed dishes for the school cafeteria when I was a junior in high school. I would wash the dishes by hand, then put them in the sanitizer which washed them again with nearly boiling water followed by a sanitizing bath. David invented that here for the soul.
We recognize our condition, we require cleansing, we refuse to continue in the iniquity. Verses 3 and 4 are the declaration that we have offended the Lord God, and the commitment to terminate such rebellion.
Fourth we respond in contrition and beg for forgiveness. This is more than just overlooking our faults. We must have a supernatural intervention to impute a righteousness to our account that we do not possess or deserve. (Verse 9 and 14)
This is followed by a restoration of contentment. (Verse 8 and 10) Joy and gladness, healing, a new heart and a right spirit all contribute to our enjoyment of the Lord's presence in our lives.
Sixth, we have the renewing of commission. David and all believers are charged with reporting God's gracious acts in our lives to those we encounter. Every day, we encounter someone who needs to hear this good news. If God can do it for a sinner like David and me, He can and will do it for you too.
And finally we realize a commitment. This is not a passing event. Verses 13 through 17 complete a description of our actions and attitudes for the rest of our lives. This is a permanent change of direction. Our goal is to emulate David and earn the accolade of "man after God's own heart," and good and faithful servant. (Acts 13:32 and Matthew 25:19, 22)
Our "R C" is not to assuage our thirst, but to purify and direct our hearts and lives.
Friday, February 3, 2017
Psalm 51:8, 9 Broken Bones
Previously (1) we mentioned that David was not "cruising along" oblivious to the damage that his sin was causing to both himself and to those who encountered him. Verse 8 reinforces that for us.
Make me to hear joy and gladness, Let the bones which You have broken rejoice. 9 Hide Your face from my sins And blot out all my iniquities.
In fact it sounds like he was far from complacent, content, and unaware of his condition. He was joyless and sad. Doesn't sound like the "happy sinner" caricature does it? No "happy go lucky" life for David. "Bones You have broken...." This is not clear if it is one bone, broken several times, or several bones with one or more breaks. Some translations use the word, "crushed."
Have you ever had a broken bone you recognize the pain. Now multiply that by "bones" and "crushed." (HCSB) I have read and heard that "bone pain" is some of the most excruciating pain that we may have to endure. Thankfully, I cannot verify that. I will just accept it at face value. David was in great suffering for his sin.
That is actually a good thing. Hebrews 12:6, 8 tells us why.
...for the Lord disciplines the one He loves and punishes every son He receives. 8 But if you are without discipline—which all receive—then you are illegitimate children and not sons.
Jesus talked about false followers who claimed to do miracles and service "in His Name." They heard the chilling verdict, "I never knew you." (Matthew 7:23) If anyone sins, especially as grievously as David and is "getting away" with it, we have a clear sign indicating that the person is not a child of God. He (or she) is a fake disciple. And the end of such a charade is not pleasant.
David, on the other hand asked for, and received rejoicing where pain had ruled. God did indeed, "hide His face from (David's) sins and blotted out all his iniquities."
Two lessons here: One, if, and sadly when we sin, we have a recourse. Turn and confess. Look back at verse 7. " We can be wise, clean, and white." (2) And now we find even joy, gladness, and rejoicing. Indeed, what a deal.
Our second lesson is more ominous. If we are not suffering "discipline" from God's hand when we harbor unconfessed sin, then the "I never knew you," verdict looms large in our future. The time to turn is now. Don't wait. You only lose guilt and gain glory. Glory.
Make me to hear joy and gladness, Let the bones which You have broken rejoice. 9 Hide Your face from my sins And blot out all my iniquities.
In fact it sounds like he was far from complacent, content, and unaware of his condition. He was joyless and sad. Doesn't sound like the "happy sinner" caricature does it? No "happy go lucky" life for David. "Bones You have broken...." This is not clear if it is one bone, broken several times, or several bones with one or more breaks. Some translations use the word, "crushed."
Have you ever had a broken bone you recognize the pain. Now multiply that by "bones" and "crushed." (HCSB) I have read and heard that "bone pain" is some of the most excruciating pain that we may have to endure. Thankfully, I cannot verify that. I will just accept it at face value. David was in great suffering for his sin.
That is actually a good thing. Hebrews 12:6, 8 tells us why.
...for the Lord disciplines the one He loves and punishes every son He receives. 8 But if you are without discipline—which all receive—then you are illegitimate children and not sons.
Jesus talked about false followers who claimed to do miracles and service "in His Name." They heard the chilling verdict, "I never knew you." (Matthew 7:23) If anyone sins, especially as grievously as David and is "getting away" with it, we have a clear sign indicating that the person is not a child of God. He (or she) is a fake disciple. And the end of such a charade is not pleasant.
David, on the other hand asked for, and received rejoicing where pain had ruled. God did indeed, "hide His face from (David's) sins and blotted out all his iniquities."
Two lessons here: One, if, and sadly when we sin, we have a recourse. Turn and confess. Look back at verse 7. " We can be wise, clean, and white." (2) And now we find even joy, gladness, and rejoicing. Indeed, what a deal.
Our second lesson is more ominous. If we are not suffering "discipline" from God's hand when we harbor unconfessed sin, then the "I never knew you," verdict looms large in our future. The time to turn is now. Don't wait. You only lose guilt and gain glory. Glory.
Psalm 51:6, 7 Clean and Pure
"Against Thee and Thee only have I sinned." We kind of jumped over that last time. (1) Let's not misunderstand that. David was identifying the real victim of his sin. God's law was transgressed and the other "injuries" were something like collateral damage. Not that they did not suffer real pain and even death, but they were not the primary object of the damage. David recognized that his relationship with the Lord was damaged, or worse, destroyed, and he needed to get right.
The pain and suffering caused to other people is to remind us that sin is never a unilateral event. A popular, though very erroneous label used today is "victimless crime." There is no victimless crime. Someone, somehow, somewhere is always affected. David is not minimizing the damage that he did, nor will he avoid confession, asking for forgiveness, and restitution where possible. Sin, in the long run, is never attractive nor cheap.
In verse 6 David begins the process of correcting the damage that he inflicted.
Behold, You desire truth in the innermost being, And in the hidden part You will make me know wisdom.
David begins with his "innermost being." Truth is a "hot" topic today, but that is nothing new. We have always struggled with truth and error, truth and lies, even right and wrong.. The first recorded words of Satan were a lie. (Genesis 3) And he has maintained that posture of falsehood ever since. So David's first purge is that of falsehood. Whatever lie or lies he told himself are banished.
And it seems that his days of overt disobedience were over. (He did number the people which was unwise, but it is not clear that he deliberately disobeyed in that.) He was remarkably "tolerant" maybe even permissive with his sons. It is quite reasonable to conclude that he felt that it would be hypocritical to be too strict in light of his own behavior. But his days of overt rebellion seem to be over.
Do not overlook his final statement. "You will make me know wisdom." That is probably one attribute that was conspicuously absent in David. He was energetic and impulsive, but not often marked by deliberative reflection. A lot of us need a little more "inner wisdom."
We might trace his reversal of direction to verse 7:
Purify me with hyssop, and I shall be clean; Wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow.
As we saw before, this is not a physical washing, but a spiritual one. We are sneaking up on verse 10, (2) which is where we started. Hyssop was symbolically used for many cleaning and purifying rituals, from the Passover on. David was not blaming his environment or a momentary lapse in judgment. He was filthy inside and it started with falsehood. When we lie to ourselves, we are setting things up for a big fall. Things will get very "dirty."
The phrase, "whiter than snow," is quite catchy. Hey, we should write a little song about that. But I digress. David probably did not know how snow was formed. Ice crystals freeze from vapor directly to the solid state on a crystallization source. This is often a speck of dust. So the center of every snow flake is "dirt." So "whiter than snow" is both picturesque and scientifically accurate. It is also uncannily reflective of our personal situation. We might even be pretty good looking on the outside, but the central core is not so attractive.
Behold, You desire truth in the innermost being, And in the hidden part You will make me know wisdom. 7 Purify me with hyssop, and I shall be clean; Wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow.
We trade what we know about ourselves (v. 5) for truth and honesty in our innermost being. We can be wise, clean, and white. What a deal.
The pain and suffering caused to other people is to remind us that sin is never a unilateral event. A popular, though very erroneous label used today is "victimless crime." There is no victimless crime. Someone, somehow, somewhere is always affected. David is not minimizing the damage that he did, nor will he avoid confession, asking for forgiveness, and restitution where possible. Sin, in the long run, is never attractive nor cheap.
In verse 6 David begins the process of correcting the damage that he inflicted.
Behold, You desire truth in the innermost being, And in the hidden part You will make me know wisdom.
David begins with his "innermost being." Truth is a "hot" topic today, but that is nothing new. We have always struggled with truth and error, truth and lies, even right and wrong.. The first recorded words of Satan were a lie. (Genesis 3) And he has maintained that posture of falsehood ever since. So David's first purge is that of falsehood. Whatever lie or lies he told himself are banished.
And it seems that his days of overt disobedience were over. (He did number the people which was unwise, but it is not clear that he deliberately disobeyed in that.) He was remarkably "tolerant" maybe even permissive with his sons. It is quite reasonable to conclude that he felt that it would be hypocritical to be too strict in light of his own behavior. But his days of overt rebellion seem to be over.
Do not overlook his final statement. "You will make me know wisdom." That is probably one attribute that was conspicuously absent in David. He was energetic and impulsive, but not often marked by deliberative reflection. A lot of us need a little more "inner wisdom."
We might trace his reversal of direction to verse 7:
Purify me with hyssop, and I shall be clean; Wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow.
As we saw before, this is not a physical washing, but a spiritual one. We are sneaking up on verse 10, (2) which is where we started. Hyssop was symbolically used for many cleaning and purifying rituals, from the Passover on. David was not blaming his environment or a momentary lapse in judgment. He was filthy inside and it started with falsehood. When we lie to ourselves, we are setting things up for a big fall. Things will get very "dirty."
The phrase, "whiter than snow," is quite catchy. Hey, we should write a little song about that. But I digress. David probably did not know how snow was formed. Ice crystals freeze from vapor directly to the solid state on a crystallization source. This is often a speck of dust. So the center of every snow flake is "dirt." So "whiter than snow" is both picturesque and scientifically accurate. It is also uncannily reflective of our personal situation. We might even be pretty good looking on the outside, but the central core is not so attractive.
Behold, You desire truth in the innermost being, And in the hidden part You will make me know wisdom. 7 Purify me with hyssop, and I shall be clean; Wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow.
We trade what we know about ourselves (v. 5) for truth and honesty in our innermost being. We can be wise, clean, and white. What a deal.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)