There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true. —Soren Kierkegaard. "…truth is true even if nobody believes it, and falsehood is false even if everybody believes it. That is why truth does not yield to opinion, fashion, numbers, office, or sincerity–it is simply true and that is the end of it" – Os Guinness, Time for Truth, pg.39. “He that takes truth for his guide, and duty for his end, may safely trust to God’s providence to lead him aright.” – Blaise Pascal. "There is but one straight course, and that is to seek truth and pursue it steadily" – George Washington letter to Edmund Randolph — 1795. We live in a “post-truth” world. According to the dictionary, “post-truth” means, “relating to or denoting circumstances in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief.” Simply put, we now live in a culture that seems to value experience and emotion more than truth. Truth will never go away no matter how hard one might wish. Going beyond the MSM idealogical opinion/bias and their low information tabloid reality show news with a distractional superficial focus on entertainment, sensationalism, emotionalism and activist reporting – this blogs goal is to, in some small way, put a plug in the broken dam of truth and save as many as possible from the consequences—temporal and eternal. "The further a society drifts from truth, the more it will hate those who speak it." – George Orwell “There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” ― Soren Kierkegaard
1:4 The king has brought me. This is the first of five occurrences of the word “king” (1:4, 12; 3:9, 11; 7:5). Here in v. 4 there are two possibilities: either the king is Solomon, who has tried unsuccessfully to win the girl’s affections, or he is her lover, whom she romantically fantasizes as her king. The latter interpretation is to be preferred (see Introduction: Characteristics and Themes). The paragraph ends, as it began, with the girl referring to her absent lover in the third person (vv. 2–4 note).
We will exult and rejoice in you. The “daughters of Jerusalem” (v. 5) agree with the girl that the love of her lover is better than wine (v. 2).
Sproul, R. C., ed. (2005). The Reformation Study Bible: English Standard Version (p. 937). Ligonier Ministries.
1:4 Draw me after you The word mashakh can mean “to seize” or “carry off” (Psa 28:3). The woman longs for her lover to come for her, wishing he would take her away.
the king This line can be seen as a fulfillment of the woman’s wish from the beginning of the verse. Though the designation “king” may indicate literal royalty, it may be a term of endearment for the lover.
Let us be joyful and let us rejoice in you The second half of Song 1:4 is a summarizing refrain or chorus. It emphasizes that the man’s love (dod) is better than wine (20), and that the young women are correct to love (ahev) him (1:3). While the identity of the singers is uncertain, they are likely the “daughters of Jerusalem” from 1:5.
Barry, J. D., Mangum, D., Brown, D. R., Heiser, M. S., Custis, M., Ritzema, E., Whitehead, M. M., Grigoni, M. R., & Bomar, D. (2012, 2016). Faithlife Study Bible (So 1:4). Lexham Press.
1:4a The king is probably a term of endearment, indicating the woman’s high regard for her lover rather than referring to his actual position. (However, many who follow the Shepherd Hypothesis read this as referring to Solomon; see Introduction: Alternative Interpretations.)
1:4b This is the first speech of the “others,” who function like a chorus. They join the shepherdess in her praise for the shepherd (you is masculine) by picking up her words from v. 2. They probably refers back to the “virgins” of v. 3, who are presumably the same as the “daughters of Jerusalem” (v. 5).
1:4 Longing for intimacy prefigures the longing for intimacy with the love of Christ (1 John 4:7–21).
Crossway Bibles. (2008). The ESV Study Bible (p. 1216). Crossway Bibles.
1:4 let us run. This is better understood as spoken by the Shulammite, rather than the daughters of Jerusalem, in the sense of “let us hurry.” The king has brought me. This is better understood as the desire of her heart—”Let the king bring me into his chambers”—rather than a statement of fact. We will extol your love. The daughters of Jerusalem affirmed the Shulammite’s praise in v. 2.
MacArthur, J. F., Jr. (2006). The MacArthur study Bible: New American Standard Bible. (So 1:4). Thomas Nelson Publishers.
1:4 The king. Solomon. See pp 1065–66. chambers. Bedroom, bridal chamber. Plural is unusual, but may imply a large, palatial dwelling with many rooms. OTHERS. This heading was inserted by the ESV editors throughout the Song to denote passages from a choir, most likely the daughters of Jerusalem. you. The king, but ultimately the Lord Himself. Luth: “[Solomon’s] words in You are emphatic. It is as if he were saying: ‘Outside Your solace and aid one experiences nothing but toils’ ” (AE 15:199).
Engelbrecht, E. A. (2009). The Lutheran Study Bible (p. 1068). Concordia Publishing House.
1:4 — We will be glad and rejoice in you. We will remember your love more than wine. To make both our marriages and our churches work as God wants them to, we must get involved with others of like mind who delight in us and our successes. No one grows in perpetual solitude.
Stanley, C. F. (2005). The Charles F. Stanley life principles Bible: New King James Version (So 1:4). Nelson Bibles.
1:4 The complexity of the interchanges in this book are illustrated in this verse. The headings help sort out the speakers. The king: This is Solomon; yet aside from the title (v. 1), he is not identified by name as a protagonist until 3:7, 9, 11 (his name in v. 5 is part of a descriptive phrase). chambers: This means the bridal chamber. The verse ends with the thoughts of the young woman as she gazes at her lover: Rightly do they love you employs the verb for love found in v. 3, indicating romantic feelings.
Radmacher, E. D., Allen, R. B., & House, H. W. (1999). Nelson’s new illustrated Bible commentary (p. 795). T. Nelson Publishers.
Given that historians look to those who are contemporaries of the events, Paul is an important resource for what historians can know about Jesus of Nazareth. Furthermore, the earliest documents we have for the life of Jesus are Paul’s letters. Paul was a very competent rabbi who was trained at the rabbinic academy called the House of Hillel by ‘Gamaliel,’ a key rabbinic leader and member of the Sanhedrin. Both Christian and non-Christian scholars have come to have great respect Paul. Allow me to mention a few comments here:
“Without knowing about first century Judaism, modern readers—even those committed to faith by reading him—are bound to misconstrue Paul’s writing…Paul is a trained Pharisee who became the apostle to the Gentiles.” –Alan Segal, Paul the Convert: The Apostolate and Apostasy of Saul the Pharisee (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1990), xi-xii
“Paul has left us an extremely precious document for Jewish students, the spiritual autobiography of a first-century Jew…Moreover, if we take Paul at his word—and I see no a priori reason not to—he was a member of the Pharisaic wing of first century Judaism.”–Daniel Boyarian, A Radical Jew: Paul and the Politics of Identity (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994), 2.
“Paul was a scholar, an attendant of Rabban Gamaliel the Elder, well-versed in the laws of Torah.”-Rabbi Jacob Emeden (1679-1776)–cited by Harvey Falk, Jesus the Pharisee (Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock, 2003), 18.
Allow me to list some of the basics every Christian should know about Paul:
1. Paul studied under the famous teacher Gamaliel (Acts 22: 3), the grandson of Hillel.
2. Hillel the Elder was nicknamed “the Babylonian” because he was descended from a family of Babylon.
3. Beit Hillel ended up having three successors, Rabban Gamaliel, the Elder being the first Sage esteemed with the honorific title of Rabban—“our master.”
4. The house of Hillel was unique in that it was an example of a family of who originated from the diaspora, with no priestly connections, which attained the position of hereditary leaders of the nation until, in the time of Rabbi Judah ha Nasi (170-200 C.E.), its members were officially recognized as by the Roman government as Patriarchs.
5. Beit Hillel ended up having three successors, Rabban Gamaliel, the Elder being the first Sage esteemed with the honorific title of Rabban—“our master.” The New Testament evidence demonstrates that Paul belonged to Beit Hillel rather than Beit Shammai. This is supported by Paul’s halakhot (with the possible exception of his view of the legal status of women), his tolerance and openness of Gentiles, some of his no literal interpretations, and his anthropocentric rather than theocentric emphases.
5. The Talmudic sources distinguish between the beit sefer (i.e., the house of the book”) wherein the (sofer) taught the reading of the written Torah- and the beit talmud (i.e., the house of learning). Children would learn the alphabet and how to read in the former, the teacher would write the letters on a wax tablet with a stylus and the pupils would recite them aloud. Reading skills were attained through repetition after the teacher and auditive memory since the scriptural text was not yet vocalized, students were dependent on the teacher’s precision in orally transmitting the precise reading for every passage.
6. Young children were taught how to read and understand the Torah and Prophets, to recite the Shema and the basic blessings over the food, and received instruction regarding their future roles in family and command of life. Following years of Bible study, students moved on to the study of the Oral Torah. School studies would finish at the age of twelve or thirteen (bar mitzvah age) and of the boy was gifted and so inclined he would then enroll at a “beit midrash” to study Torah with other adults who devoted themselves to Torah study in their spare time.
7. If he showed further ability and willingness he could go to one of the famous Sages and learn from him for a number of years. Gamaliel would of served as one of the foremost teachers of the “beit midrash” (e.g., a college or “seminary”) conducted by pharisaic leaders within the Sanhedrin. Therefore, given that Gamaliel was such a distinguished teacher, it may be possible that Paul began to study with him only after he had displayed great promise and reached an age whereby he could profit from learning under a great master like Gamaliel.
8. In the relationship between the students and teacher, a deep bond could be established which led to great love and respect. The subject matter of study revolved around three main areas: Bible, midrash (creative biblical interpretation), aggadah (narrative elaboration of the biblical text). Since Paul’s letters demonstrate a strong familiarity with biblical text among other ways, since he quotes from the Tanakh over ninety times in his letters, the standard hermeneutical rules are displayed both halakhically and aggadically.
9. Paul spoke mishnaic Hebrew/Aramaic as well as Greek (cf. Acts 21:37), in addition to possessing a reading knowledge of biblical Hebrew. Paul also demonstrated he was familiar with Greek poets (e.g., Epimendies, Aratus, Euripides, Memander). Therefore, since Paul’s letters show familiarity with rabbinic methods for interpretation of Scripture and popular Hellenistic philosophy to a degree, this makes it likely that he received a formal education in both areas.
2. Paul as an active persecutor
The language Paul uses in his pre-revelatory encounter with the risen Lord shows how antagonistic he was towards the messianic movement. In Gal. 1:13-15, Paul uses terms such as “persecute” and “destroy” to describe his efforts to put and end to the spread of the early faith. We see here:
Saul was in hearty agreement with putting him (Stephen) to death. And on that day a great persecution began against the church in Jerusalem, and they were all scattered throughout the regions of Judea and Samaria, except the apostles. Some devout men buried Stephen, and made loud lamentation over him. But Saul began ravaging the church, entering house after house, and dragging off men and women, he would put them in prison. (Acts 8: 1-3).
Furthermore, Luke summarizes Paul’s persecution of the early Messianic community.
I myself was convinced that I ought to do many things in opposing the name of Jesus of Nazareth.And I did so in Jerusalem. I not only locked up many of the saints in prison after receiving authority from the chief priests, but when they were put to death I cast my vote against them. And I punished them often in all the synagogues and tried to make them blaspheme, and in raging fury against them I persecuted them even to foreign cities. (Acts 26:10-11).
3. Paul’s Antagonism Towards the Early Messianic Movement
Paul doesn’t give a list of reasons as to why he persecuted the early Messianic community. It may be that Paul perceived faith in Jesus as a threat to Torah obedience. His zeal for the Torah is evident in his Letters (Phil. 3:6; 1 Tim 1:13). Any tampering with the Torah was off limits cause it defined the identity of the Jewish people. Or, perhaps Paul wanted to help keep the peace. Hence, he feared a Roman reprisal of a Jewish sect proclaiming Jesus as Messiah. Another possibility is that given that Deut. 21:22f. puts “the one who is hanged under a divine curse” and Paul’s language about the offensiveness of a crucified Messiah (1 Cor. 1:23), Paul knew the seriousness of his fellow countrymen proclaiming a crucified blasphemer like Jesus. In the end, we can’t be dogmatic as to why Paul was the persecutor that he was. Paul doesn’t list his reasons for why he persecuted the early followers of Jesus.
4. Paul’s Encounter with the Risen Messiah
Paul did not follow Jesus from the beginning. However, Paul is still considered an apostle, though “abnormally born” and “the least of the apostles” (1 Corinthians 15:8-9). His turning to Jesus happened though a dramatic revelatory encounter (Acts 9: 1-7). His first years as a follower of Jesus in Arabia remain a mystery. Three years later he went to Jerusalem to visit; this is where he saw Peter and James. Paul’s account of his calling in Galatians 1:15-16 is similar to what Jeremiah’s says about his own calling:
But when he who had set me apart before I was born, and who called me by his grace,was pleased to reveal his Son to me, in order that I might preach him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately consult with anyone nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me, but I went away into Arabia, and returned again to Damascus. (Gal 1:15-17)
The word of the Lord came to me, saying,“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart; I appointed you as a prophet to the nations. (Jer.1: 4-5)
Regarding what happened to Paul, he more likely received a “call” rather than a conversion to a new religion. He says “ I am a Jew” (Acts 22;3) “I am a Pharisee” (Acts 23;6), and “I am a prisoner for the sake of the hope of Israel” (Acts 28:20). Notice that Paul didn’t say “I was a Pharisee” or that “I was a Jew.” He saw his calling as being in line with the same divine mission that was given to the prophets of the Old Testament.
5. Paul’s Letters: Primary and Secondary Sources
Remember, written and oral sources are divided into two kinds: primary and secondary. A primary source is the testimony of an eyewitness. A secondary source is the testimony source is the testimony of anyone who is not an eyewitness-that is, of one who was not present at the events of which he tells. A primary source must thus have been produced by a contemporary of the events it narrates. Since Paul was a contemporary of Jesus, he can be considered as a primary source. He also claimed to have a personal encounter with Jesus (Acts 9:5-9).
6. Paul’s use of oral tradition terminology
Paul employs oral tradition terminology such as “delivering,” “receiving,” “passing on” “learning,” “guarding,” the traditional teaching within his letters in the following places:
Romans 16: 17: “Now I urge you, brethren, keep your eye on those who cause dissensions and hindrances contrary to the teaching which you learned, and turn away from them.”
1 Corinthians 11:23: For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus in the night in which He was betrayed took bread.
Philippians 4:9: The things you have learned and received and heard and seen in me, practice these things, and the God of peace will be with you.
1 Thessalonians 2:13: For this reason we also constantly thank God that when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men, but for what it really is, the word of God, which also performs its work in you who believe.
2 Thessalonians 2:15: So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter from us.
7. Why do Paul’s Letters Matter?
Paul’s letters are dated between AD 40 and 60. These are the earliest records we have for the life of Jesus. Therefore, to jump to the Gospels as the earliest records to the life of Jesus is a tactical mistake.
AND the Philistines took the ark of God, and brought it from Eben-ezer unto Ashdod, and they brought it into the house of Dagon, and set it by Dagon. 3 ¶ And when they of Ashdod arose early on the morrow, behold, Dagon was fallen upon his face to the earth before the ark of the LORD. (The true God would not endure that an idol should stand erect in the same temple with his ark, therefore down it must go. The ark was brought into the house as a captive, but immediately became a Conqueror. If the Lord, by his Spirit, comes into the human heart, sin soon falls before him.) And they took Dagon, and set him in his place again. (It was a wretched god that needed setting up. If idolatry did not make men foolish, they would see the absurdity of their conduct.) 4 And when they arose early on the morrow morning, behold, Dagon was fallen upon his face to the ground before the ark of the LORD; and the head of Dagon and both the palms of his hands were cut off upon the threshold; only the stump of Dagon was left to him. (The second fall was greater than the first, for the fish-god was broken, and only his scaly tail remained. The head and hands which symbolised wisdom and power were dashed to atoms. Thus does grace in the heart destroy the sovereignty and energy of sin.) 6 But the hand of the LORD was heavy upon them of Ashdod, and he destroyed them, and smote them with emerods, even Ashdod and the coasts thereof. 7–9 And when the men of Ashdod saw that it was so, they said, The ark of the God of Israel shall not abide with us: for his hand is sore upon us, and upon Dagon our god. They sent therefore and gathered all the lords of the Philistines unto them, and said, What shall we do with the ark of the God of Israel? And they answered, Let the ark of the God of Israel be carried about unto Gath. And they carried the ark of the God of Israel about thither. And it was so, that, after they had carried it about, the hand of the LORD was against the city with a very great destruction: and he smote the men of the city, both small and great, and they had emerods in their secret parts. 10 ¶ Therefore they sent the ark of God to Ekron. And it came to pass, as the ark of God came to Ekron, that the Ekronites cried out, saying, They have brought about the ark of the God of Israel to us, to slay us and our people. 11, 12 So they sent and gathered together all the lords of the Philistines, and said, Send away the ark of the God of Israel, and let it go again to his own place, that it slay us not, and our people: for there was a deadly destruction throughout all the city; the hand of God was very heavy there. And the men that died not were smitten with the emerods: and the cry of the city went up to heaven. (This disease was not only extremely painful but was meant to put the Philistines to shame, because they insolently dared to seize the ark of God. How glad they would have been to be rid of their captive, which even in captivity triumphed over them.)
IN the Psalms we have a summary of this part of Israel’s history. Let us read it—
PSALM 78:58–66
58 For they provoked him to anger with their high places, and moved him to jealousy with their graven images. 59, 60 When God heard this, he was wroth, and greatly abhorred Israel: so that he forsook the tabernacle of Shiloh, the tent which he placed among men; (Shiloh was abandoned, the ark never returned to it, and the place became such a desolation that not one stone was left upon another. The candlestick was removed out of its place.) 61, 62 And (the Lord), delivered his strength into captivity, and his glory into the enemy’s hand. He gave his people over also unto the sword; and was wroth with his inheritance. 63 The fire consumed their young men; and their maidens were not given to marriage. 64 Their priests fell by the sword; and their widows made no lamentation. (The wife of Phinehas was too much burdened with a heavier sorrow to be able to lament for her husband.) 65, 66 Then the Lord awaked as one out of sleep, and like a mighty man that shouteth by reason of wine. And he smote his enemies in the hinder parts: he put them to a perpetual reproach. (Not long shall wickedness triumph. God is evermore victorious.)
Spurgeon, C. H. (1964). The Interpreter: Spurgeon’s Devotional Bible (p. 229). Baker Book House.
Ever since I became a Christian one of my greatest joys has been reading the Bible. From discovering new insights about human nature, to learning how special I am to God, the Bible has a wonderful way of always bringing great joy to my heart every time I pick it up.
I think that President Woodrow Wilson was spot on when he said: “I am sorry for men who do not read the Bible every day. I wonder why they deprive themselves of the strength and the pleasure.”1 The sheer pleasure that diving into the Scriptures brings me is hard to describe. Knowing that every page of the Bible has lessons to teach me and help me to live a more productive and holy life fills my heart with joy as I strive to become more like Jesus. And knowing that Jesus is totally on my side even during the deepest trials of my life brings such a sense of peace – it makes me want to shout His praises each and every day.
Sadly, many Christians rarely if ever read the Bible, and as a result deprive themselves, as President Wilson says: “of the strength and the pleasure” that the Scriptures can provide.
The Bible is just so inspirational. Jesus’ teachings on the Sermon on the Mount, the Psalms, the Ten Commandments and the continuous love of God for mankind have down through the centuries been the pillars on which millions have anchored their faith. No book can generate more comfort, encouragement and purpose for life than the Bible. So many great masterpieces of art, literature, music and film have been created by people touched with the message of God that our world would be deprived of much of its very heart and soul if it were deprived of this one book.
If you sense I have developed a love affair with the Holy Scriptures you would be right. The fact that the Bible teaches me how to love and tells me that God loves me is one of the most joyous thoughts my mind could ever dwell on. And even when the Scriptures bring conviction to my soul I rejoice because this leads me to confession of my sin and getting me back on the right track with God.
My friends the Bible is the “in” book for this and every generation. No wonder the psalmist proclaimed: “Open my eyes that I may see wonderful things in your law.” (Psalm 119:18). The Bible is the reading experience of a lifetime. Reading the Bible is like going on a great treasure hunt where nuggets of pure gold can be unearthed by all those who study this most amazing book. But perhaps the greatest joy of all is knowing that as we read the sacred pages of Scripture, Jesus promises to be our personal tour guide leading us from here to eternity!
AS THE FEEDING OF THE FIVE THOUSAND precipitates the bread of life discourse, so Jesus’ healing of the congenitally blind man in John 9 precipitates some briefer comments on the nature of spiritual blindness and sight. Some of the authorities were finding it difficult to believe that the victim had in fact been born blind. If it were the case, and if Jesus had really healed him, then this would say something about Jesus’ power that they did not want to hear. Then as now, there were plenty of “faith healers” in the land, but most of their work was not very impressive: the less gullible could easily dismiss most of the evidence of their success. But to give sight to a congenitally blind man—well, that was unheard of in faith-healing circles (9:32–33). Unable to respond to the straightforward testimony of this man, the authorities resort to stereotyping and personal abuse (9:34). Jesus meets up with him again, discloses more of himself to him, invites his faith, and accepts his worship (9:35–38). Then he makes two important utterances: (1) “For judgment I have come into this world, so that the blind will see and those who see will become blind” (9:39). In some ways, this is stock reversal, like the account of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19–31), or the parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector (Luke 18:9–14)—a common theme in the Gospels. But this reversal is in the realm of vision. Those who “see,” with all their principles of sophisticated discernment, are blinded by what Jesus says and does; those who are “blind,” the moral and spiritual equivalent of the man in this chapter who is born blind, to these Jesus displays wonderful compassion, and even gives sight. Some Pharisees, overhearing Jesus’ comment and priding themselves on their discernment, are shocked into asking if Jesus includes them among the blind. This precipitates his second utterance. (2) “If you were blind, you would not be guilty of sin; but now that you claim you can see, your guilt remains” (9:41). Of course, Jesus might simply have replied “Yes!” to their question. But that would not have exposed the seriousness of their problem. By subtly changing the metaphor, Jesus drives home his point another way. Instead of insisting his opponents are blind, Jesus points out that they themselves claim to see—better than anyone else, for that matter. But that is the problem: those who are confident of their ability to see do not ask for sight. So (implicitly) they remain blind, with the culpable blindness of smug self-satisfaction. There are none so blind as those who do not know they are blind.
Carson, D. A. (1998). For the love of God: a daily companion for discovering the riches of God’s Word. (Vol. 1, p. 104). Crossway Books.
THE BEGINNING AND THE ENDING OF Galatians 5, taken together, tell us a great deal about the Gospel that Paul preaches. In the first part, Paul is still trying to persuade his Gentile Christian readers in Galatia that adding Jewish heritage and ritual to their Christian faith does not add something to it, but subtracts something from it. In particular, if they submit to circumcision, then “Christ will be of no value” to them at all (5:2). Why not? What harm could arise from being circumcised? Paul explains that the Gentile who allows himself to be circumcised “is obligated to obey the whole law” (5:3). That was the symbol-significance of circumcision: it was the mark of submission to the law-covenant. But to take that step betrays a massive failure to understand the true relationship between the law-covenant and the new covenant that the Lord Jesus Christ introduced. The former prepares for the latter, announces the latter, anticipates the latter. But to commit oneself to obeying the terms of the law-covenant is to announce that the new covenant Jesus secured by his death is somehow inadequate. These Galatians, who have in the past clearly understood that men and women are justified by grace through faith, are now “trying to be justified by law,” and in so doing “have been alienated from Christ”; it means nothing less than falling away from grace (5:4). The ultimate righteousness will be ours at the end, when Jesus returns. Meanwhile, “by faith we eagerly await through the Spirit the righteousness for which we hope” (5:5). To understand the crucial significance of Christ this way means that those who believe in Christ Jesus—what he has accomplished for us in his central place in redemptive history—know full well that circumcision itself is neither here nor there (5:6). But circumcision actually subtracts from Christ if one undergoes it out of a desire to submit to a covenant that in certain respects Christ has made passé. While in the first part of the chapter Paul talks about the work of Christ, he slips in a brief mention of the Spirit: “By faith we eagerly await through the Spirit the righteousness for which we hope” (5:5, italics added). Already the Spirit is given to believers, consequent upon Christ’s work. Christians, then, are those who “keep in step with the Spirit” (5:25), who display the lovely fruit of the Spirit: “love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control” (5:22–23). Pursue those things; there is no law against them, and they stand over against the wretched acts of our sinful nature (5:19–21; cf. Prov. 6:16–19) against which the Law pronounced but which it could not overcome.
Carson, D. A. (1998). For the love of God: a daily companion for discovering the riches of God’s Word. (Vol. 2, p. 104). Crossway Books.
Brethren, I beseech you, be as I am; for I also have become as you are. Galatians 4:12
Influence is the power to have an important effect on someone. If someone influences someone else, they are changing a person or thing in an indirect but important way.
We have all been influenced by other people or movements and not always in a positive way. My parents had the most and earliest influence on me. I accepted what they believed. Later, the influence came from teachers and peers. Those who influence us have significant effect on our lifestyle.
In Galatians 4:12, Paul is asking the Galatian Christians to become like him, and to put themselves in his shoes. He explains that he became like them, and that he knows what they are going through because he has been there too. He asks why they would now throw away the blessing they once felt, and why they would not pay the same deference to him that they once did.
In other words, Paul is asking the Galatian Christians to fully accept their status as free men and women in as he, Paul, has fully abandoned his own status as a man “under the law” to live free in Christ himself.
Those who influence us can control us and control our behavior, so we need to be cautious as to who gets to us. Do we listen to the wrong people or wrong movements in this liberal anti-Christ world?
How do people influence us? We soak up attitudes, ideas and characteristics like a sponge from the people around us without realizing it. We absorb, assimilate and instinctively mirror behaviors. We adopt mindsets that we understand to be beneficial.
People influence others through political savvy, self-promotion, building trust and networking. The goal is to influence and change others. Sensory data is interpreted according to our cultural learnings long before our ability to think about and understand our culture develops.
As Christians, we need to be sure, both in and out of the church, by whom or what we are influenced. Like Paul, Jesus calls us to be influenced by and emulate Him.
Think about it. By whom are you influenced. Who is your number one influencer?
Joseph of Genesis is reflected often in the episodes of Esther and Mordecai – including this passage. Both Joseph, the young man of Genesis 41, and the young men here in Esther 2 have their advice accepted by their respective kings. Joseph’s advice was godly and served God’s saving providence. These young men’s advice was not godly, but it too served God’s saving providence.
King Ahasuerus is viewed as owning everything, doing what he wants with both men and women – herding them from their homes, and sterilizing men to serve his purposes. The advice that Ahasuerus receives as he seeks a better queen than Vashti is not admirable; it is simple superficiality. Character means nothing – only beauty. Joseph was attractive to Potiphar’s wife because of his looks (Genesis 39:6); such – would also be the case with Esther and the king (Esther 2:7).
Ahasuerus looks all-powerful, but he searches for a better bride superficially and tyrannically. Belonging to Christ and His kingdom is not tyrannical at all; His Lordship frees us from tyranny. The care of God the Father, the pardon by Christ the Son, and the regenerating work of God’s Spirit reveals to us a King who treasures us as His possession.
Oh, to know the love of Christ that surpasses knowledge! Much better to belong to a bridegroom-king such as Christ! It is better than belonging to Ahasuerus, to ourselves, or to anything else.
Suggestions for prayer
Pray with thanksgiving that Christ has dominion over land and sea, but also pray with thanksgiving that in His Lordship He possesses you as that which He treasures.
Rev. John Vermeer is Pastor Emeritus of Doon United Reformed Church in Doon, Iowa and is currently living in Cedar Lake, Indiana. He has served churches in Kansas, Iowa, and Illinois over the course of 34 years. Get this devotional delivered directly to your phone each day via our RP App. This devotional is made available by the Nearer To God Devotional team, who also make available in print, for purchase, at NTGDevotional.com.
1Therefore, if you have been raised up with Christ, keep seeking the things above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God. 2 Set your mind on the things above, not on the things that are on earth. 3 For you died and your life has been hidden with Christ in God. 4 When Christ, who is our life, is manifested, then you also will be manifested with Him in glory. Colossians 3:1-7 (LSB) Read verses 5-6 on the site.
We are born from our mothers’ wombs depraved and separated from God because we are sinners. Unless God intervenes in our lives we will be self-absorbed and temporally focused in every part of our lives. We are “depraved” because we desperately seek fulfillment from our only avenue open to us for any circumstance which will tell us we are special or deserving of a positive “feeling” of contentment or fulfillment….
That avenue is the flesh. Our flesh is all about self. Even seemingly selfless acts are done from a motivation of some form of self-gratification.
Man is intensely religious. Even those who claim to be atheists worship themselves. Natural Man must worship someone or something. Idolatry is the result. The following quote of from Martin Luther’s Table Talk from the chapter “Of Idolatry” article CLXXV.
The calves of Jeroboam still remain in the world, and will remain to the last day; not that any man now makes calves like Jeroboam’s, but upon whatsoever a man depends or trusts–God set aside–this is the calves of Jeroboam: this is, other and strange gods, honored and worshipped instead of the only, true, living, and eternal God, who only can and will help and comfort all need. – Martin LutherView article →
In his inaugural speech, President Trump vowed ‘we will not forget our God’. On retaking the White House, Trump has already acted on his promise to stand for Christian values. Check out his day one reforms here and learn how you can pray for the incoming administration.
“Just a few months ago, in a beautiful Pennsylvania field, an assassin’s bullet ripped through my ear. But I felt then and believe even more so now that my life was saved for a reason. I was saved by God to make America great again.”
It was one of many moments during President Trump’s inaugural address that prompted a thunderous standing ovation.
Donald Trump is back — and the energy is electric.
On just his first day, the 47th US President undertook more than 200 executive actions, gave three historic speeches, and fielded 60 minutes of press questions even while signing piles of documents at the Resolute Desk.
But it was his inaugural address, delivered in the US Capitol Rotunda, where Trump really shone — and where America’s spiritual identity was reaffirmed by the nation’s Commander-in-Chief.
That godless agenda is finished, Trump declared on Monday night, during a half-hour address in which he wholly dismantled the disastrous record of his predecessors, who were forced to endure the spectacle from front row seats.
In words that reverberated globally and poignantly summed up his message, Trump resolved, “We will not forget our country, we will not forget our Constitution, and we will not forget our God.”
Watch:
Read the transcript of President Trump’s inaugural address here.
President Trump’s Day One Achievements
In the hours that followed, Trump wasted no time, holding a freewheeling press conference from the Oval Office while signing a raft of executive orders which:
Made biblical and biological reality the official policy of the US federal government by declaring that there are only two genders, male and female
Banned the cult of transgenderism in the military
Ceased federal funding for sex changes and transgender therapies for prison inmates
Eliminated all Marxist diversity, equity and inclusion programs, jobs and funding in the federal government
Declared a national emergency at the southern border, designated Mexican drug cartels as terrorist groups, and evoked birthright citizenship for illegal immigrants
Triggered a review of all potential political weaponisation and misconduct within the Department of Justice and US intelligence agencies over the past four years
Watch Trump’s press conference and his signing of executive orders here:
The Trump-Jehu Connection
For good reason have many Christian commentators likened Donald Trump to the biblical figure Jehu, who was anointed by the prophet Elisha to become king of the northern kingdom of Israel, and whose story is told in 2 Kings 9–10.
During his long, dramatic and tumultuous reign, King Jehu enacted many successful reforms for the Kingdom of Israel. He was commended for his zeal in executing God’s judgment against a prior king, Ahab, who had been one of Israel’s most corrupt rulers.
King Jehu was a ruthless character, vengeful and uncouth. In order to secure the throne, he first had to overthrow a corrupt and entrenched royal family led by Queen Jezebel and King Joram, who belonged to the Ahab dynasty.
While King Jehu was not a particularly spiritual man himself, he saw it as his mission to root out idol worship and replace it with worship of the true God.
In perhaps the most dramatic episode of his reign, Jehu destroyed the temple of Baal in Samaria — an icon of Ahab’s dynasty — and turned it into a latrine.
Importantly, despite his many imperfections, King Jehu enjoyed the support of God’s prophet, Elisha. Jehu’s reign was a mixture of zealous reform and personal political ambition. His major shortcoming was that he did not abandon all idolatrous practices — a grave mistake that ultimately led to further idolatry and national decline.
Let the reader understand.
Pray for America and President Trump
President Trump’s ambitious national reforms were perhaps best captured in this segment of his inaugural address:
The United States will once again consider itself a growing nation — one that increases our wealth, expands our territory, builds our cities, raises our expectations, and carries our flag into new and beautiful horizons.
And we will pursue our manifest destiny into the stars, launching American astronauts to plant the Stars and Stripes on the planet Mars.
Ambition is the lifeblood of a great nation, and, right now, our nation is more ambitious than any other. There’s no nation like our nation.
Americans are explorers, builders, innovators, entrepreneurs, and pioneers. The spirit of the frontier is written into our hearts. The call of the next great adventure resounds from within our souls.
Our American ancestors turned a small group of colonies on the edge of a vast continent into a mighty republic of the most extraordinary citizens on Earth. No one comes close.
Americans pushed thousands of miles through a rugged land of untamed wilderness. They crossed deserts, scaled mountains, braved untold dangers, won the Wild West, ended slavery, rescued millions from tyranny, lifted billions from poverty, harnessed electricity, split the atom, launched mankind into the heavens, and put the universe of human knowledge into the palm of the human hand. If we work together, there is nothing we cannot do and no dream we cannot achieve…
In America, the impossible is what we do best.
Please pray for America and for President Donald Trump as he seeks to revive the national spirit and restore Christian values to Washington D.C.
Politics is far from everything, but good political leadership can have a significant impact on the spiritual and religious outlook of a nation, and God can use leaders mightily to achieve His will on earth.
THE DRAMATIC POWER of the testing of Abraham by the offering of Isaac (Gen. 22) is well known. The very terseness of the account calls forth our wonder. When he tells his servant that we (22:5—i.e., both Abraham and Isaac) will come back after worshiping on Mount Moriah, was Abraham speculating that God would raise his son back from the grave? Did he hope that God would intervene in some unforeseen way? What conceivable explanation could Abraham give his son when he bound him and laid him on the prepared altar? A trifle earlier, Abraham’s reply to Isaac’s question about the lamb is a masterstroke: “God himself will provide the lamb for the burnt offering, my son” (22:8). There is no suggestion that Abraham foresaw the cross. Judging by the way he was prepared to go through with the sacrifice (22:10–11), it is not even clear that he expected that God would provide a literal animal. One might even guess that this was a pious answer for the boy until the dreadful truth could no longer be concealed. Yet in the framework of the story, Abraham spoke better than he knew: God did provide the lamb, a substitute for Isaac (22:13–14). In fact, like other biblical figures (e.g., Caiaphas in John 11:49–53), Abraham spoke much better than he knew: God would provide not only the animal that served as a substitute in this case, but the ultimate substitute, the Lamb of God, who alone could bear our sin and bring to pass all of God’s wonderful purposes for redemption and judgment (Rev. 4–5; 21:22). “The LORD will provide” (22:14): that much Abraham clearly understood. One can only imagine how much the same lesson was embedded in young Isaac’s mind as well, and to his heirs beyond him. God himself connects this episode with the covenantal promise: Abraham’s faith here issues in such stellar obedience that he does not elevate even his own cherished son to the place where he might dethrone God. God reiterates the covenant: “I will surely bless you and make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and as the sand on the seashore. Your descendants will take possession of the cities of their enemies, and through your offspring all nations on earth will be blessed, because you have obeyed me” (22:17–18). On this point, God swears by himself (22:16), not because otherwise he might lie, but because there is no one greater by whom to swear, and the oath itself would be a great stabilizing anchor to Abraham’s faith and to the faith of all who follow in his train (cf. Heb. 6:13–20).
Carson, D. A. (1998). For the love of God: a daily companion for discovering the riches of God’s Word. (Vol. 1, p. 47). Crossway Books.
IN ACTS 21 WE FIND PAUL AND THE CHURCH in Jerusalem trying to be as accommodating as possible, but nothing will avail. Paul is arrested, in line with the prophecies to the effect that he would be seized and bound (21:4, 11). Note: (1) This is one of the “we” passages in Acts (21:1, 17). On the face of it, Luke the author is at this point traveling with Paul and is a witness to the events described here. That is worth noting, because many critics find these events completely unbelievable. (2) The church and its leaders warmly receive Paul and his reports of gospel fruitfulness among the Gentiles. This is entirely in line with their earlier delight when Paul reported many Gentile conversions (e.g., Acts 15). In other words, experiences in Samaria (Acts 8) and Peter’s visit with Cornelius and his household (Acts 10–11) have prepared the church to delight in the manifest progress of the Gospel among the Gentiles. (3) Nevertheless, the leaders are painfully aware that substantial numbers of conservative Jews are out to get Paul. They have heard that he is counseling “all” the Jews in the Diaspora not to circumcise their children or follow the Law of Moses (21:21). So they devise a plan to help him regain a reputation for observing conservatism (21:23–24). “Then everybody will know there is no truth in these reports about you, but that you yourself are living in obedience to the law” (21:24). It is this passage that is especially controverted, for does not Paul himself say that he is flexible on such matters (1 Cor. 9:19–23; Gal.)? Yet before we write off the Jerusalem elders and Paul himself for massive inconsistency, or Luke for making up stories, observe: (a) The initial charge is that Paul exhorts all Jews in the Diaspora to abandon circumcision and the Law of Moses. That he does not do. He refuses to allow circumcision and kosher observance to become a test of spirituality, but he does not advocate universal abandonment of the Law. He himself circumcised Timothy to advance the communication of the Gospel. (b) One suspects that the biggest fear of some conservative Jews was that Paul would desecrate the temple (21:27–29). The elders therefore sought to show that while he was in Jerusalem Paul was a carefully observant Jew, even paying for the temple purification rites of others. After all, neither Paul nor the Jerusalem leaders imposed full observance on all Christian believers (21:25; cf. Acts 15; see vol. 1, meditation for July 28). So in the providence of God, Paul is arrested. Thus he arrives, for the first time, in Rome, and the Gospel is heard in Caesar’s courts.
Carson, D. A. (1998). For the love of God: a daily companion for discovering the riches of God’s Word. (Vol. 2, p. 47). Crossway Books.
2 John 1-13 In this week’s studies, we once again see John’s combination of truth, love, and obedience.
Theme
The Recipient of John’s Letter
No other books of the New Testament more clearly reflect the current letter writing style of the first century than do 2 and 3 John. There is an opening greeting, in which the author identifies himself and names those to whom he is writing. There is an opening salutation. This is followed by the body of the letter, containing the message. Then there is a closing salutation in which the author expresses his hopes of seeing the one to whom he is writing and sends a final greeting. The letters of 2 and 3 John follow this format. But, like the other New Testament books which also follow it, particularly the Epistles of Paul, these books introduce distinctly Christian ideas by which the conventional forms are both elevated and transformed.
In the case of 2 John there is an opening introduction which is filled with Christian greetings. This is followed by a two-pronged message dealing with the life within the local Christian congregation and the danger without. Finally, there is a conclusion in which the members of one Christian congregation greet those in another.
It is strange that a letter which is apparently so straightforward should present deep problems regarding both its author and its recipients, but such is the case. There is disagreement as to the identity of the elder. This question has been discussed in the introduction to 2 and 3 John. There is disagreement as to the identity of the recipient, whom John terms “the elect lady and her children.”
There are two general viewpoints as to who “the elect lady” might be. The first is that by this term John refers to an individual person. She may be unnamed, in which case “the elect lady” is a good translation. Or, which is less likely, she may be named, in which case the Greek words eklekte kuria could conceivably be translated “to the elect Kuria” or “to the lady Eklekte.” In support of this approach there is the fact that a personal address of this kind is what would be expected in so short and straightforward a letter. Moreover, if the recipient is not an individual, then the address must be symbolic of something else; and it hardly seems necessary to read a symbolic message or meaning into so short a text.1
The second viewpoint is that John is addressing an individual church which he thus stylizes by the phrase “the elect lady.” At first glance this seems unlikely for the reasons given above. But there are good arguments in its favor.
First, there is a strange absence of clear personal references, which is made all the more strange by the marked contrast with 3 John, which is quite personal.
Second, there is an apparently unconscious and repeated transition from the second person singular pronoun (vv. 4, 5, 12) to the second personal plural pronoun (vv. 6, 8, 10, 13), which indicates that the author may have been thinking of a complete congregation rather than just of one individual.
Third, there are expressions which are highly appropriate to the corporate view. These involve the expressions of love which John has for the elect lady and her children, the revelation that some of her children abide in the truth while some apparently do not, and above all the fact that the closing verse conveys greetings from the elect lady’s sister and the children who are with her. Moreover, if it is objected to this view that such a stylization is unnatural and unnecessary, it must be remembered that while that may be true for our age it was not necessarily true for John. In fact, a similar greeting from “the church that is at Babylon, elected together with you” (also a feminine singular ending) occurs just a few pages earlier in the New Testament, at 1 Peter 5:13.
While the matter is probably incapable of a final solution within the limits of our present knowledge, the balance of probability seems to be on the side of the corporate interpretation.
1Alexander Ross, The Epistles of James and John (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1954), 129-130.
Study Questions
How does 2 John follow the typical style of a first century letter? What distinctively Christian ideas are present?
What are the two general views of the identity of “the elect lady”?
Which view is preferred, and why?
Application
For Further Study: Download for free and listen to James Boice’s message, “The Path of Discipleship.” (Discount will be applied at checkout.)
For Further Study: James Boice’s studies on the Epistles of John were originally preached to the congregation of Tenth Presbyterian Church, and are available in paperback. Order your copy and receive 30% off the regular price.
And it shall be, when the LORD thy God shall have brought thee into the land which he sware unto thy fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, to give thee great and goodly cities, which thou buildest not … then beware lest thou forget the LORD. Deuteronomy 6:10, 12 SUGGESTED FURTHER READING: Psalm 78:52–64
Wealth and prosperity may blind men’s minds so that they do not sufficiently attend to modesty and moderation but rather grow wanton in their lusts and intoxicate themselves with pleasures. So God prescribes against this error. Moses admonishes us to beware lest we forget God when we have been liberally and luxuriously treated by him because he knows that it is common for abundance to lead to arrogance. Moses does this, first, by showing how base and unworthy our ingratitude would be if God loaded us with many excellent benefits and we then cast away the recollection of him. His goodness was inestimable in giving people cities built by the hands of others and in transferring to them whatever others had prepared by their great labor and industry. So their impiety was even more detestable in neglecting him when he daily set himself before them in this abundant store of blessing. Let us learn from this passage that we are invited by God’s liberality to honor him, and that whenever he deals kindly with us, he places his glory before our eyes. On the other hand, we should remember that what ought to be seen as vehicles to lift up our minds on high are, by our own fault, converted into obstacles, and that therefore we ought to be more on guard against them.
FOR MEDITATION: It is logical that great blessings from God’s hand would motivate us to praise him all the more. Sadly, however, we often take these blessings for granted and no longer recognize our dependence on him for everything. What blessings do you often take for granted?
Calvin, J., & Beeke, J. R. (2008). 365 Days with Calvin (p. 36). Day One Publications; Reformation Heritage Books.
2 and 3 John In this week’s studies, we look at some distinguishing elements and issues that are found in 2 and 3 John, and note some application for our own time.
Theme
John the Apostle
At the conclusion of yesterday’s devotional, we mentioned one reason why Eusebius’ reference to Papias may not prove the existence of two Johns. Today, we begin by offering another reason.
Second, in his discussion of Papias it may be Eusebius himself who is of limited understanding in discerning what his source has to say. True, the language of Papias is ambiguous and may even be clumsy. But this may be due to the fact that Papias is actually trying to distinguish in a compressed fashion among three types of witnesses.
In the first class are the apostles, all of whom saw the Lord and who testified with unique authority. These were the prime source of information naturally, and Papias had received knowledge of Jesus through the remembered teaching of seven of them: Andrew, Peter, Philip, Thomas, James, John, and Matthew. The second class of witness contains those who were disciples of the Lord only (not apostles) but who possessed special importance for Papias in that they were still living and could therefore be consulted. Papias mentioned only one of these, Aristion. In the third and final category are those who were apostles but who, unlike most of the apostles, were living. Again, Papias has but one example, John. But John is mentioned twice in that, on the one hand, he was an apostle and belongs with the other apostles whom Papias mentioned and, on the other hand, was living and so belongs with those individuals, either apostles or disciples, who were continuing to bear testimony to the Lord.
In support of this interpretation there is the fact that Papias speaks in the past tense of the witness of the seven apostles but changes to the present tense in drawing attention to what “Aristion and the presbyter John say.”
Obviously, in view of Papias’ language it cannot be demonstrated with certainty that the existence of one John at Ephesus rather than two is factual. Nevertheless, it is at least equally unproved that there existed a second John at Ephesus, known as “the elder,” to whom the authorship of 2 and 3 John as well as the possibility of authorship of the other books in the traditional Johannine corpus must be referred.
It is, however, also possible to approach the question of the identity of “the elder” of 2 and 3 John from an entirely different point of view. Let us assume, for the sake of argument, that there were two Johns in Asia Minor, John the apostle and John the elder. Can it be, assuming the existence of this second person, that he is adequate to account for the books as we have them?
The author of 2 and 3 John identifies himself as “the elder,” and this favors the hypothesis somewhat. But does what we know of him correspond with our theory? We notice that the author of these books is unnamed except for the title. But if this is so, then the author must have identified himself without using his name because, as Stott argues, “His identity was so well known and his authority so well recognized that he could use the title without needing to qualify or amplify it. Moreover, since the two Epistles were written to different churches, he was evidently known and acknowledged in a wide area of the province of Asia.”1
The author obviously knows a great deal about these churches. He follows their affairs. He accepts responsibility for what happens to them. Obviously he also loves these people, cares for them, and takes time to instruct and warn them. Stott continues, “Is it possible, that a man of such prominence, who exercised such authority and wrote three Epistles which are included in the New Testament canon, should have left no more trace of himself in history than one dubious reference by Papias?”2
1John R. W. Stott, The Epistles of John (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1964), 39.
2Ibid., 39.
Study Questions
Explain another way Papias’ remarks can be understood, according to three categories.
What argument does John Stott give for the elder of 2 and 3 John as being the apostle John?
Application
For Further Study: Download and listen for free to James Boice’s message from Ephesians 4, “Unity! Unity!” (Discount will be applied at checkout.)
WE must not suffer the intercession of Abraham to pass away from our thoughts till it has reminded us of the yet more powerful advocacy of our Blessed Lord Jesus. We see him in one of his own parables describing himself as preserving the sinful by his pleadings, and the passage is a fit sequel to our yesterday’s reading.
LUKE 13:1–9
1 There were present at that season some that told him of the Galilæans, whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices. 2 And Jesus answering said unto them, Suppose ye that these Galilæans were sinners above all the Galilæans, because they suffered such things? 3 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish. (See the need of repentance. Philip Henry once said, “Some people do not like to hear much of repentance; but I think it so necessary that if I were to die in the pulpit, I should desire to die preaching repentance, and if I should die out of the pulpit I hope to die practising it.”) 4 Or those eighteen, upon whom the tower in Siloam fell, and slew them, think ye that they were sinners above all men that dwelt in Jerusalem? 5 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish. When we hear or read of terrible judgments upon sinners, such as these here recorded, and that which befell Sodom of old, we ought not to congratulate ourselves as though we were exempted because of our innocence, but rather we should regard these events as warnings to ourselves; since, if we fall into the same sins, sooner or later a doom equally overwhelming will come upon us. If any enquire why it has not come already, let them pay special attention to the parable which follows. There has been an intercessor at work, or we should have perished long ere this. 6 ¶ He spake also this parable; A certain man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard; and he came and sought fruit thereon, and found none. (It was in good soil, and under the gardener’s care; it would therefore yield fruit, or prove itself to be good for nothing.) 7 Then said he unto the dresser of his vineyard, Behold, these three years I come seeking fruit on this fig tree, and find none: cut it down; why cumbereth it the ground? Three years was long enough for a test: there might have been two bad seasons to account for the absence of fruit, but when a third time the tree was fruitless the fault must be in the tree itself. God gives us time enough for trial. All of us have been borne with quite long enough to prove us, and perhaps at this moment the Lord is saying, “Cut it down.” How very like are some of us to the barren tree! In itself it is of no use, it fills the place of a good tree, it draws the goodness from the soil, and hurts others near it. It is thus that men live useless lives, and meanwhile are occupying wastefully positions in which others would bring glory to God. 8 And he answering said unto him, Lord, let it alone this year also, till I shall dig about it, and dung it. (It is the voice of Jesus the Intercessor. He is unwilling to see the axe uplifted, for he is full of compassion. See how unconverted men owe their lives to Jesus. They are not preserved by their own worth or worthiness, but they live upon sufferance, and will die as soon as the voice of Jesus ceases to plead for them.) 9 And if it bear fruit, well: and if not, then after that thou shalt cut it down. May we who have been without grace till now hear the word of God at this hour and live; for this may be our last year of grace, and when it is over we may be cast into the fire of hell. Jesus has pleaded that we may be tried once more; but there is a limit to his pleadings. Note the two ifs, “And if,” “and if not.” Upon these two ifs hang eternity. The Lord grant that none of us may be cut down and cast into the eternal burnings.
See how the fruitless fig-tree stands,
Beneath its owner’s frown:
The axe is lifted in his hands,
To cut the cumberer down.
“Year after year, I come,” he cries,
“And still no fruit is shown;
Nothing but empty leaves arise,
Then cut the cumberer down.”
Sinner, beware! the axe of death
Is rais’d and aimed at thee:
Awhile thy Maker spares thy breath,
Beware, O barren tree!
Spurgeon, C. H. (1964). The Interpreter: Spurgeon’s Devotional Bible (p. 29). Baker Book House.
2 and 3 John In this week’s studies, we look at some distinguishing elements and issues that are found in 2 and 3 John, and note some application for our own time.
Theme
The Elder
One similarity between the two letters is that each begins by the author’s introduction of himself as “the elder.” In the one case he writes, “The elder unto the elect lady and her children, whom I love in the truth” (2 John 1). In the other letter he writes, “The elder unto the well-beloved Gaius, whom I love in the truth” (3 John 1). Traditionally the identification of “the elder” plus the unnamed author of 1 John and of the fourth Gospel has been fixed as John, the son of Zebedee, who became an apostle. The captions of the books themselves indicate this. But from time to time, particularly in recent years, it has become popular for scholars to say that there were two Johns who lived in Asia Minor, the apostle John and John the elder, and that it was John the elder rather than the disciple of Christ who wrote the three letters. Some feel that he is the author of the Gospel also.
There are several points from which this line of thinking originates, but the most important is a brief paragraph from The Expositions of Oracles of the Lord by Papias, a bishop of Hierapolis. His words are quoted by the early church historian Eusebius.
Papias writes thus:
I shall not hesitate also to put down for you along with my interpretations whatsoever things I have at any time learned carefully from the elders and carefully remembered, guaranteeing their truth. For I did not, like the multitude, take pleasure in those that speak much, but in those that teach the truth; not in those that relate strange commandments, but in those that deliver the commandments given by the Lord to faith, and springing from the truth itself. If, then, anyone came, who had been a follower of the elders, I questioned him in regard to the words of the elders—what Andrew or what Peter said, or what was said by Philip, or by Thomas, or by James, or by John, or by Matthew, or by any other of the disciples of the Lord, and what things Aristion and the presbyter John, the disciples of the Lord, say. For I did not think that what was to be gotten from the books would profit me as such as what came from the living and abiding voice.1
In this quotation the twofold repetition of the name John suggests that there may have been two Johns known to Papias. And, in fact, this is the way Eusebius takes it. He writes,
It is worth observing here that the name John is twice enumerated by him. The first one he mentions in connection with Peter and James and Matthew and the rest of the apostles, clearly meaning the evangelist; but the other John he mentioned after an interval, and places him among others outside of the number of the apostles, putting Aristion before him, and he distinctly calls him a presbyter. This shows that the statement of those is true, who say that there were two persons in Asia that bore the same name…2
It can hardly be doubted that Eusebius makes a good case for two Johns on the basis of Papias’ words. But having acknowledged this, it is right to ask whether Eusebius is correct in his interpretation. There are reasons for questioning it.
First, the passage from Papias is at best ambiguous. Indeed, Eusebius himself seems to admit this in general when he later refers to his source as appearing “to have been of very limited understanding, as one can see from his discourses.”3
1Eusebius, The Church History of Eusebius, The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, series two, volume 1, translated with prolegomena and notes by Arthur Cushman McGiffert (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1961), 170-171.
2Ibid., 171.
3Ibid., 172.
Study Questions
What is the similarity between the two letters that bears on their authorship?
What is the main reason why some feel there were two Johns, and that John the elder differs from the apostle John?
List the first reason why Papias’ comment does not need to be referring to two Johns.
Application
For Further Study: Download and listen for free to James Boice’s message from Ephesians 4, “Unity! Unity!” (Discount will be applied at checkout.)
2 and 3 John In this week’s studies, we look at some distinguishing elements and issues that are found in 2 and 3 John, and note some application for our own time.
Theme
The Immediate Problem
The letters of 2 and 3 John are the shortest books of the New Testament, shorter even than Jude or Philemon which also each have only one chapter. But this does not mean that either 2 or 3 John is insignificant. To be sure, in some ways each merely repeats the general message of 1 John, which is longer. But the repetitions are made in two distinct contexts which in turn give a unique direction to the letters and call forth new emphases.
The immediate problem in each book is that of traveling teachers or missionaries. According to Christian ethics all who thus traveled about were to be shown hospitality by Christians in the town to which they came. In this, Christians were doing what the best of non-Christians would also do. But in Christian circles this extension of hospitality was open to obvious abuse and raised moral questions as well. For example, suppose the visiting teacher claimed to be a Christian missionary or even a prophet but taught what was clearly false doctrine. Hospitality would demand that he be provided for, but to do so would seem to be participation in the spread of his false teachings. Should he be received or not? Or again, suppose the teacher overstayed his welcome or asked for money, thereby giving evidence of being motivated more by greed than by a desire for Christian service. How long should such a one be tolerated? Should money be given? The extent of this problem in the early church age is seen in the fact that the Didache, another early document, deals with the problem at length and even invents the term “Christmonger” to describe those who attempted thus to profit by Christianity.
The letters of 2 and 3 John deal with these problems and also share other Christian teaching incidentally. In 2 John the author seems to be writing to a local church. So here the issues are discussed in the broadest terms. First, the author reminds his readers of the tests of true Christianity which have already been developed in the earlier and longer letter. Second, he warns them to be on guard against false teachers. In this case the test of truth and error is the test of Christian doctrine, particularly as it relates to Jesus as the Christ come in the flesh.
In 3 John the negative approach (“receive him not,” that is, the false teacher) gives way to a positive encouragement to receive those who really are the Lord’s servants. Several distinct personalities are in view. The letter is written to a Christian named Gaius. He is commended for having shown hospitality to teachers who had visited his area and is encouraged to continue showing it. Diotrephes is the second person mentioned. He is rebuked indirectly for his refusal to welcome the same teachers and for trying to keep other Christians, such as Gaius, from doing so. Finally, mention is made of a third personality, Demetrius, whose example is said to be a good one. These two letters, the one warning against receiving and encouraging false teachers and the other encouraging a genuine hospitality toward true teachers, belong together.
Study Questions
Read 2 and 3 John, and note the similar themes with 1 John.
What is the immediate problem that 2 and 3 John deal with?
What are the specific matters that 2 John addresses?
What emphasis is seen in 3 John? Why do 2 and 3 John belong together in the themes they discuss?
Application
For Further Study: Download and listen for free to James Boice’s message from Ephesians 4, “Unity! Unity!” (Discount will be applied at checkout.)
There was a time when scarcely a person in the Anglo-Saxon world would not have been able to cite John 3:16. Doubtless it was the best known verse in the entire Bible. It may still hold pride of place today—I am uncertain. But if it does, the percentage of people who know it is considerably smaller, and continues to decline as biblical illiteracy rises in the West.
Meanwhile there is another verse that is (perhaps more) frequently quoted, almost as a defiant gesture, by some people who do not know their Bibles very well, but who think it authorizes their biases. It is Matthew 7:1: “Do not judge, or you too will be judged.” In an age when philosophical pluralism is on the ascendancy, these nine words might almost be taken as the public confession.
Three things must be said. First, it is striking that today’s readings include not only Matthew 7 but also Genesis 7. There the sweeping judgment of the Flood is enacted: “Every living thing on the face of the earth was wiped out; men and animals and the creatures that move along the ground and the birds of the air were wiped from the earth. Only Noah was left, and those with him in the ark” (Gen. 7:23). The same God stands behind both passages, so we should not be too hasty in understanding Matthew 7:1 to mean that all judgment is intrinsically evil.
Second, this is not an instance where something practiced in the Old Testament is somehow abolished in the New. It is not as if judgment was possible in Genesis but is now abolished in Matthew. After all, Matthew 7:6 demands that we make judgments about who are “dogs” and “pigs,” and the paragraphs at the end of this chapter warn against false prophets (and tell us how we are to discern who is true and who is false), and who is truly a follower of Jesus and who is not. Moreover, not only does this chapter speak of a terrible judgment no less final than the flood (Matt. 7:13, 19, 23), but there are many passages in the New Testament that are equally uncompromising.
Third, we must not only expose false interpretations of Matthew 7:1, we must understand what it does say and appropriate it. The verb judge has a wide range of meanings, and the context (7:1–5) is decisive in giving it its color in this passage. People who pursue righteousness (6:33) are easily prone to self-righteousness, arrogance, condescension toward others, an ugly holier-than-thou stance, hypocrisy. Not all are like that, of course, but the sin of “judgmentalism” is common enough. Jesus won’t have it.1
ezra 7 recounts the mission of Ezra in the postexilic community in Jerusalem and Judah. Obviously it was part of imperial policy that if exiled groups were permitted to return to their homeland, they should be supported by their priests. From the perspective of pagan superstition, the rulers would not want any of the regional gods angry with them (7:23); from the perspective of the covenant community, this was formidable evidence that the good hand of God was upon them, that he was able to rule the affairs of the mightiest empires so as to preserve his own people.
The nature of Ezra’s task could easily be taken as a model of the privileges and responsibilities of all whose duty it is to teach the Word of God to the people of God: “For Ezra had devoted himself to the study and observance of the Law of the Lord, and to teaching its decrees and laws in Israel” (7:10).
(1) Ezra devoted himself to the study of the Law. There is no long-range effective teaching of the Bible that is not accompanied by long hours of ongoing study of the Bible. Effectiveness in teaching the Bible is purchased at the price of much study, some of it lonely, all of it tiring. If you are not a student of the Word, you are not called to be a teacher of the Word.
(2) Ezra devoted himself to the observance of the Law. For some people, study is an end in itself, or perhaps a means to the end of teaching. But even though the subject matter is Scripture, for these people there is no personal commitment to living under its precepts—to ordering their marriage, their finances, their talk, their priorities, their values, by the Word of God. They do not constantly ask how the assumptions of their age and culture, assumptions that all of us pick up unawares, are challenged by Scripture. The study of Scripture, for such people, is an excellent intellectual discipline, but not a persistent call to worship; the Bible is to be mastered like a textbook, but it does not call the people of God to tremble; its truths are to be cherished, but it does not mediate the presence of God. Ezra avoided all these traps and devoted himself to observing what Scripture says.
(3) Ezra devoted himself to the teaching of the Law. He was not a hermit-scholar; he was a pastor-scholar. What he learned in study and obedience he also learned how to pass on. Whether in large, solemn assemblies, in family or clan settings, or in one-on-one studies, Ezra committed himself to teaching the Word of God to the people of God. It is difficult to imagine a higher calling.2
all four of these chapters depict new beginnings, but the first reading—Genesis 1—portrays the beginning of everything in this created universe.
On the face of it, this chapter, and the lines of thought it develops, establish that God is different from the universe that he creates, and therefore pantheism is ruled out; that the original creation was entirely good, and therefore dualism is ruled out; that human beings, male and female together, are alone declared to be made in the image of God, and therefore forms of reductionism that claim we are part of the animal kingdom and no more must be ruled out; that God is a talking God, and therefore all notions of an impersonal God must be ruled out; that this God has sovereignly made all things, including all people, and therefore conceptions of merely tribal deities must be ruled out.
Some of these and other matters are put positively by later writers of Scripture who, reflecting on the doctrine of creation, offer a host of invaluable conclusions. The sheer glory of the created order bears telling witness to the glory of its Maker (Ps. 19). The universe came into being by the will of God, and for this, God is incessantly worshiped (Rev. 4:11). That God has made everything speaks of his transcendence, i.e., he is above this created order, above time and space, and therefore cannot be domesticated by anything in it (Acts 17:24–25). That he made all things and continues to rule over all, means that both racism and tribalism are to be rejected (Acts 17:26). Further, if we ourselves have been made in his image, it is preposterous to think that God can properly be pictured by some image that we can concoct (Acts 17:29). These notions and more are teased out by later Scriptures.
One of the most important entailments of the doctrine of creation is this: it grounds all human responsibility. The theme repeatedly recurs in the Bible, sometimes explicitly, sometimes by implication. To take but one example, John’s gospel opens by declaring that everything that was created came into being by the agency of God’s “Word,” the Word that became flesh in Jesus Christ (John 1:2–3, 14). But this observation sets the stage for a devastating indictment: when this Word came into the world, and even though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him (John 1:10). God made us to “image” himself; he made us for his own glory. For us to imagine ourselves autonomous is, far from being a measure of our maturity, the supreme mark of our rebellion, the flag of our suppression of the truth (Rom. 1).1
the first steps toward israel’s return from exile and their rebuilding of the temple (Ezra 1) are full of interest:
(1) A person without much knowledge of history might be forgiven for thinking that Israel was the only national group released from the bondage of exile. Historically, that is not true. When the Persians took over from the Babylonians (who had sent Judah into exile), King Cyrus of Persia reversed the Babylonian policy. The Babylonians (and the Assyrians before them) transported the aristocracy and leading citizens of subjugated territories. Rebellion in the ancient world was often suspended on the threefold cord of people, land, and religion. If one of these three strands could be removed, there was less likelihood of revolt. By transporting all the leaders of every branch of a culture to some new territory far removed from their own land (thereby disconnecting people and land), these empires secured a kind of peace. Obviously they also introduced enormous dislocation, which must have had many negative effects, not least economic. Whatever the reasons, Cyrus not only stopped this policy, but permitted exiles—including the Jews—to return home.
(2) But Ezra is right in understanding this to be the work of God: “The Lord moved the heart of Cyrus king of Persia” (1:1). At another time, the Lord would cause a census to be taken of the entire Roman world, to bring a pregnant woman to Bethlehem—once again to fulfill an ancient Scripture (Luke 2).
(3) The prophecy in this case, according to Ezra, is that of Jeremiah (Ezra 1:1), probably referring to Jeremiah 25:11–12; 29:10–14; 51. It would be a mistake to read Ezra 1:1 as if God were somehow bound by Jeremiah’s word, instead of the other way around. The point is that the prophecy of Jeremiah is nothing other than the word of God. God is bound by his own word. When Daniel understood that the prescribed time of exile was coming to an end, he set himself to seek the face of God for his people (Dan. 9)—which of course was exactly the right thing to do. And here we find the answers both to Daniel’s prayers and to God’s promises.
(4) As usual, when God works decisively, there are no loose ends. On the one hand, he moves Cyrus the King to make his proclamation; on the other hand, he moves in the hearts of many Jews to return home (1:5). After all, we are dealing now with a generation that had grown up entirely in the Tigris-Euphrates valleys. It would be like asking the second or third generation of immigrants to the United States from, say, Japan or Germany, to return “home.” But God’s people become willing in the day of his power.2
Haggai 1:1 — This is the same year as Ezra 4:24 (520 BC). Haggai is the first prophet to the returned remnant. We’ve read about Zerubbabel and Joshua in Ezra 3:2.
Haggai 1:4 — Interesting priorities. It wasn’t time to build the LORD’s house, but it was time to build “ceiled houses.” These houses were “roofed with costly woods;” some think “with the very cedar provided for the rebuilding of the Temple” (Ezra 3:7).
Verse 4 – For you, O ye; for you, yourselves; such as ye are (see Zechariah 7:5). He appeals to their consciences. You can make yourselves comfortable; you have time and means and industry to expend on your own private interests, and can you look with indifference on the house of God lying waste? Your ceiled houses; your houses, and those ceiled – wainscoted and roofed with costly woods (1 Kings 7:3, 7; Jeremiah 22:14), perhaps with the very cedar provided for the rebuilding of the temple (Ezra 3:7).
Haggai 1:9 — We’re told that God doesn’t dwell in temples (Acts 7:48, Acts 17:24). God did not need a temple, but this is indicative of the hearts of the people. Construction stopped for 16 years because of opposition (Ezra 4:24), but instead of seeking the LORD, they built their own houses. So, what was so important about this Temple? For the Israelites to obey God, they must follow His rules and that includes the sacrifices. Well over a hundred of the Torah laws dealt with the Temple. Under Babylonian captivity they had an excuse, but now there was no excuse.
Haggai 1:14 — God has put it in some people’s spirit to do the work of the house of the LORD God. Let’s do the work today; remember His last command (Matthew 28:19-20)!
Haggai 2:3 — This building was not going to rival Solomon’s Temple, but God still encouraged those building it (Haggai 2:4) because He would fill it with His glory (Haggai 2:7). He even promised that it would be more glorious than Solomon’s (Haggai 2:9).
Haggai 2:9 — How would this humble building rival Solomon’s Palace? Because in this place God would give His peace. If you’re interested in learning how that happened, check out this article yours truly did on the Peace of Christmas.
Haggai 2:19 — Blessing comes from obeying the LORD (Haggai 2:18). Now, what is the blessing? Is it always health, wealth, and prosperity? Lutheran Satire matched up present day “religious affirmations” with martyrs of church history in a provocative video. God’s blessings undo the ceremonial uncleanness (Haggai 2:13-14) and His chastening (Haggai 2:17).
Revelation 11:1 — We read about something similar in Ezekiel 40:3.
Revelation 11:3 — Who are the two witnesses? They have the power to shut heaven like Elijah (1 Kings 17:1), and their enemies are destroyed like Moses’ enemies (Numbers 16:32).
Revelation 11:10 — Welcome to Alternative Christmas – the celebration of the death of two intolerant bigots! What could be more joyous than the termination of people who didn’t get along with the Antichrist’s political correctness?
Psalm 139:1 — Welcome to the greatest psalm on omniscience! God knows me (Psalm 139:1), my goings (Psalm 139:2), my ways (Psalm 139:3), and my words (Psalm 139:4). What is my response? Psalm 139:14 – I will praise Thee!
Psalm 139:17 — This verse forms part of the chorus to the song, “I Have Been Blessed.”
Psalm 139:23-24 — The song, “Search me, O God,” is based on these two verses.
Proverbs 30:16 — There is a harsh pain in those who want to have children but cannot, even from biblical times (Genesis 30:1).
Share how reading through the Bible has been a blessing to you! E-mail us at 2018bible@vcyamerica.org or call and leave a message at 414-885-5370.
Habakkuk 1:1 — J. Vernon McGee has an interesting take on Habakkuk:
I call him the doubting Thomas of the Old Testament because he had a question mark for a brain. His book is really unusual. It is not a prophecy in the strict sense of the term. It is somewhat like the Book of Jonah in that Habakkuk told of his own experience with God—his questions to God and God’s answers.
You’ll notice that Jonah reads easier than Habakkuk – Jonah is in prose (story-form), and Habakkuk is in poetry (thought rhyme, not sound rhyme).
Habakkuk 1:4 — Most Bibles don’t include the quote marks to indicate the dialogue going on in this book:
Habakkuk 1:1-4 – Habakkuk’s 1st Affirmative Constructive: “Judgment doth never go forth” (in contrast to Nahum’s recitation of judgment, Habakkuk says, “Why isn’t it happening yet?”).
Habakkuk 1:5-11 – The LORD’s reply: “I raise up the Chaldeans”
Habakkuk 1:12-2:1 – Habakkuk’s response: “The wicked devoureth the man that is more righteous than he?”
Habakkuk 2:2-20 – The LORD’s reply: “Because (Babylon) hast spoiled many nations, all the remnant of the people shall spoil thee”
Habakkuk 3 – Habakkuk’s prayer: “Revive thy work! … Yet I will rejoice in the LORD”
Habakkuk 2:4 — ”The just shall live by his faith” is quoted in Hebrews 10:38, Romans 1:17, and Galatians 3:11.
Revelation 9:3 — Some people have identified the locusts with helicopters, and Revelation 9 with the gulf war. While the breastplate of iron and the sound of wings could fit, the heads, faces, hair, teeth, and tails don’t seem to fit. We need to make sure we’re reading the text, and not reading current events into the text (Nahum’s traffic prophecy).
Revelation 9:16 — In addition to the locusts, a 200-million-man army is heading to slay a couple billion people (Revelation 9:18). Yet, in spite of this, we see the same situation as in the Old Testament.
Revelation 9:20 – “… yet repented not” of their 1st, 2nd, 6th, 7th, 8th Commandment sins.
Psalm 137:8 — Sounds a bit like Habakkuk – weeping about the suffering coming to Israel (Psalm 137:1), and looking forward to the Babylonians being destroyed.
Psalm 137:9 — Sounds a little harsh, even for the Old Testament. GotQuestions.org notes that it shows a) total destruction, b) it will be a fulfillment of Isaiah 13:16, c) it is an expression of intense emotion, and d) it is restrained – the Psalmist is not engaging in revenge himself (Romans 12:17) but leaving it to God.
Proverbs 30:10 — An ancient warning against “tattle-tales.” John Gill notes:
Doeg the Edomite accused David to Saul, and the Pharisees accused the disciples of Christ to their Master, (1 Samuel 22:9) (Matthew 15:2); the apostle’s advice is good, and agrees with Agur’s, (Romans 14:4).
It also seems to address the universal problem of pride. Many of us try for superiority by any means, yet God continually warns about trying to puff ourselves up.
Share how reading through the Bible has been a blessing to you! E-mail us at 2018bible@vcyamerica.org or call and leave a message at 414-885-5370.
1Therefore, if you have been raised up with Christ, keep seeking the things above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God. 2 Set your mind on the things above, not on the things that are on earth. 3 For you died and your life has been hidden with Christ in God. 4 When Christ, who is our life, is manifested, then you also will be manifested with Him in glory. 
Truth2Freedom's Blog 