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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)