http://ferndalechurches.org.uk/resources/ en john.dray@sightgroup.com Copyright 2011 2011-01-11T11:25:16+00:00 http://ferndalechurches.org.uk/resources/detail/a_prophet_for_the_twenty-first_century_zephaniah/ http://ferndalechurches.org.uk/resources/detail/a_prophet_for_the_twenty-first_century_zephaniah/#When:11:25:16Z A prince of Israel is inspired to speak for God. His words are abidingly relevant.A Prophet for the Twenty-First Century: Zephaniah 1:1-6 Imagine the scene. Huge crowds from all over Judah and beyond have gathered to Jerusalem, to the Temple, for one of the three great festivals of the nation’s year: the harvest festival. The congregation has gathered, the dignitaries are in place, the crowd hushed awaiting the beginning of the ceremonies… And then, a young, junior member of the royal family (a known friend of his distant cousin the king) rises to his feet and begins to speak. Doubtless, if it had been one of the crowd the stewards would have speedily moved forward for a quick eviction. But they stand transfixed, uncertain how to handle a ‘royal’, and while they do so he begins to speak… A sigh of relief, however, then goes round the assembly. He claims to be speaking for God, it might be out of order here but at least what he has to say is ‘orthodox’: God is going to bring the sinful world of men and women to an end (2,3). This is no new message. It pervades the length and breadth of the Bible. Yet, that fact can perhaps dull our senses to its truth. Zephaniah realised this and, therefore, makes his point as simply and solemnly as possible. Thus: i) He emphasises its certainty: ‘I will certainly sweep away everything and person’. ii) He emphasises both this and the solemnity of this fact by twice repeating the words, ‘solemnly declares the LORD’. iii) He makes it clear that not think they are an exempted class by using language drawn from the flood story but including the fish (compare Genesis 7:21-23). iv) He indicates the reason: man created from the dust to glorify God will return to it through failing to do so. Zephaniah’s message is as relevant today as it ever was. We are created to live for the glory of God. All who fail to do so are under his certain judgement. You and I are expected to take this with absolute seriousness! Yet, like Zephaniah’s original audience the reaction of most of us is probably the same: ‘thats the old Gospel, there are some sitting around me here who certainly need to hear that!‘. But at this point Zephaniah resumes his speech and he hasn’t gone far before his audience are ready to dismiss him as a religious crackpot! Put simply, he says, ‘What I mean is this, all this applies to each of you: God is going to judge this church!‘ One can well imagine the stunned, outrageous, unbelieving silence that followed. We need to recover some of the shock of those early hearers, for God’s word to them is the same word which comes to us today. Far too many of us consider ourselves to be safe and secure in our evangelical faith (just as did the ‘evangelical Jews’ of Zephaniah’s day, after all Josiah had swept the nation clean of false religious worship). We, too, need to be warned by the prophet’s message. Note, then, what Zephaniah teaches: God is going to judge those who claim to be his people (4-6). He singles out several groups of people: 1) The person with the unrenewed mind (4). He speaks against the ‘remnant of Baal’, those who purport to offer service to God but whose service is a veneer covering over attitudes which are still those of unregenerate men and women: ‘the pagan priests…even the priests of God’ (4b). Paul stresses the need for renewal of our minds (Romans 12:1,2). Only then so we develop a proper perspectice from which to conduct our lives in a godly way. Too often today, we claim to be believers but the way we conduct ourselves, especially with one another, shows that the spirit within comes from the pit. God, through Zephaniah, shows that he is as opposed to this as he is to full-blown paganism! We need to take heed lest we to are judged. 2) The person with two lives (5a). Here Zephaniah singles out the people who are one thing in public but quite another thing behind closed doors. Some people impress in public but are quite different if encountered out of the public eye. Some Christians are like this, seeking to please men like the Pharisees of Jesus’ day but failing to remember they were called to live before the all-seeing God all of the time. Is God as impressed with you in private as you think others must be by you in public? We need to heed Zephaniah’s warning. This is the attitude of a people who are, in reality, strangers to God. 3) The person who refuses to acknowledge the God’s lordship (5b). Zephaniah was a very effective preacher. He used some clever techniques to engage his hearers attention. He does that here. He speaks to those who go through the pretence of serving God but ‘who also swear by Malcam’. This is a play on words for the consonants also made up two other words: ‘their king’ and ‘Moloch’, a pagan deity (as in NIV). He seems to be saying this: here are people who offer worship to God while another ‘lord’ is still sovereign in their lives, namely self. Such is tantamount to idolatry. We need to take this on board. Knowing God as ‘Lord’ is not an optional extra for the special believer. It it is the standard of all true citizens of God’s kingdom. There can be but one LORD and it must be him. Too few of us show by our use of time, energy, gifts, money that this is true of us. Finally, Zephaniah addresses a fourth group: 4) The person who is a practical atheist (6). It may come as a surprise to some of us that there are more atheists about than those who claim to be so! It is just as possible to be a practising evangelical atheist as it was to be a practical Jewish atheist in Zephaniah’s time. Zephaniah singles out two different types: a) the person who once walked faithfully before God but now religion has become a matter of routine (6a). Religious observances are undertaken, religious meetings attended, but there is no longer any desire to seek his will in the whole of life. The early zeal has been replaced by a formal acknowledgement of God ...but no more. b) the person who has never really sought God (6b). Again, we note that he is talking to professing believers, to people like us. Too many professing believers remain at a level in which they never ever seem to take God seriously. They claim conversion, but they never really change and grow. Zephaniah speaks over the centuries to us. Are his words true for us, for me? We must stop there… though Zephaniah’s shocked audience had yet more that God was going to say to them through him. Put simply, however, this is a passage in which God adresses each one of us and says, ‘Are you ready to meet God?‘. These people had come to Jerusalem thinking that they knew the answer. Zephaniah had to disabuse them. What about you and me? Are our lives ones of total, consistent, walking before God in all things. Nothing less characterises a true believer. 1:7-2:3 In the previous verses Zephaniah, the royal prince, has stood up among the people of God, probably at the time when the people of God were gathered for the great autumnal celebration in Jerusalem, and, addressing a people who had experience the reforms of Josiah and thought their orthodoxy was unimpeachable, had threatened them with the judgement of God. His main charge was that the outward reformation of the church-state that had occurred under the blessing of God was, nevertheless, not sufficient for him. God was looking for renewal as well as reformation. The present section develops Zephaniah’s message more fully. Probably drawing upon the songs and prayers of the autumnal festival liturgy (the hymns, ‘The great day of the LORD is near - near and coming quickly’ and ‘Gather together, gather together’ as well as the prayers, ‘Be silent before the sovereign LORD’ and ‘Seek the LORD’) he turns the phrases which so easily tripped off the tongues of the worshippers into sentiments which demanded their wholehearted attention and response. He continues to challenge us today! He says, Tragically, some of us may be preparing for heaven when God is preparing us for hell (1:7). Zephaniah picks up the sentiments (and probably the phrases) of the autumnal festival with which the people of his time looked expectantly for the Day of the LORD: the great and final hope of Old Testament religion. However, there is a twist in the tale of his message: while the people think they are preparing for heaven God is preparing them for judgement! This frightening fact needed (and needs!) justification. Thus, the prophet continues by adding: The symptoms which mark us out for judgement not glory (1:8-13). He describes two different types of symptoms (8-11, 12f.): a) compromised religion (8-11). Three things are said about one group among his hearers (especially culpable faults among the leaders!). The three things are described rather as in a progressive diagnosis, working from the symptoms down to the root cause. Thus, we are told that compromised religion is: i) characterised by its adherents being indistinguishable from the unbelievers (8). Israel had been commanded to dress in a manner which markedly distinguished them from the surrounding nations. In this symbolic way they were to declare the deeper difference in attitudes, affections and the will which were expected of them. However, the people were adopting foreign dress and, in so doing, reflecting an underlying attitude to God which was distant from him. All too easily our words are belied by our conduct, for in that our standards and practices are no different from those of the unbeliever. ii) This is seen to be true when we live by worldly standards (9). This verse is almost impossible to translate and the NIV offers only one possibility among many! Perhaps, most likely, is that Zephaniah emphasises that the people are characterised by worldly standards. They think like unbelievers because, iii) their (and our) underlying motivation is of the world (10f.): here materialism is especially in view. Living, as unbelievers largely do, for self, they produce the fruit and lifestyle consistent with it. Whether in social (8), religious (9) or economic matters (10f.) they are indistinguishable from the world. Note, there is no criticism of their theological orthodoxy: their beliefs. Rather, their beliefs are not carried into practice having never penetrated to the heart and will. Spiritual death is written over them with a large hand. The NT makes the same emphasis (notably in James 2, Romans 12:1f.). Faith which is only skin deep and does not produce fruit is not true faith and renders its adherents still under the judgement of God for all their protestations and professions. Too readily evangelicalism seems to ape the Judahities of Zephaniah’s day. We also need to hear God’s prophetic denunciations of us! b) complacent religion (12f.). We may detect a slight difference in Zephaniah’s attack here (though compromise and complacency are frequent bedfellows). He speaks of a people ‘never overwhelmed with belief’, indolent and with little energy to go the way of the world but no energy at all to work for God. Again, Zephaniah is not speaking to flagrant sinners but pew fillers who delight to sing the songs of Zion and to join the worship of God’s people but who lack any willingness to sacrifice and live for GOD. Their religion is hedonistic. Again, far too frequently, evangelicalism is characterised by precisely such people. We need to be very watchful because: The judgement of the compromised and the complacent is inevitable (1:14-18). If Zephaniah lived today he might well have sought a visual aid to make this point. In kaleidoscopic fashion he flashes before his hearers as a film or video might before its watchers, a succession of vivid images which bespeak utter destruction and lostness. The language is highly evocative, not least when it pictures a city in which the fortifications have crumbled, the street corner defences have been utterly exposed (16) and a lone warrior (used though he is to the privations and devastation of war) openly weeps in abject and hopeless distress (14f.). A further picture is given: God will shake their lives off as dust from his feet because they are not his (17f.), worthless to him, mere garbage. God urgently calls us to renewal (2:1-3). What are we to do faced with the impending wrath of God against us? For us, as for Zephaniah’s hearers, four things are required: i) we must come to terms with our real situation (2:1f.). One of their hymns rejoiced in the coming judgement of God on sin ( the word for ‘gather’ here is usually used for gathering stubble for burning) and on the sinful nations ( the word ‘nation’ here was usually used of pagan nations). Here Zephaniah emphasises that they are the object of God’s wrath. The people must arouse themselves from their self-deception and face facts; unpalatable as they may seem! So too do we. Part of the problem lay with the people’s picture of God. They thought of God as the ‘not coming’ One [verse 2 can be translated ‘before “nothing” comes upon you]. To them, he was the distant, unconcerned God of deism. But, says Zephaniah, ‘not coming’ is coming! What about your mental picture of God? ii) we must be radically changed (2:3). The call to righteousness is a call to come to God, eschewing mere legalism and seeking to respond not merely by doing the law but seeking to live out a quality of life which from the deepest parts of man responds to the will of God in righteousness. Heart, mind and will captive to the will of God. iii) we are to live as those utterly dependent on the mercy of God. In the OT the ‘humble’ are those who, without any other hope, cast themselves entirely upon the mercy of God. We too are to live for him as those daily and utterly dependent on his mercy. We have no claim on him, only his mercy. iv) this is our only hope (2:3, end). The ‘perhaps’ is ambiguous, perhaps it hints and God’s pessimism as to whether any will take any notice. Will you re-enforce such pessimism or cleave to him in fresh and devoted and practical commitment? This is no easy message either to listen to or to preach. But it is vitally important. God is only interested in those who are ‘sold out’ for him!  2:4-3:8. A visit to Jerusalem for one of the great annual festivals would have been characterised by the visitor hearing one of the religious officials (one of the ‘school of prophets’) utter a series of messages from God against the surrounding pagan nations. In this section Zephaniah seems to take his stand among them (rather as a Hyde Park corner speaker). Much of what he (initially) said was scarcely new…He taught (and teaches): God will judge all of his enemies, In 2:4-15 he speaks to a representative group of nations from the west (4-7), the east (8-11), the south (12) and the north (13-15). He thus seeks to teach that in whatever quarter of the world, God will judge the ungodly. His judgement will be sudden and unexpected (4b), total (5b) and final (9b). None will be spared (a point emphasised in 13-15, a vivid picture of utter destruction: those animals usually found far from man will roost in the centre of the city). God has not changed. The time is coming when God will suddenly come to avenge the sinner. We have been warned. Yet Zephaniah’s comments raise a natural question: ‘Who are God’s enemies?‘. The prophet is not ignorant of the question. Moreover, he is aware how readily we seek to evade God’s word unless it is unambiguously addressed to us. So he says: God’s enemies are those of us who have never been broken before Him. He describes those who have never humbly bowed before Him (‘pride’, 10), since they have never come to an end of themselves (15) and have never found a true place for God and his people (5,8). This is true of every unbeliever today. The grossest sin is to refuse to bow before God. All other sins are merely symptoms of this one great failure. Sadly the life of those of us who profess Christianity is also, often, no different from those whom Zephaniah rebuked in the LORD’s name. Without a deep sense of sin and need we remain self-confident and display all the marks of a selfish spirit. For us, too, God has been marginalised along with his people. God’s judgement of his enemies will be blessing indeed upon those of us who are his children. Nothing less than a universal (11) paradise (7,9) is described. Zephaniah will return to this theme (3:9ff.) but, at present, he is more concerned to warn the unbeliever than encourage the faithful. The rest of our time together is occupied, especially, in looking at 3:1-8. All Zephaniah’s hearers would have no doubt agreed with all that he had so far said. They would have reassured themselves that they were members of Josiah’s ‘Reformed Church’. However, they (and we!) are in for a shock: a shock which breaks gradually but is all the more a shock for that! As he begins his anonymous last oracle it would be understndable that his hearers lulled themselves into thinking that he is about to reveal some other pagan nation, perhaps Egypt. However, very quickly it becomes apparent that: God is going to judge his own people. For it is against the ‘LORD’, the covenant God of his people, that this people have sinned (2) for they had refused God’s will for them (2a) had become defiled by sin (1) and manifested their fragmented relationship with God in their relationships with others (3ff). Whatever their claims to orthodoxy etc. their attitude to one another showed a failure to really live for him. How sadly true this is of so many Chrisian congregations. Yet, how can the professing people of God end up like this? Zephaniah replies by teaching us that: All too easily we can slip into a condition of enmity with God. Disobedience and its reflex, the failure to trust God, leads to a failure to live for him. The consequence (now as then) is that in community life God’s people become indistinguishable from the world. Moreover, leaders are not exempt and often set the tone for others (4,5). As a result, however orthodox their messages, their ministries are treacherous, profane, dangerous (3,4) for they lull themselves and God’s people into a false sense of security. Zephaniah is, thus, emphasising that perhaps the greatest enemy to the church and the individual believer is the enemy within! God is in the midst of his people (5). 5a reads rather like the first line of a hymn: perhaps one that was frequently sung at one of the great festivals. If so, Zephaniah takes words that had so often been used to offer false assurance, and turns them on their head. He is among his people all right: and ready to avenge their sins (8). The tragedy was, and is, that the people of God are so often blind to this obvious fact. Zephaniah bid his contemporaries look at the evidence (6) and not test his longsuffering to the limit (7) by sin exaggerated by the evidence all around them. The knowledge of God’s presence among us is a great reassurance, but it is not only that. It is also a powerful challenge to live authentic Christian lives for our lives are lived as before him. This passage is a solemn one which none of us dare evade. The certainty of coming judgement ought to arouse the unbelievers among us to repentance and faith in the Lord Jesus. But for those of us who profess to be believers, even those of us in leadership, the challenge is clear. We too are to live lives which demonstrate the reality of what we profess: lives which demonstrate our total self-abandonment and our absolute trust and obedience in him. God is satisfied with nothing less.  3:9-20. Thus far Zephaniah’s various addresses have been a sustained and fiery message of judgement. Only brief shafts of light have appeared among the storm-clouds and they have been quickly overclouded once again. What then are the faithful among his people to make of his messages? Is there no hope: even for them and those of us who feel the weight of his words and the accuracy of his diagnosis? In his final message, the prophet turns to address these people and their questions. What he has to say remains relevant today. For God does not change and the basis upon which he has operated in the past is no different from the way he acts today. God will graciously restore his people (9-10). The failure of the professing people of God is not his final word for that is a word of grace! God will yet have a worldwide people (10), radically renewed (9a), serving him truly (9b) in loving and mutual service (9c). However much his people fail God’s purpose does not change! We may hear these words and be ambivalent towards them. Its wonderful but…how? Our minds ‘boggle’ at the grandeur of the promise. Thus, Zephaniah continues: God will restore his church by restoring his people (11-13). What seems impossible to man will be achieved by God as he roots out the pride which is the root of all sin (11) and creates a people utterly dependent on him (12). Such will discover that such self-denying church issues in ‘heaven on earth’ (13). These two sections set before us, therefore, God’s (and our) proper ambitions for ourselves and church. However, lest we still find his testimony too outrageous, Zephaniah adds: God’s restoration is as certain as it will be glorious (14-17). These verses are largely in the past tense, a technique the prophets often used to emphasise the certainty of their words: as far as they were concerned the events could be described as something that was already past! Moreover, the picture offered is a beautiful one. As the people rejoice in the removal of their reproach so God delights in them with the satisfied silence of a captivated lover and the exuberant singing of the person who is so happy that he cannot remain silent (17). He will be as happy with them as they are with him! This is a picture of what church-life should be and will be: may it be so among us! However, wonderful though all this is, it is not the last word, since: God’s restoration of his people will be soon (18-20, esp. 19). Zephaniah describes the present deformed, dispossessed and marginalised (Oh! don’t we feel it) people (19) enjoying soon (‘at that time’ carries such a force, 19) a genuine and meaningful life (18) which is visible to the world (19). Moreover, lest we still have doubts he adds two final assurances: verse 20 repeats the substance of verse 19 and concludes with the solemn assertion, ‘says the LORD’. One cannot read these verses without feeling that they point to a reality that lies beyond the present world for its full realisation. This is so often true of the prophets predictions. Yet what was prophesied here did come to pass in the return from the Exile: and God’s ways are no different today. The application to us, therefore, is along the following lines: i) we are to be reassured that the present sorry state of the people of God (even our own church?) is not God’s final purpose. Revival, even a worldwide revival, is still God’s purpose. ii) we are to be challenged by the teaching here and this in two ways: a) that what is described here is true of a remnant only (13). Many among the professing people of God will miss the blessing. b) we are to be challenged in our own commitment and ambitions. Are we wholehearted for God and do we look for a church which is characterised by the features described here? If so we are to work and pray to that end. We are not to be idle. iii) we are to be encouraged, even in the darkness, to trust him and humbly wait for him: he will not fail us!   Commentary 2011-01-11T11:25:16+00:00 http://ferndalechurches.org.uk/resources/detail/the_letter_of_james/ http://ferndalechurches.org.uk/resources/detail/the_letter_of_james/#When:11:23:25Z A much neglected letter with an up-to-date message. THE EPISTLE OF JAMES AUTHORSHIP: There are three James’ mentioned in the NT: James the brother of Jesus, James the brother of John and James the son of Alphaeus. Since the second was martyred very early and the last fades from the scene very rapidly in the NT and in view of the fact that the author does not give an extended introduction as to who he is (assuming, therefore, that he is well-known) the first mentioned is generally regarded as the ‘James’ intended by the introduction. DATE: This being the case, it must have been written sometime during the late 30’s to 62 (when James was martyred). Some argue for a late date, assuming that James’ polemic is against a misinterpretation (by his readers) of Paul’s theology of salvation by faith. It can be argued, however, that James does not show a profound knowledge of Pauline theology and he could be opposing early errorists who were familiar only with Paul’s oral teaching. In fact, it is equally likely that the two wrote independently and the similarities and differences reflect a common background rather than actual interaction. This also would favour an early date. Perhaps, 40-45 AD is most likely: the very early years of the Christian church, perhaps the oldest NT witness. See further 1:1. It is tempting to suggest that the letter was written to the dispersed Jerusalem church after the persecution of Stephen, possibly in the early years of Paul’s ministry. PLACE: On the above assumptions, almost certainly Jerusalem. NATURE OF THE BOOK: Superficially it is a letter (1:1) but this seems to be a literary convention. Note, therefore: i) Form: A variety of suggestions are made as to the overall genre, e.g. wisdom, paraenesis (ethical instruction), diatribe etc.. None quite fits the bill. Could it be condensed, codified or re-worked (by James or others?) sermon notes? ii) Structure: This relates to the foregoing discussion. Some see it as atomised with many unrelated sections simply placed alongside one another. Yet both formal structural links are discernible (e.g. catchwords) and there is an inner coherence. Perhaps, therfore, we have a relatively ‘non-linear’ homily. iii) Content: A variety of opinions are expressed. Some see it as a Jewish tract which has been somewhat Christianised (this view is seldom advanced today); others see it as a Jewish-Christian work (Adamson, see 1:1) others a work intended for believers everywhere (see again, see 1:1). SUMMARY: James the brother of Jesus wrote the book about 40-45 AD. It is a distinctively Christian homily intended for the dispersed Jerusalem church. It interacts with the popular ethical instruction of the day (both Jewish and, in part, Hellenistic). EXPLANATION. The Devil is always quick to act against anything that might endanger his cause…. so he has been very alert to see that the Book of James is either misunderstood and/or neglected.  Two very effective techniques have been adopted: i)  To persuade people that it teaches a man or a woman is vindicated in the sight of God by their own deeds. ii)  In reaction, to cause suggestible Christians to believe that there is little in James that is truly evangelical; that it speaks little of Christ and the Spirit and much about the law; that it is almost sub-Christian. So efficient has been the Devil’s propaganda (Luther described it as a ‘right strawy epistle’, placed it in the third and last of his categories of the most useful books in the NT and, under his influence James was put last in the NT up to and including Tyndale’s English version of 1536.) that James’ book is much neglected today… and to our cost. 1:1 The epistle begins with a remarkable indication of the author’s humility. He is simply, ‘James, a slave’. The brother of Jesus and leader of the parent church in Jerusalem, describes himself very simply, in terms which he probably regards as true of every believer (rather than thinking of the way ‘the servant of the LORD’ was used of the greatest OT saints). He begins his message by indicating those to whom he is writing. It is to ‘the twelve tribes of the dispersion’. There has been considerable debate about this phrase: i)  Some see it as literal equalling Jews of diaspora i.e. outside of Judea.  The problem is that it is clearly addressed to Christians (1:1; 2:1 etc.) therefore some argue ii)  Others argue it is written to Jewish Christians i.e. the true Israel of God. iii)  The New Testament consistently applies the Old Testament names of Israel to all New Testament believers.  Therefore this letter is best seen, so it is often argued, as it has been traditionally been, as a Catholic Epistle. iv) Another attractive explanation is that it was written to the (exiled) Jerusalem church. iii is, perhaps, the most popular. However, ii and iv are very attractive and may be the most likely. ‘God and the Lord Jesus Christ’. James makes an amazing statement here as the brother of Jesus: Jesus is God (Lord = Yahweh in LXX (the Greek Old Testament) always quoted by James). James may not mention Jesus much in the letter (the nature of his message does not require a full-blown Christological statement). However, there can be no doubt about his high view of Jesus: a remarkable testimony from one who had grown up with Jesus! 1:2-4 Verses 2-4 turn to one of the most vital areas of experience, to all believers: testing. Note: i)  James emphasises the inevitability and the universality of testing.  This is seen by his reference to ‘when’ not ‘if’ and his address without exception, to ‘my brethren’ (as well as the universal scope of verse 1)  Thus old and young, mature and immature, week and strong, healthy and sick etc. are all alike addressed and told that they will certainly be tested. ii)  What is the nature of testing?  James says 3 important things in this connection: a)  He uses a word (‘testing’) which includes both inward and outward trials, the assaults of the devil and the ‘examinations’ of the Father.  (In this connection N.B. ‘temptation’ is not sin, acquiescence is sin.  Jesus was tempted 40 days cf Luke 4:1ff.  Temptation itself is not a ground for discouragement but of joy!) b) He uses another word (usually translated ‘of many kinds’) which emphasises the unending variety of trials. c) another word (‘you face’) emphasises the (frequently) sudden fierce onslaught of testing (which is, of course, its strength.) Thus both temptations to sin and severe trials are alike included here. Each are unendingly varied - including every place and condition into which believers enter.  Note, too, that this teaching denies the suggestion that ‘if only I were…. I would be a better Christian’. iii) James indicates the attitude Christians should have to such variegated trials: a) Such are to be viewed against the lessons of common experience where the rigours of training and experience are the basis for progress and success; where testing along is the proof of genuine quality. [Various interpretations are offered for, ‘testing…not lacking anything’ (3,4). Some argue that testing develops by perseverance, but NIV is probably best. It is also best to understand ‘its work’ as a reference to the fully mature man of faith.] b)  More importantly, Christians are to observe that that character undivided in obedience to God and unblemished in life (‘perfect and entire, wanting nothing’), the believers supreme ambition, is alone realised by testing. Consequently c)  testing is to be viewed and increasingly experienced as sheer joy (2) since God’s purpose and men’s spiritual ambitions are being realised. James does not suggest we are to enjoy them but reckon the experiences in the light of growth and eternity and thus derive great encouragement from them. 1:5-8 A question naturally rises in the mind: In the midst of such trials how can the Christian view things from God’s point of view and find the resources that are needed to reach maturity. Surely, supernatural assistance is required? James does not deny this and answers the question in this paragraph. The key to understanding what he is saying lies in the word ‘wisdom’ in verse 5.  “Wisdom” in the Bible is not a high IQ or great skill or cleverness or experience.  Rather beginning with the fear/reverence of God (cf Prov 1:7 and parallels) it is that spiritual gift (for Luke 11:13 seems to be alluded to here) which enables the believer to reckon this experience from God’s point of view and act accordingly (cf Rom 12:2). NB. Some observe that James does not mention the Holy Spirit in this letter. What is important to note, then, is that for James “wisdom” is the fruit of the work of the Spirit. It emphasises, too, a dimension of the Spirit’s work that we tend to neglect: where the Spirit is present a person will demonstrate it by a life of practical godliness based upon the illumined mind viewing circumstances and experiences from God’s point of view. James begins by telling believers that they certainly ought to be wise (5).  There are two reasons for this.  (i)  God’s character; for he: a) ‘gives generously’. He is a giving God (the participle emphasises habitual action or character).  But not only so; b)  He gives freely and to all, not according to merit but according to need.  c) and He does so without upbraiding. This word is slightly ambiguous. It could mean without hesitation.  His commitment to his people’s needs is total and unqualified. Or, it could mean without ‘criticism’ - that is without harping on about past failures etc. The latter is more likely. ii)  God’s purpose: in this matter of spiritual mindedness there is no question of God’s desire and intention. Therefore, if the believer is not increasingly spiritual minded it is a very serious matter.  James gives us three reasons for this:  (i)  It is a profoundly unhappy position to be in: ‘double-minded, unstable in all he does’ (8).  The worldly person has a degree of happiness, according to his lights, because he leaves God out of the picture altogether.  But James has in mind here the one who fears to take such a path (because of God’s judgement) but, at the same time cannot completely commit himself or herself to God’s way, perhaps, through fear of the cost. The consequence is an ill-directioned, inconsistent and profoundly unhappy existence. Not only so, but ii)  it gives a person a fruitless, valueless prayer life (7).  No prayer is answered to ameliorate or render happy the conditions.  Foundationless experience continues. Most seriously, however, iii)  Such a condition raises very serious questions about a person’s Christian profession (5 and 6) Observe what James teaches:  Spiritual mindedness is the result of a prayer prayed ‘in faith’.  NOT ‘with faith’ as an additive so that we ‘screw ourselves up’ to believe something or other - that is not Biblical faith, though there are requests we should never doubt receiving.  RATHER ‘in faith’ is a phrase which reflects the single-minded trust in God which is the mark of the true believer. Verses 2-8 are fairly general in their teaching. They may, however, reflect a specific situation in which believers are despairing (even of prayer) because of their present difficulties. 1:9-11 We live (as James did) in a society which is dominated by the idea that social status and the accumulation of wealth is a mark of personal worth.  For many of us this is rooted in our educational values.  Thus we are, either, dominated by such ambitions ourselves, or, conversely as “non achievers” we are frequently envious and jealous of the “have’s” (the root of all divisions in society) and are often bowed down by the sense of failure and insignificance which attends this. James knows all about both the pride and disillusionment which are the respective fruits of such attitudes, and, in these verses, he seeks to apply “Biblical wisdom” (the context) to the situation for both comfort and warning. Attitudes and practices to such ‘worldly’ standards of thinking must be governed by God’s revelation.  In particular, by three things. i)  The present dignity of all believers (compare Eph 1:3 and 1 Peter 2:9).  This gives us a status which means that we can sing: “On all the things of earth with pity I look down” ii)  The future glory of the children of the children of God.  compare Mt. 5:5; Rev. 22:5b etc. - both these lessons are contained in verse 9 “that he is exalted”. iii)  The ephemeral character of earthly status and wealth (10,11).  James’ language is vivid.  He recognises, a)  the exceeding attractiveness of status and wealth. The language of these verses is that drawn from the short Palestinian spring with its riot of colour and beauty:  the anenomies, lupins and cyclamen in gorgeous bloom. BUT, he notes also, b)  its transience. The language (‘scorching heat’) is either refers to the sirocco which withers up this glory overnight so that the dried plants are only good as fuel for fire (of hell?) or to the sudden scorching of the midday sun.  c)  The impossibility that such status and wealth can be carried into the next world (11b).  In the midst of his riches the wealthy man is irretrievably separated from them. All this is said not only as a warning to the rich, but (primarily) to encourage the poor not to become jealous of the wealth and privileges of the rich. (This supposes, perhaps, a people experiencing poverty as a result of their profession. It is probably best to assume the rich man is a non-believer.) Thus, James argues that three attitudes, or practices, should result: (i) The rich should glory alone in being humble at the foot of the cross (10a) even if (as is possibly implied) his wealth and status are lost in such a ‘humbling’. This seems the best interpretation of verse 10. (ii)  Equally, the poor rejoice in their possessions in Christ (9) and with such ‘heavenly mindedness’ find peace and joy on earth.  What an antidote to depression and despair and the sinful thoughts of the nobody’s in society!!! (iii)  Above all, (a subject James will return to) there should be no place in the family (of brothers: a favourite word of James’, 9) of God for worldly values of status etc.  Men divided in society are united in a true family and so it is to be with the people of God.  There is only one ground for boasting. 1:12-18 In the previous paragraphs,  James is addressing all believers (1:1) and seeking to set before them the challenge to and necessity of a life of practical godliness.  He has discussed the inevitability of testing (1:2-7), the necessity of spiritual mindedness and given an illustration (1:8-11).  He now returns to testing - but is less concerned here about the onset of such tests as the way in which testing is ‘handled’ by the believer when faced with the ‘moral’ challenge of suffering. He begins on a note of encouragement by outlining the enviability of victory in trial (12). The word ‘blessed’ means ‘Oh! how happy’; “How much to be envied is ....“ (cp. Ps. 1:1 etc.)  James describes a state of which the believer should be rightly jealous. He explains the reasons: (i)  Perseverance in trial is evidence of true love for God.  Mere words or sanctified emotions are nothing except they are ‘proved’ in the fire of afflictions. (ii)  By means of perseverance the believer is possessor of God’s guarantee - eternal life.  He (alone) will receive God’s honour in the life to come and (implied) experience true life in the present. Note that ‘crown’ amplifies all this. Crowns in the ancient world were not valuable but zealously sought after as symbols of an enviable status. (B)  Thus TRIAL leads to PERSEVERANCE leads to LIFE.  But this is not the only possible option in the face of testing.  TRIAL may lead to SIN and DEATH is the other option.  James necessarily has to go on, therefore, and say some very solemn things.  BUT he does so out of a pastoral concern and love (16, ‘my beloved brethren’).  He makes his point by emphasising the dangers inherent in trial.  He deals with this by a)  Outlining the ways in which dangers originate and then, b)  By setting out the consequences. Trial may lead to perseverance but, says James, it may alternatively lead to sin and death.  It may constitute the complete shipwreck of any faith that we may have.  Hence, James’ seriousness here. (i)  The danger may begin with some harmless desire (14). [‘evil’ is supplied in the NIV: it is not in the text and is an interpretation]. ‘Desire’ is not the negative word: it can include good and evil desires.  Thus says James, either in response to trial or as the onset of temptation harmless desires may be utterly harmful of spiritual well-being. (ii)  The problem lies not in the desire, however, so much as in its over attractiveness.  (‘drawn away’ = allured) and in the way in which the believer is enticed by it (‘enticed’ - verse 14) or caused to place a false emphasis upon it. (ii)  Not only so but when sin, or sinful emphasis has entered a person’s life it leads to habitual conduct.  (‘When it is finished’ verse 15). (iv)  Finally, spiritual death is the result.  A quenching of the spiritual life in the present life which leads (if unchecked) to the ultimate spiritual death in the life to come. Two relevant illustrations: i)  ‘rest’ is a proper desire, but it can become an excuse for a path of sin in which it becomes the excuse for disobedience to God’s word, leads to spiritual declension and the encroaching of spiritual death. Too many of us ‘sleep’ along this path of disobedience. ii)  ‘trial’ to often leads to ‘self pity’.  This leads not to fortitude but opens the door to apostacy.  We all face trials - the mark of our spirituality is the way we handle them.  Often self pity is found in those who have been tried but a little. But N.B. James utters another warning. (verse 13).  Too often people found in such situations make excuses to avoid personal responsibility.  Indeed this is a mark of spiritual declension itself.  A true believer will NEVER make excuses for excuse is the basis of inaction and not a stimulus to repentance and reformation.  Above all God cannot be blamed for he is (a) holy; (b) good (13b) and (c) unchangeably so (17, end where the contrast is between diurnal changes and the unchanging character of God. The details, much debated in the commentaries, need not detain us) and the sovereign father of his children (17, beginning). These are not idle or abstract truths.  On the contrary (assuming a logical connection between 17 and 18) James emphasises that they form the very resources that enable trial to be faced and overcome (18). Out of sheer and sovereign goodness (“of His own will”) the Father has bestowed the greatest good of all (Spiritual birth ‘begat us’: the reference to creation does not fit in well here: see the commentators) in order that (implied, by His power) His children might live lives of devotion to Him and in separation from sinful paths.  God could not have done more than He has done for us to keep us from sinful paths. One commentator suggests that the background to this section may be persecution of Jews and the temptation for Christian Jews to join the zealot movement rather than accept the situation as allowed by God. It could, equally, apply to those Christians who were facing dispersion and hardship (even persecution) after the martyrdom of Stephen. They needed pastoral answers to their questions as to why the ‘righteous’ suffer. They needed to recognise that believers cannot escape evil days, but they can mature in their midst. 1:19-27 James’ great concern in this Epistle is to set out the marks of Christian maturity.  He has emphasised (verse 18) that this is, indeed, an obligation arising out of the very nature and intent of the new birth. The question naturally arises:  How may such maturity be cultivated?  This section is intended to provide a comprehensive answer. a) He begins by stating that maturity will be achieved by listening to God’s word (19a) and by avoiding that garrulity (19b) and sinful conduct (19c) which drowns God’s “still small voice”. Most doubt this connection. However, it makes good sense and cannot be excluded from James’ mind: listening to God is the supreme form of listening! See also verse 21. The word of God has brought to life (18) “for it is the living word” - and it is fully able to accomplish the “righteous life that God desires” (20) So the believer must listen… but not just listen!  For maturity comes: (b) By receiving God’s word (21) James uses an illustration from gardening.  The “implanted seed” needs cultivation and the “rank growth” of sin which is ever ready to overwhelm needs careful attention and action. (21a) ..... And it is the word itself ‘accepted’ which is able to accomplish this (21b). [How sadly deficient is our view of Scripture if we think it merely teaches necessary truth!  In fact it is the dynamite of God which is able to affect our maturity as believers!!] Thus: by weeding out “rampant growth” and by glad submissive obedience the word is received and empowers. But again, this is not the complete story for full maturity is only attained by: (c)  Doing God’s word (22-27).  The commentators discuss endlessly the detail of James’ pictures here. However, the point is clear enough! The word that is listened to and received must be taken into life and acted upon (22-24) otherwise the ‘believer’ is involved in an inexcusable self-deception:  inexcusable because he has listened (23) self-deceiving (24) because he presumes such listening is sufficient, though the very word listened to denies it!  - and yet, in reality, maturity is the work of a lifetime (25) since diligence (‘look intently’) and perseverance (‘continues to do this’) alone affect maturity. - and yet (again) bondage to the Word will lead to true freedom (25) and an enviable life (25 end, cp. 12).  The path to freedom is not through lack of restraint but in bondage to the word. d)  Finally, James notes that there are 3 marks of maturity, each of great significance (26-27) viz. (i)  a reined tongue is the necessary effect of the implantation of the ‘Word of truth’; (ii)  Care for the helpless as the helpless recipients of grace (NB not so much charity but friendship is emphasised); (iii)  Purity of life as the firstfruits to God (cf. 18) In seeking to discover the specific context for James’ words One commentator suggests that within the community to whom James was writing there were both religious formalists (who can still exist, even in a persecuted church) and (possibly as a consequence) some serious moral problems (see verse 21). In addition, he suggests that 19f. reflect a view in which some sought to bring about God’s kingdom on earth by force. 2:1-7 The subject of verses 1-13 is the utter horror of prejudice when found among believers. Most conclude the context envisaged is congregational meetings of the church. Martin thinks it more likely applies to a situation in which the congregation has come together to hear a judicial case. However, clearly prejudice is in view. The context of the discussion amplifies this.  In 1:18 James spoke of the believers conversion from God’s point of view.  In particular he emphasised that God accomplishes a man or woman’s salvation “that we should be the first fruits of his creatures” i.e. that as His ‘new creation’ we might manifest the life of new creatures.  Thus in 1:19-27 the way to such holiness was set out as by the believer’s of a)  Listening, b) Hearing, and c) Doing God’s word - an obedience that leads to true freedom (25).  The chapter concluded (26f) by describing 3 areas of practical godliness which arise from such glad obedience. Here the second of these examples is picked up and emphasised. The reason that such an apparently insignificant matter is picked up becomes clear in the light of James’ argument. James’ response to prejudice is threefold (1-4, 5-6a, 6b-7). i) The sinful horror of prejudice among believers is established by the fact that Jesus is the Lord of glory (1-4). James does not often mention Jesus; but when he does it is with the highest Christology (see 1:1, _o__ was a Jewish periphrasis for the divine name) and with considerable effect, as here (see below). The example of 2f. is concluded by the (to us?) unexpected statement of ‘Have you not become judges with evil thoughts’.  This apparently harsh judgment is explicable, however, in the light of verse 1. The emphasis (see above) lies upon Jesus as ‘the Lord of glory’ a glory which is His not simply by virtue of His essential deity but is so through His humiliation and loneliness. (Phil 2:8-10): is His because of His identication with us in our lowly condition (Heb 2:9). This, says James, sets us the standard of true status and honour. Thus the harshness of James’ judgment is explicable and justified and His assertion that prejudice and faith are mutually exclusive of one another is seen in its full light.  Moreover we speedily see how an apparent minor sin is treated with such severity since to indulge in prejudice is to have totally failed to grasp the essential character of the Gospel. ii)  But James is not finished in making his point!  The horror of prejudice is also seen in the light of the will of God. (5-6a). - God’s people were chosen of Him because they were neglected, abased and worthless; -their present dignity is one grounded in faith and love; -their future glory rests in - the promise of God to such persons; -all this, again, runs flat contradictory to prejudiced conduct (6a). iii) Finally, prejudice is absurd because of our new status (6b-7).  While James observes that all too often it is the powerful who make life hard for believers his essential point is found in verse 7 - in conducting themselves according to worldly standards they dishonour the status of believers. Our status rests in the worthy name ‘Jesus’.  To conduct oneself after worldly standards is to indulge in blasphemy. 2:8-13 In the wider context James has been declaring the absolute necessity of those who profess Christ to show by their conduct the reality of their claim to be ‘new creatures’ in Christ (1:18). More immediately, he has singled out partiality (2:1-7) and shown how such is a fundamental denial of the experience of salvation since the Gospel is God’s favour to the undeserving. Here the same subject is under review (2:9) but, James seems to be answering an implied objection (? antinomian: this would link with his point in 14ff.) and, in so doing, deals with the larger subject of the Christians relationship to the Old Testament Law. (It may be that the context for these words is that detailed in 1-7 and that legal pressures on the poor, rather than physical oppression, is in view. Such might have been based on a view which relegated to the ‘margin’ certain OT laws. Martin suggests that in the context of the political situation in C1 Palestine the reference to murder may not be figurative!) Whatever the precise situation, i) James teaches that all Christian believers are to obey the whole Law.  In verse 8 James seems to refer to the OT law.  Moreover, he seems to regard the whole law in this sense (citing both the ten words and the holiness code in this section). It is a unity (cf. Matt. 5:18f. ; 23:23; Gal 5:3 cf. 13f).  Probably, the reference in Lev. 19:18 is to be seen in the light of Jesus’ use of it as the summary of the law fulfilled in His person. However, James assumes, what the Old Testament itself teaches, that the Law is not a standard for works-righteousness, but a pattern of life for the already redeemed.  This he emphasises by calling it the ‘royal law’ (8) i.e. as both the ethical standard of the Kingdom and as that conduct characteristic of its citizens: being binding upon them. ii)  The Law is fulfilled in love (8f).  Jesus taught the same with reference to both the Godward and manward commands (Matt. 22:34ff) here James deals with the latter.  N.B. He is not saying love may be set over against the Law but that the motive for obedience is love.  Believers are not slaves of the Law but delighted co-workers.  A mark of maturity is the extent to which this is true. iii)  The Law, received by faith empowers for loving obedience (12).  Aside from loving trust the Law provokes enmity, but received as the wish of a loving Father it is a catalyst to conformity, a) giving liberty to obey, and b) liberty in obedience. Faith mixed with law is, thus, spiritual dynamite!! iv)  Such obedience to the Law is absolutely necessary to spiritual well-being (13).  David sometimes failed miserably but such failures were followed by repentance and were not characteristic of him.  He loved the Law and thus won God’s approval and mercy.  The same point is made by James:  ‘Love covers a multitude of sins’.  In judgment the believer shall receive mercy if he/she has showed that disposition to the Law which is characteristic of the new creation. 2:14-26 James has stated that the evidence of a person being a ‘new creation’ in Christ (1:18) is self discipline, loving concern for others and personal purity (1:26f).  He has highlighted the second of these in 2:1-13 and emphasised the need to do the works of the law. But James now faces in 2:14-26 an objection to his teaching:  is not faith the essential mark that a person is in Christ? The specific example which is given reads rather like an actual case known to James. Note: i)  James distinguishes between faith and ‘such faith’ (NIV - see verse 14, but cp. AV whose translation has encouraged an over-exaggerated contrast between James and Paul). In other words James agrees with the objection BUT, he argues, the objection is failing to distinguish between true and specious faith.  Thus in the remainder of the passage he sets out the tests of true faith. ii)  James begins by describing the character of false faith (14-20); a)  He emphasises that ‘false faith’ is dead (17) or valueless (20- so the best manuscripts).  Indeed, he would doubtless argue that it is less than that: for it leads to self-deception and false assurance and provides the people of God with one of its most intractable pastoral problems. b)  Such ‘faith’ manifests itself in e.g.; 1) bare assent (18-20), i.e. in the belief that merely to acknowledge the truth of Christian doctrine is sufficient for salvation.  This disastrous misconception is very popular in evangelical circles but the lie to it is given in verse 19:  Such faith is shared with those demons who are hostile in their opposition to God:  They know the facts, they even make some response: they tremble before them (!) but they remain unsaved!  To share the faith of demons is not to know salvation.  Mere assent does not bring a saving knowledge of God. 2) ‘selfish faith’ is not enough (14-17) i.e. that faith which rejoices in the supposed personal benefits of salvation but manifests no love for other Christians. Prayer and best wishes in the absence of remedial action which is possible is not true saving faith. It is basically selfish: faith because of personal benefit. 3)  Linked with this (14-17) is ‘faith of convenience’.  The ‘personal’ and ‘spiritual’ are divorced from the ‘social’ and ‘material’ so that faith becomes wholly undemanding, ‘Sunday’ faith. Evangelical churches are full of people characterised by such useless, self-deluding faith. iii)  The marks of true faith (21-26) are set out in two instructive examples, Abraham (21-24) and Rahab (25f). Note 1)  From the example of Abraham that faith is characterised by: a)  personal trust; b)  wholehearted obedience; c)  costliness; d)  testing; e)  perseverence and f)  total commitment, holding nothing back. Moreover, it has a twofold blessing attending it: i.e. a) justification (24); b) reconciliation (23).  True faith really brings the fruits of salvation - but only ‘true’ faith. 2)  is seen (as Rahab’s example shows) in seeking to meet the needs of others (and there are always many needs:  the shut-ins, nursing mothers, depressed, sick, etc.).  N.B. Rahab met the in-hand needs: they are always the most costly for the believer can’t do them by ‘proxy’! 3)  such faith is no optional extra.  That ought to be obvious already (!) but consider the deliberate choice of James’ examples: male/female: Jew/gentile; rich/poor; saint/sinner; great/insignificant. 3:1-12 James’ letter asks and answers some ever relevant questions e.g. i)  What is a Christian?  Our answer is usually ‘One who believes the Gospel of the Lord Jesus’.  Not so James.  True faith, he says, is not mere belief but the fruit of the new birth manifested in action (2:14-26). ii)  Another question he raises is, ‘What, then, are the true marks of a mature faith?‘  James’ astonishing response is found in 1:26f., viz. a controlled tongue, lack of partiality and personal purity. In 2:1-13 James has established that partiality is to deny the impartial Lord whose disciples we are called to be:  hence its seriousness. Similarly in 3:1-12 the controlled tongue is discussed in such a way as to establish that in this area also (so often regarded as a ‘peripheral’ issue with respect to true faith) a matter of vital importance to the existence of true faith is being discussed.  In this James agrees with Paul. It is not unlikely that the original situation which James addressed was one in which there was serious abuse in the teaching offices of the church and that it is this issue which lies behind this entire section. Could the ‘body’ here be the congregation? James begins this section by teaching that a controlled tongue is the key to holy living (1-4).  In James’ day there was an over emphasis on gifts of speech. In the Greek world orators were regarded like film or pop-stars today. In Judaism the rabbi was greatly revered. It was not surprising that such attitudes be carried over into the church and for believers to be keen to excel, if possible, in this realm of church life. James does not deny the importance of a teaching ministry. Indeed he emphasises the responsibility to the point of discouraging those who would seek such a ministry inadvisedly (1b). There may be a double thought here: the teacher himself/herself will be judged by the higher standard of their own teaching (a teacher can scarcely plead ignorance of God’s will!) but also by the results of such teaching: the lapses of others may be the result of inadequate or faulty teaching. The remainder of this section is seen by some to be primarily applicable to the teacher (indeed a similar claim can be made for verses 13-17 and see above). We should not lose sight of this powerful application. However, James’ words are widely applicable to all of God’s people. Thus, since teaching is indeed a responsible ministry, James proceeds to remind his readers that the disciplined tongue is vitally important. Thus gossip, tale-bearing, slander, bad language etc. (but above all, false teaching) are never to characterise the people of God (especially the leaders). This is important, he argues, because: a controlled tongue is both the fruit of (but more importantly here) the means to Christian maturity (2) and a healthy church. There is a simple reason for this:  a controlled tongue (and sound instruction) leads to a controlled life (3) (the reason is amplified in 5ff.). Some commentators seek to allegorise the illustrations given here. Thus, e.g. it is claimed that a controlled tongue effects victory in the storms and buffetings of life (4). It is probably best to avoid this and simply see 3,4 as two straightforward (though see the commentators!) illustrations of the main point. James amplifies his teaching in the following verses (5-8). The details are somewhat obscure (the commentaries discuss the problems). However, James’ central thrust is clear enough! He teaches that the tongue is: a)  like a fifth columnist in our bodies - ‘a world of iniquity’ i.e. the sinful world’s standing representative in our members (6: this seems the best explanation for this unusual phrase) - an unruly evil, full of deadly poison (8): a dangerous counter revolutionary. This is a typically Jewish way of thinking: the agent is identified with the cause. b)  it is the fountain and source of all corruption ‘it defiles the whole body’ (6b) especially in its self deliberation. c)  it continually infects and arouses to sin ‘sets on fire….‘ (6). d) in a word it is the agent of hell in our bodies (6c) and e)  by nature it is untameable (7f.). Hence its wields enormous power (5) and James emphasises the absurdity of the nursery ditty ‘sticks and stones….‘ especially in our media manipulated and manipulating world! It is a salutary warning, too, if these words apply primarily (or even incidentally) to false teaching! The horror of all this is amplified in the concluding verses of the section (9-12). Alongside of this James appears to teach that the tongue is the supreme measure, the acid test, of the heart, for part of our ‘new creation’ is that (he hints) the tongue is tameable. James points to the inconsistency (10), improbability (11) and impossibility (12) of an uncontrolled tongue in the believer. Inconsistency (a theme prominent in James) is the mark of a spurious faith. In private devotions and church services the proper liturgical language may be used (‘praise’, NIV, is a weak translation. However, the same tongue not infrequently indulges in informal cursing (see again 5:12 for fuller discussion of James’ view of oaths). We should not press the illustration too far, for it is an illustration of the inconsistency in speech which mars so much of Christian conduct. The other two illustrations are self-explanatory and the last (particularly) emphasises that in the matter of nature like reproduces like. The point is clear: the new nature will produce the fruit of the new nature not the crop of the old. Once again, we see the penetrating analysis of James into areas of conduct which we so easily dismiss as peripheral to our maturing discipleship. For James the issue is vital. The tongue, above all, is a touchstone of the believer’s claim to a new nature. It is not unlikely that the examples in 10f. are drawn from actual situations which James has in his mind as he writes. 3:13-18 This paragraph fits appropriately into its context. James has been concerned to urge professing Christians (especially leaders?) to a life of faith.  He has argued that in this matter they must not show partiality (2:1-12) and must have a disciplined tongue (3:1-12). It is possible that teachers are still primarily in mind (see above), though a more general reference is possibly preferable. It is not unlikely that the factionalism pictured here is, again, a concrete example. Could it be that James has in view a politically motivated Zealot-supporting group? In such a situation James may well be offering the biblical answer to how the rule of God is to be established. It is not inconceivable that some of James’ hearers would be getting impatient - anxious that he should specify a list of things that they should do as believers (leaders?).  These verses constitute his reply. However, significantly, instead of giving a list of verbs (which would specify acts) he provides a catalogue of adjectives (indicating the sort of people believers should be (13)). It is not legalism that James is teaching.  Rather the right actions will flow from a right heart.  In different language Paul teaches the same in Gal 5:22f.. Wisdom (see above) is practical godliness. The person who is truly wise and discerning (the two words here are virtual synonyms) will show it in action, but above all, in the way those actions are performed. This goes beyond James’ point in chapter 2. Here he demands works as a mark of true faith but adds that true works are themselves characterised by a complete absence of selfishness. So, above all James looks for the attractive life which is the fruit of humility/meekness. The remainder of the passage is intended to emphasise this first by: 1)  Asserting the necessity of meekness (14).  Here is no optional extra of the christian life - for in its absence the truth is denied (14b): this seems the best explanation of the ambiguous last phrase. Rather, the absence of meekness, reveals a person to be other than he/she claims: a)  contradicting the message of the Gospel: since it is set forth to produce a new life and, b)  contradicting the truth as definitely displayed in the Lord Jesus. James then adds two short paragraphs (15f; 17f) intended to show both negatively and positively the marks of meekness, thus: 2) The nature, character and results of a life opposed to true meekness (15f). Conduct opposed to true meekness is characterised by pride and selfishness.  in sum, by self on the throne.  Thus it speaks much of rights but little of duties.  Sensitive to slights it is blind to its own offences (16a). Its effects are destructive (16b) even gangrenous.  And such fruit speaks eloquently of the true nature of the plant upon which it has grown! : it is man-made, even sub-human but, above all, from the pit (15): the lifestyle of hell. (For the detailed meanings of the words in verse 15, see the discussion in the commentaries). 3)  By contrast, meekness is set forth (17f.). It is the breath of heaven, in response to prayer (1:5). This is so because it is a transcript of the divine character (‘pure’) which is manifested in an attitude which accounts others as more important than self.  Open to reason and submissive its great ambition is peace and harmony, and as such produces the fruits which legislation could not encompass.  Its end: the fruit of righteousness (a life utterly pleasing to God). 4:1-6 Christians are called to be holy, imitators of God (1 Peter 1:16).  James made the same point in 1:27c in giving his third essential mark of a believer, ‘keep… from being polluted by the world’.  A Christian is to have a distinctive lifestyle modelled on the nature of God. But how is such teaching to be ‘cashed’?  Traditionally by the answer we give to the question, ‘What must I do to be holy?‘.  Without denying that there are certain things which are inimical to a true Christian profession, James emphasises that there is another question which has a higher priority:  ‘What sort of person should I be to be holy?‘ This the the answer he tackles here. In so doing, he amplifes the teaching which is contained in the previous section. Martin suggests that the situation envisaged is one of church members getting embroiled in the various ‘parties’ within Palestine prior to the fall of Jerusalem. Such has been fostered, he suggests, by the involvement of certain leaders in social and political movements. This is not unlikely (and see his detailed defence of this view). In the context of the letter (and, possibly, the situation envisaged by Martin) James begins by emphasising that ‘worldliness’ is an attitude of the heart.  In particular all worldliness springs from personal selfishness (1-3). ‘I want’ characterises the worldly person and is seen as everything is subordinated to personal ambition and an exaggerated sense of individual rights.  Selfishness is always destructive, not edifying, as James’ example (so pertinent, as he appeals to church life) shows. Selfishness (demonstrated even in the place of prayer, (3)) leads to prolonged animosity and sudden quarrels (1a) and this is the fruit of hearts at battle stations, red alert all the time (1b). This is always destructive of peace and harmony (2f.)..  It renders personal spiritual growth in fellowship impossible.  As such, it is an effective demolition job on God’s people and work.  James emphasises this in verse 3. Such conduct is impoverishing (3) rendering the prayer life totally ineffective.  Without peace in fellowship there is no peace with God and, therefore, no access to Him as Father.  Either believers must cleanse their hearts or stop their futile prayers. In fact, the believer ought to be seeking God for those things which are a priority with Him: then prayers will be answered. More serious still is the fact that lack of peaceableness among believers shatters the law of God (4ff.). Lack of peaceableness is to break the sixth commandment and, since God is the other party, breaks the whole of the first table of the Law! It speaks of people who are estranged (worse, severed) from the people of God. This is traced out by James. Such conduct is tantamount to; i)  a broken marriage contract (4a):  adultery. The word ‘adulteresses’ (4) has a long OT history. Characteristically, it was the word used of Israel when they turned from Yahweh to serve other gods. Here its use (especially the plural) exposes a similar situation in the life of every individual peace-breaker. ii) hostility to the marriage partner (4b) which leads to iii) a broken heart (5). This verse is a notorious crux. There is no obvious reference in the OT for this saying: perhaps the best explanation being that James here summaries an OT theme rather than cites a specific text. But the greater difficulty is its meaning! a) Does ‘envy’ or ‘jealously’ refer to God or man. The NIV assumes the latter. It could, however, the former. Thus, ‘God is jealous over…‘. The spirit could also refer to either man or God. I have taken it to refer to the spirit of man placed in man by God: the part of man created to look toward God and serve and worship Him. The thought then is that God is jealous when that spirit turns towards the world. This said, it appears clearly that to commit adultery, not simply to a human spouse but to God Himself, cannot be exceeded as a breach of the sixth commandment. As such the first table of the Law is also voided and thus the Gospel is denied for (6) the Spirit is given to believers to produce precisely the opposite. 4: 6-10 The last paragraph emphasises the sort of people believers are to be. This is undertaken negatively. James describes the disposition which is worldly.  It has four elements but all are, essentially, aspects of selfishness, viz. a)  an exaggerated sense of ones own importance (1), b)  and exaggerated sense of the importance of ‘things’ (2), c)  a low view of others - who are regarded as dispensable, and there to exploit for personal advantage (2) and, finally, d)  a low view of the character of God (4). In 4:6 - 5:6 James emphasises that to evidence true faith in godliness (and, therefore, be acceptable to God) each of these four attitudes must be dealt with. Thus (to run ahead a little!): i)  6-10:  James indicates how believers should walk before God. ii)  The in 11-12 he shows how they should live in fellowship with their fellow believers. iii)  In 13-17 he tacles the practical matter of how to develop a proper self-estimate. iv)  Finally. In 5:1-6 he encourages a proper perspective as to how to view ‘things’. To begin with James teaches several things which should characterise a believer’s attitude to God.  Thus: i)  True religion is manifested in an active allegiance to God.  ‘Submit to God….resist the Devil’ (7).  Success in the Christian life is not accomplished by passive yielding but, as ‘soldiers of the cross’. This involves two elements: a) the positive rejection of the Devil’s advances (looking out the enemy and conquering him in the name of Jesus: ‘he will flee’) and b)  a deliberately cultivated fellowship with God (8a).  It is not a sense of fellowship with God which leads to godliness (as we tend to think) but that such fellowship is cultivated by a disciplined use of the means of grace.  ‘Come’ involves activity.  The believer will neither know God or holiness if he/she neglects Bible study, private and public worship, the Lord’s table etc.  Too often, Christians want God to draw near to them before they will live in conformity to his will.  The reverse is God’s way. ii) Practically, this is outworked as believers actively sanctify themselves in thought and deed (8b).  ‘Sinners’ emphasises acts of sin; ‘purify your hearts’ emphasises inner attitude.  The latter is emphasised in Phil 4:8f., the former in active conformity to the will of God as revealed in his will. iii)  True religion is shown, in sum, by a life of repentance (9f.): a daily turning from sin to Christ is evidenced in all these active steps taken. In all these things the emphasis lies on what the believer must do to be godly - and such demands might lead to despair.  So James emphasises that as the Christian strives to accomplish these ends ‘He gives more grace’ (6)... and ‘will lift you up’ (10).  These two statements which are a parenthesis to the passage make the same point as Phil 2:13f.  As the believer strives, God is active both to produce that striving and to accomplish victory. 4:11,12 With these verses James moves on to discuss how holiness is to be achieved in the realm of inter-personal relationships (see analysis above). It is possible, to follow Martin’s thesis, that the Sadduceean party is in view. James begins here by condemning the appalling fact of criticism among the people of God (‘slander’ verse 11a). But, NB. he speaks against all criticism not only unjustified criticism.  It may well be true what you say, says James, but it is no less evil or sinful to criticise.  Christians should not criticise one another (11b). Four reasons (and very weighty ones) are advanced: 1) James gives a reminder as to who the person criticised is.  2 words, one deliberately repeated, are important here: i) brother (11), twice, and ii) neighbour (12) The former is a reminder of Genesis 4:9 and of the moral obligation of God’s people to live in harmony (Psalm 133:1); it points to the example of Jesus (Heb. 2:10ff.) and the effects of the Gospel (Eph. 2:13f.). The latter word points out the duty of believers to seek the common good (cp. Lk 10:25-37). Criticism points the finger but does nothing to help, not going to the one whose needs are recognised and seeking to meet those needs. 2)  James puts in a reminder about the law of God (11b cf. 2:8).  The essence of the law is love for fellow believers.  Thus the whole law of God is shattered to smithereens when believers criticise one another. By selfish criticism a person indicates that he or she consider that they may evaluate the law for itself, may reckon certain values (‘free speech’) to be more important and may countermand the authority of God. 3) linked with this is the fact that the law is a transcript of the Divine character (12a, implicit).  He has required of His people nothing that He is not Himself or is not ready to do.  His own example (in incarnation) is a demonstration of how he regarded us as brothers and neighbours.  He did not speak evilly but undertook our salvation. Thus, believers run the gauntlet of the judgment seat of Christ (Romans 14:10) and are neglecting to make our calling and election sure (2 Peter 1:10). 4)  Finally, James reminds his readers of who they are (12b).  They are all sinners saved by grace.  Who then are they to stand high and mighty and point the finger at others? 4:13-17 In this paragraph James offers practical advice as to how Christians can cultivate a true estimate of themselves (see analysis, above). The worst case of sin is to know the right and not to do it (17).  It is possible to sin in ignorance but the greater sin is that undertaken wilfully.  Sin is thus not determined by its grossness externally but its wilfulness.  We need to grasp this Biblical emphasis. James describes a serious manifestation of such a sin among the people of God (13-16).  Once again James shocks by his unexpected teaching.  He picks an example which all are easily inclined to and seldom regard as very important:  self presumption.  He explains what he means:  Often believers undertake and plan their lives but leave God entirely out of account (13).  They do this by; i)  presuming that they are masters of their own lives: “we will go”. ii) that they have right to such self mastery: “we will….“. iii) They presume that they have the ability of themselves to undertake all in their lives. At its worst this is seen in the disposition:  ‘My life is my own….  I have a right to do what I want ..... and I am going to do it’. James’ words make it clear that there is no greater sin than the attitude which excludes God from all of life except worship.  The reason:  such an attitude is a flat denial of biblical revelation.  This is so since: (i) there is none who controls the future but God alone (14a): (ii) man is subject to abject frailty.  He can accomplish nothing but what God undertakes in and through him (14b). Thus: (iii)  all are utterly dependent upon God for everything (15). To live as though this were not so is, without qualification, evil (16) since it is to do the works of the Devil who is, above all, the evil one. Note: i) James does not exclude planning and forethought (on the contrary verse 15 presupposes this); ii) He does not mean we should venture nothing because of our frailty; iii)  He does not mean that we use ‘If God wills’ as a fetish.  It is how we live not what we say that is important. iv)  James does mean that every action, step and plan in life is conducted in total dependence upon God and in humble submission to Him as the LORD OF LIFE.  We should go through life conscious of His provision and thankful for it. 5:1-6 James’ theme in 4:1-5:6 is “conduct that pleases God”. In 5:1-6, by a negative example, he teaches governments, employers but, above all, ordinary Christians how they should view things (NB. Again James is not speaking of the standards of acceptance with God, he is setting out the sort of conduct produced by experienced salvation.) In particular he teaches that Christians should be free from all covetousness. As in the previous section which spoke of merchant traders, James is probably not addressing the rich in the church. Rather as with the prophets on occasions (especially Amos 1:3ff.) a group, unlikely to hear the words,  is addressed in order that the hearers might shun any possibility of identifying with the attitudes characteristic of such groups as a whole (though not necessarily every individual within the group). Martin graphically depicts (p174f.) the situation in C1 Palestine which seems to lie behind James’ words. Thus, in language which is drawn from the vocabulary and style of the OT prophets, James begins by teaching that a Christian must be entirely free of a hoarding spirit. (1-3)  There are four steps to James’ argument:  1)  He describes a scene in which things are hoarded for no good reason. NB. James is not simply speaking against the rich.  He uses the example of rich people who are most liable to this fault.  But all are in daily danger of it.  2)  He emphasises the pointlessness of such an attitude:  material things decay. 3)  More seriously, such conduct must be seen in the light of eternity.  Our resources are not ours by right, they are entrusted to us as stewards by God.  On the basis of our stewardship God will judge us.  Hence to hoard up wealth is to ‘have heaped treasure together for the last days’ (see the commentaries for the variuos nuances of meaning in this phrase) when Jesus will return as judge. 4)  While there is a treasure to hoard up unto the last days (a treasure of faith and righteousness) this treasure only leads to judgment and the torment of hell (the language of verse 3 seems to be that of eschatological judgment). The next stage in the argument is James’ assertion that covetousness is robbery (4). Resources are entrusted to mankind for the use of others and misappropriated is robbery, and fraud and (4b) the God of all resources (the Lord of Sabaoth, the hosts of Israel and the commander of the heavenly bodies: here the background is probably, especially, Exodus 2:23, emphasising His compassionate involvement with the oppressed) does not turn a blind eye to such robbery from Him. Further, covetousness reveals a heart without grace (5) for such an attitude is earthbound (5a) and selfish (5b).  A gracious disposition seeks God’s glory. Moreover, covetousness is murderous. It is possible that James has in mind the example of the one righteous man and is saying that it was ‘simple’ covetousness which sent Jesus to the Cross.  When covetousness exists a person sides with Judas Iscariot (6) cp. Jn 12:5,6; Matt 26:14-16.  Possibly,  we have a somewhat hyperbolic statement that covetousness robs a poor person of the necessities of life. De facto, however, James is often literally right! It is not impossible that an actual example is in James’ mind in view of the contemporary situation of the author. James hints at one final point, the greatest of all: covetousness reveals a fundamental failure to understand the Gospel of Jesus. For, 1)  It is the God of Sabaoth who plans to ‘freely give us all things’ (Rom 8:32). 2)  It is the same God in the person of His Son who ‘for our sakes became poor’ (2 Cor 8:9). 5:7-12 James has indicated in this letter that the new birth (1:18) is powerfully seen in the standard of conduct described in his epistle.  The grace of God which brings to birth manifests itself in the succeeding life.  This theme has occupied the bulk of his epistle.  One major question remains:  How can those who profess the new birth go on to that mature life described by James?  James provides the answer in these verses in a section probably specifically related to the sort of trials described in the previous paragraph but possibly provided to answer the broader question. James, typically, highlights his answer by two illustrations from the area of speech. Before tackling his teaching we need to get one detailed matter out of the way: taking oaths. (see verse 12) Motyer states “It is very unlikely that James would find any difficulty in taking an oath as required from witnesses in court, or that he intended any reference to such.  Apart from the fact that it is absurd to expect strangers to be able to recognise at once that stirling quality of character which could not tell a lie, and therefore the request for a spoken guarantee of truth simply reflects an inevitable involvement in a society of sinners, the formal oath is, in the context of a court of law, part of the way in which we safeguard that control of speech on which James is so insistent.  It is a solemn and considered use of the tongue which could come under no condemnation.  Mt. 23:16-22 fills in the background of a society in which oath taking was part of an evasion of responsibility… Solemn oath taking is countenanced throughout scripture.“ The Bible does not forbid oaths.  Thus God swears (Dt. 4:26) and encourages others to solemn oaths ‘by His name’ (Dt. 6:13, Jer 12:16).  The NT is no different 2 Tim 4:1 describes an ‘oath’ to be taken by Timothy. The Bible does resist all oaths taken to evade the truth (cp. especially Matt 23:16-22) and emphasises that in an unfallen world oaths would not be necessary. Since in swearing I solemnly emphasise the truth of my words I do exactly what James commends! Christian maturity is not an ‘overnight phenomenon’ it is a cultivated fruit achieved only through patience.  This is the thrust of James’ words here (7f.). Patience itself is the fruit of trial and suffering (see especially verse 10).  Maturity is generally only achieved by means of a bitter road. Nevertheless, patience which leads to maturity ought to be aroused by: i) the final reward (7a): the coming of the Lord and His words ‘well done, you good and faithful servant’. ii)  the Lord’s return (8) as judge.  In NT the return of the Lord is not a ground for speculation but a call to holiness.  It must delight the Devil that he has confused and divided the church so much at this point that we avoid talking about it at all! iii)  by the blessedness perseverance brings (10f. especially). Note, the points James makes. Firstly, he seems to indicate that Job’s perseverance amid many trials (sickness, mental and spiritual anguish, doubt etc.) led ultimately to his personal blessing (11 and cp Job 42:5), notably in that God revealed Himself more fully to him. This, believes James, should arouse all spiritually minded people. Secondly, personal usefulness especially in relation to others results. This is the point of 10, 11a. Finally, the believer is to seek to avoid falling prey to that conduct which so often characterises those under stress (9): lashing out at those closest to hand. All this is no optional extra.  Failure results not in the absence of blessing but of judgment and condemnation (9,12): again, in areas which are often dismissed as unimportant. Again, a situation which arose from the high temperatures and revolutionary philosophies engendered by the contemporary situation in C1 Palestine may well offer the context to this passage. Could the oaths in mind be ‘revolutionary oaths’? 5:13-18 The following verses are closely related to the previous paragraph. James is answering for the last time the question, ‘Where does the key to ‘spiritual maturity’ lie (or, how is the kingdom to be brought in)?‘ He has already offered one answer in 5:6-12: patience. Here he offers a second: prayer. Verse 13 is very important in understanding exactly what James means. True prayer, says James, is characterised by 2 things: i) By the fact that every experience of life is seen as a ground for prayer of some kind or another.  ‘Sorrow’ is a ground for lamentation and petition:  ‘Joy’ a basis for thanksgiving and praise…. and what is true of these two ‘extremes’ of human experience must be true of all those that come in between!! ii) Put slightly differently, every experience in life is seen as a ground of fleeing to God:  a friend who delights to share every joy and sorrow of his children. Lying behind these two attitudes is a further conviction:  God is the all sufficient friend of all His people. The true believer is no fatalist.  Rather his life is in the hands of a personal friend:  a friend who is utterly reliable and one we can humbly depend upon in all circumstances. This is important.  A mature prayer life is not seen in the length or beauty of prayers, nor in the alleged answers to prayer witnessed.  Rather maturity is seen when the believer comes to utterly depend on God for all things and to live a life which is itself a prayer. A mature prayer life has noble fruits.  It gives stability and with stability usefulness.  This is seen as: 1) We joyfully acknowledge the hand of our friend in all things: not only the ‘great things’.  2) We are at peace even in the midst of pain and agony.  In sum, in true prayer, says James, we always rest content in His will for us. Thus in patient trust we will arrive at maturity and (for this is our incentive) personal blessedness in the knowledge of and dependence upon God. Verses 14f. emphasise that even physical sickness (especially its severe manifestations - see below) are to be included. This passage has been invariably interpreted in the light of prejudices either for or against divine healing:  this does not aid balanced interpretation!  Let us, carefully therefore note what is taught: i)  There is, apparently, a place for the healing ministry in the present day church (14) since it is a task vested in the continuing office of the Eldership.  It is not, apparently, a ministry restricted to the Apostolic Age. ii)  The ministry is not restricted to special ‘healers’ (who seem to have existed in the NT and may, sometimes, today - though we need to be very wary of many of the claims made). iii)  The ministry is clearly complimentary to the medical profession.  In NT times elementary medicine was known (Lk 10:34), practised (Col 4:14) and encouraged (1 Tim 5:23). iv)  What is described here is NOT extreme unction.  Although some severity of illness seems presupposed (the Elders need to be ‘called’) mortal illness is not singled out and the aim is not to prepare for death (the reality if not the theory behind ‘extreme unction’) but to restore to ‘life’. v)  The healing ministry is, supremely, a ministry of prayer (see 15a especially in context, viz. verse 13):  the prayer of the Elders in particular (14) but, possibly, also the sick person.  The symbolism of the oil probably points to the declaration of the presence of God by His life giving spirit (see the discussion on this in the commentaries).  Thus verse 14 is a declaration of the ability of God and the total dependence upon Him of His children. All this helps us to understand verse 15, ‘the Lord will raise Him up’.  Obviously: i)  This presupposes that healing will very often take place; ii)  However, as with other unqualified statements regarding prayer (e.g. Mt 18:19; 21:22; Jn 14:13) the context is the thought ‘Thy will be done’.  The prayer is ‘in the name of the Lord’ (14) and therefore subject ot His will.  James does not suggest that we can force our will upon God or that where healing does not take place adequate faith has been lacking. Trophemus was left sick at Maletus.  True faith is not faith that God will h Commentary 2011-01-11T11:23:25+00:00 http://ferndalechurches.org.uk/resources/detail/ruth_and_the_god_of_grace/ http://ferndalechurches.org.uk/resources/detail/ruth_and_the_god_of_grace/#When:11:22:09Z Not just a love story. Learn of God’s grace through the experience of Naomi and her family.RUTH and the God of Grace The book of Ruth has always been a favourite with Bible readers; perhaps because its happy story contrasts with the dark days of the book of Judges; perhaps because everyone likes a good love story. Whatever the reason and despite some cultural differences (e.g. the gleaning procedure in chapter 2; the marriage proposal of chapter 3; the practice of redemption in chapter 4) the book has a timeless quality which appeals to us all. Perhaps, however, the attractiveness of the book is due to the fact that Ruth is a book about people like us.  Ruth was no great leader or heroic sufferer.  She was not like a David or a Samuel, a Nehemiah, an Elijah or a Job.  She was a simple, ordinary person; just like most of us.  Moreover, her experience of God was similar to ours.  Hers was not the privilege of a prophet.  She did not have great visions.  She had no oracles direct from God. Like us, Ruth found God in her daily life.  And the same was true of all those around her. Thus, Ruth is an important book.  Most of the stories of the Bible are full of kings and great leaders, of wars and of extraordinary appearances of God.  It is sometimes difficult for us to feel the same as such people.  But it is not difficult for us to feel like Elimelech and Naomi, Ruth and Orphah, Boaz and the un-named kinsman.  How encouraging, moreover, is the fact that the God of the Exodus is also the God of Ruth’s move to Bethlehem; the God who provided for a nation in the wilderness is the same God who looked after Ruth and fed her; the God who gave Abram and Sarah a son is the same God who gave Naomi an heir. 1:1-5 These verses set the scene for the whole book of Ruth.  They are introductory words - but no less significant or important for that.  There are some very practical lessons which remain relevant today. The words “in the days when the judges ruled” hint at how we should understand the early verses of Ruth.  They take us back to the book of Judges in which a repeated cycle of disobedience - disaster - repentance and renewal is found.  Probably, the precise time of the book of Ruth is that of the Midianite conquest described in Judges 6.  Judah was, therefore, under the judgment of God for its evil ways (see especially Judges 6:1).  This is confirmed by the fact that the land which God had described as “a land flowing with milk and honey” (Exodus 3:8,17; 13:5; 33:3 etc.) was suffering famine.  God had threatened famine on the people if they sinned against him (Deuteronomy 28:22-24).  Even Bethlehem, a place whose name means “the house of bread”, and which was usually a fertile area, was suffering. How does a people desert God?  Only because individuals one by one do so!  Therefore we are introduced to one family in Bethlehem.  They were probably a wealthy family.  We are told that they moved to Moab.  Anyone who has moved to a new home knows that it is often an expensive thing to do.  Only the richer families in Bethlehem could have afforded to move. Verse 21 might also suggest that they had been a wealthy family. The author of the book of Ruth clearly believed that names could be significant.  He introduces us to a man named Elimelech - a name meaning “the Lord is my king”.  Perhaps this name expressed the hopes of Elimelech’s parents.  Possibly it was the name given to him by his contemporaries: a sort of nickname.  Sadly, despite his name, Elimelech acted in a thoroughly unspiritual way, as we shall see. We can sympathise with Elimelech.  His two sons are named Kilion and Mahlon.  These were almost certainly nicknames, for they mean “sickly” and “pining”.  So it would appear that Elimelech had two sickly sons in a society where sons were essential.  Sons would look after their parents when old age came.  In time of famine the weak always seemed to suffer first.  Doubtless that caused Elimelech great anxiety.  Concern for himself and his wife as well as for his sons naturally led him to explore possible ways out of the famine.  Eventually he decided to go and live temporarily in Moab.  For an Israelite this was a quite astonishing decision.  There are two reasons for this.  In the first place, for an Israelite to leave the land which God had given to that nation was equivalent to deserting his God.  God’s presence was believed to be especially linked to the land.  The tent of God (probably at Shiloh) was a symbol and testimony that God was the God of this people in this land.  And Elimelech left it!  Secondly, God had made it clear that Moab, a people who worshipped the fire god Chemosh, were a people to be avoided by the people of God (see Deuteronomy 23:3-6 and compare 2 Kings 3:27 and Numbers 21:29).  But Elimelech was ready to live with them!  Moreover, no sooner was Elimelech in Moab than he allowed both his sons to marry Moabite women.  Deuteronomy 7:3,4 would probably have been understood by the Israelites at the time as including the Moabites and prohibiting marriages between Moabites and Israelites (but see the comment on Ruth 3:1-18).  Nevertheless, Elimelech seems to have behaved with hardly a thought for what God required him to do. In this way, Elimelech is typical of many unspiritual believers.  Living in sinful days, he adpoted the attitudes of men and women around him and gave little thought to God.  He was self-willed and unsubmissive to God.  Instead of seeing that the famine was a reason for him to come in repentance to God, he added to his sin; and doubtless he excused his behaviour by appealing to the needs of his family.  Here, then, is a son of Jacob acting like a son of Esau, despising his birthright (see Genesis 27).  How many Christian “Elimelechs” do the same today! Sadly, this passage also describes the consequences of Elimelech’s rebellion against God.  He had to learn the bitter lesson spelt out in 1 Corinthians 11:27,28; Matthew 10:39; Mark 8:35; Luke 9:24 and John 12:25 (and note how, usually, all four Gospels repeat the same words).  Thus, the security and protection which Elimelech sought was denied him.  Both he (verse 3) and his sons (verse 5) died; leaving his widow a helpless woman in a strange land.  His sons, as we have seen, sank to the spiritual level of their father.  They entered into disobedient marriages.  They too came to disaster. Selfish rebellion against God brought disaster on the whole family.  Elimelech’s sin influenced others to sin.  May we learn this lesson well. 1:6-22 The remainder of the first chapter of Ruth describes the response of three women, Naomi - Elimelech’s wife - Orphah and Ruth, to the challenge of full commitment to God. Naomi had been an inhabitant of Bethlehem.  However, her departure to Moab with her family was an act of rebellion against God (see verses 1-5).  She recognised this in verse 21 when she said: “The Lord has testified against me”.  Naomi, then, was like so many of God’s children.  Selfish rebellion had caused her to depart from her God. But God does not leave his backslidden children.  He seeks to win them back.  Sometimes, as with Naomi, personal disaster is the method he uses.  The sorrow of bereavement and loss often awakens a longing for a return to spiritual walk once more.  However, this did not appear to be the case with Naomi.  Perhaps her bitterness (see verse 20) was too great. However, eventually her old desires were reawakened (verse 6) when she heard of God’s blessing on others back at her home.  She heard of blessing which had followed repentance (see Judges 6:16).  So she determined to go home to her people and her God. Naomi had no false hopes of what to expect.  She did not expect God’s blessing necessarily to follow her.  She knew that she would have to live with the consequences of past failure.  In verse 21 she said: “I went away full but the Lord has brought me back empty”.  Nevertheless it was the Lord who was bringing her back and she would follow him.  When she returned, her life was characterised by joyful trust and obedience to God (see especially 2:20-22).  She had left Israel to secure her family and her food.  When she returned it was for these two things especially that she showed humble dependence on God.  She had learnt the lesson: “Trust and obey, for there’s no other way to be happy”. If we are in selfish rebellion against God, may we learn the lessons of Naomi’s experience. Orphah was the Moabite wife of Kilion (see 4:10).  She must have been a pleasant and lovable young woman.  Orphah had stayed with Naomi when she had been widowed rather than return home to her parents.  She was clearly fond of her mother-in-law (verse 14).  She also seemed to share some of the desires of Naomi for her God.  We have already seen that Naomi’s motive for returning to Israel was a desire to return to God.  It is hardly likely that Orphah would have planned to go to Israel except for the same reason (see verse 6).  So Orphah set out with Naomi and Ruth (verse 7). Naomi’s conversation with her daughters-in-law in verses 8-13 has been differently understood by Christian interpreters.  However, the most likely explanations of her words is this.  Naomi had to face the cost of her own re-commitment to the Lord.  She was anxious that her daughters-in-law did the same.  With great wisdom, therefore, she put the difficulties of commitment to the Lord before them.  She did not want them to be deceived as to what they might expect.  She recognised that, for them, residence in Israel may well mean permanent widowhood (verses 11-13); a loss of old family ties (verse 10); and, consequently, poverty was likely. Sometimes following Jesus has the same consequences for people today.  Jesus taught there is a cost to following him (see Mark 8:34-38; 10:42-45).  To gain life, we must lose it first.  There is, of course,another side (Mark 10:29-31).  However, Naomi was pressing on Orphah the cost of discipleship.  Sadly, like the rich young ruler (Matthew 19:16-30; Mark 10:17-22; Luke 18:18-30), the demands of discipleship were too great for Orphah.  Significantly, Naomi said (verse 15) that Orphah was “going back to her people and her gods”. Christian preachers rarely seem to emphasise the cost of discipleshp today.  Perhaps they think that they won’t get any disciples that way!  Naomi, however, was realistic.  She knew it was essential to explain the full cost of discipleship to those who might show a desire to be God’s children. In contrast to her sister-in-law, Ruth’s resolve was strengthened by Naomi’s challenge.  Humbly (verse 16) she pledged her permanent commitment to Naomi, to her people and to her God (verse 16,17).  Her words show that she had counted the cost and was resolved on a permanent life of discipleship.  Sensibly (verse 18), when seeing this resolve, Naomi no longer urged Ruth to go back home. 2:1-23 The stories of the Bible are usually told without comment by their authors.  No morals are draw from the stories.  Sensitive readers are left to work out for themselves the lessons built into the stories.  This is true of the book of Ruth.  It is especially true of this chapter.  The story is a simple one.  Ruth, in trying to secure enough food for herself and Naomi, finds a rich patron, Boaz.  However, lying behind these events are two great truths. The first great lesson is this: when people become disciples of the Lord it changes their way of life. Boaz recognised that Ruth had placed herself under the protection and care of the Lord (verse 12).  As an Israelite, he had done the same.  The result in both of them was a life of delighted obedience to God.  This is a mark of spiritual maturity: though here it is shown even in a young “convert” like Ruth. This truth is most clearly seen in Boaz.  In the Old Testament law God had demanded that at harvest time the harvester was not to reap right into the corners of his fields.  He was also told not to pick up what was left after the reapers had gone, nor to go back to collect a forgotten sheaf.  We read about this in Leviticus 19:9; 23:22; Deuteronomy 24:19.  The reason for these commands was that God wanted his people to show a concern for the poor and needy.  He wanted them to show compassion to people like Ruth and Naomi. The unscrupulous man could, of course, easily neglect this duty.  This is suggested in verses 2 and 22.  Alternatively, such a man could find ways around God’s laws.  However, when we read about Boaz, he not only obeys the letter of the law but he fulfils its intention also.  In his dealings with Ruth, Boaz is seen as considerate, tender, compassionate, generous and kind.  It was that kind of attitude that God’s law was intended to promote.  Ruth recognised the significance of this action of Boaz.  In verse 10 she asked: “Why have I found favour?“  The word “favour” is one of the most important words in the Old Testament.  It is the word which describes the unmerited mercy which God show to his children.  It also describes the response of God’s children to him, to one another and then to all.  Ruth recognised Boaz’s Godlike character and, in that way, recognised him as a true disciple of the Lord. The Bible never tires of teaching this lesson.  A true disciple is a person who has met God.  That meeting must change a person’s life.  The disciple’s life will now be a copy (imperfect, of course) of God’s life and character.  Delighted love for God will be the result; a love delighting in all God’s wishes and fulfilling the intention of all his words. Above all, in the New Testament we are shown Jesus as our example.  Jesus was “in very nature God, but did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness.  And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death - even death on a cross!  Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth, and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.“ Paul then adds: “Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus” (Philippians 2:5-11).  We are expected to be copies of Jesus himself!  How rarely this lesson is learnt. Sometimes it is suggested that a spiritual life will be harsh and unattractive.  We sometimes meet such supposedly godly people.  However, a truly spiritual life is lovely and attractive.  We can see this to be true in this chapter.  Ruth and Boaz shine forth as attractive and really human people.  It is this very fact that draws us to this chapter and makes us delight in the story.  But it is also a lesson that all disciples need to learn.  True believers are to be attractive because the favour of God to them makes them attractive. There is no part of life that is uninfluenced by discipleship.  This is clearly shown in this chapter.  Discipleship is seen in the home.  Ruth showed a tenderness and a respect for her ageing mother-in-law (verse 2).  Naomi had no right to expect all that Ruth did for her.  But, then, Ruth was a true disciple.  A true disciple does not think about rights, but about needs and responsibilities.  Because God had been merciful to Ruth in her needs, she now shows the same attitude to Naomi.  In the Bible there is teaching which emphasises that discipleship will be seen in the home.  Look up especially Ephesians 5:1,2,22-6:4. Discipleship is also to be seen in the work-place.  Ruth’s conduct was respectful.  She said “please” in verse 7, even when taking her rights!  Her hard work was immediately noticed (second part of verse 7).  Similarly Boaz the rich landowner (verse 1) was generous; he sought to help the needy; he was approachable, friendly and compassionate.  He used his God-given privileges to serve God.  We are to do the same.  (Compare Ephesians 6:5-9). Finally, we ought to notice that when God’s mercy has been experienced, a person’s attitudes are changed.  We have already seen this but it needs emphasising.  Ruth was willing to take the most menial and degrading part (verse 2). Service for God in the service of others led her to set aside her dignity.  Yet how often do we proudly defend ours. In addition, we see how mercy had led to childlike dependence on God.  This is seen in Boaz (verse 4) and Naomi, who was so quick to notice God’s provision for her (verses 19,20).  Above all, we see this truth in Ruth’s wide-eyed wonder at God’s provision for her in the most ordinary of circumstances (verse 10). The result of such an attitude is seen in these verses.  There is a peace and tranquillity both in need and in plenty.  May we show the same spirit? The second great lesson is the faithful care of God for his children, even in hard times.  This is especially seen in Ruth’s experience.  Perhaps it is helpful at this point to remind ourselves what Ruth’s needs were: i)  She had the obvious needs that a widow would have.  In the ancient world, a widow without a family was a most pathetic person.  Often such people were very poor.  They depended on the charity of others.  Many were forced to turn to prostitution since their bodies were the only resources that they could sell. ii)  Ruth was an alien.  She was friendless in a foreign land.  This fact is repeatedly emphasised in 2:2,6,10,11,21.  Many immigrants to a new country will understand how Ruth must have felt. iii)  She had been recently bereaved and must therefore have been under great emotional strain.  Boaz seems to recognise this in verse 11. iv)  She was a recent convert. The great confession of 1:16-18 was now being put to the test in the severest way possible. These things must have filled Ruth with doubts and fears.  Some believers today try to hide behind empty spiritual words and are not always honest about their problems.  However, most of us if we are honest have experienced at one time or another the same sort of difficulties as Ruth did.  This is one of the reasons why the book of Ruth is so useful to us.  Let us notice, then, how God met Ruth’s needs. Firstly, Ruth began to meet her own needs!  Commonsense (often lacking in God’s people), led to careful thought and sensible action (verses 2,3 and 7) and proved to be part of God’s guidance to her.  She did what she could and left what she couldn’t do in the hands of God. Secondly, Ruth sought the advice of others close to her (verse 2) and found the will of the Lord in their sensible advice.  Indeed she discovered God’s care for her on a number of occasions in the same way.  She found God’s care in the tenderness, compassion and generosity of others (verses 8,9).  That was another way in which God provided for her. Thirdly, Ruth found God directly at work in her circumstances.  Humanly, by complete coincidence, God led her steps to Boaz, the person most able to help her!  This fact was noticed by the author of Ruth (verse 3). All this leads to some very practical lessons.  We notice that God’s provision was not miraculous.  Many believers have an exaggerated regard for miracles.  They do not seem to think that God is at work if they have not experienced a miracle.  For them, the book of Ruth may be disappointing.  There is no hint of a miracle here.  But God does provide for her and for those of us (i.e. for most believers) whose lives are as free of miracle as Ruth’s.  This is a great comfort.  If God provided for her in her ordinary, unexciting, day-to-day experience, he can and will do the same for us! Moreover, God is seen to be at work in all Ruth’s affairs and in her case they were mostly small ones!  What comfort this is to us in our small lives. It is also important to notice that there is no dramatic change in Ruth’s life (not yet, at least!).  Rather God showed himself in his daily, detailed attention to her in the middle of all her needs.  God did not suddenly deliver her.  He met her where she was. It is this fact which enabled her, and should enable us, to trust him even in the middle of our needs.  Boaz’s wish (verse 12) should become a conviction which, by faith, governs our lives as it did Ruth’s. Finally, do you study your life carefully as we have studied Ruth’s, to discern the hand of God?  If you do, it will greatly increase your faith and trust in him.  For Ruth is not unique.  Her story is your story and mine! 3:1-18 Once again the story of Ruth 3 is fairly clear.  Naomi takes steps to find Ruth a suitable husband.  Several observations need, however, to be made to explain some of the details of the story. First, to the modern reader there do seem some things done here which we might think wrong.  It seems likely that some custom unknown to us, but acceptable at that time, is described here.  We need to avoid being critical of the conduct of Naomi, Ruth and Boaz in this chapter.  The author of Ruth does not judge them; nor should we.  On the other hand, we should not copy them, either! There is no suggestion that anything immoral took place between Boaz and Ruth.  Indeed, Boaz probably sent Ruth away early in the morning in order to avoid any possibility of gossip about their conduct which might have hindered his plans for Ruth. And the verses do not tell us that Boaz was drunk.  He was in good spirits.  The harvest was good and he had enjoyed a good meal.  The Bible does not criticize people for being happy.  But it does warn of the dangers of drinking alcohol and of the sin of drunkenness. Secondly, there are two Old Testament practices which are strange to us but are mentioned in this chapter. The first is the levirate.  Look up Genesis 38 and especially Deuteronomy 25:5-10.  In Old Testament times it was vital that a man’s family name was preserved.  Accordingly, if he died without an heir, steps were to be taken to ensure that he had an heir who could carry his name (and inherit his property).  Thus it ws customary, and required by God’s law, that the widow of a dead man be married to one of her husband’s relatives.  The first son of such a marriage would then be the dead man’s heir. Elimelech had died childless; or at least his sons died soon after his death, without having had any children themselves.  Now only Ruth held out any possibility that Elimelech might have heirs.  But Ruth was only his daughter-in-law and no duty rested on her to raise children to keep alive Elimelech’s name. Secondly, the chapter mentions the kinsman-redeemer (Hebrew: “Goel” - a word meaning “to recover or redeem”).  This is mentioned in Leviticus 25:25-28, 47-49.  These verses describe the responsibility of a near kinsman to do all that was necessary to secure the land (verses 25-28) and support the persons (verses 47-49) of poor near-of-kin.  As we shall see, Naomi had such a kinsman (chapter 4) who had showed no great desire to fulfil his obligations.  Boaz, by contrast, was under no obligation to Naomi but was willing to help her. Thirdly, we need to ask the question, was Boaz right to want to marry Ruth?  In chapter 1 we suggested that Mahlon was wrong to marry Ruth because she was a Moabite.  How then could it be right for Boaz to marry her?  The answer is this.  Although the Old Testament laws seem to be racist, this was never in fact the case.  Whoever identified with the people of God was given the full status of an Israelite.  The prohibitions against marriage with someone from another race were intended to teach that God hated his people to marry outside the people of God.  The Old Testament laws were not so much racist as religious.  The people of God were to marry only others from among the people of God and that is the point that is important here.  In chapter 1 Mahlon married a worshipper of Chemosh.  That was quite wrong.  However, after Ruth’s confession in 1:17,18 her words and her actions have shown that she was a true worshipper of God.  No obstacle, therefore, existed any longer for an Israelite to marry her.  Indeed both Ruth and Boaz show such a spiritual maturity in chapter 2 that Boaz could clearly have done no better than marry Ruth! With these facts in mind we can observe several important lessons which are contained in chapter 3. In these verses we have a wonderful illustration of the commitment of both Ruth and Boaz to their Lord. It is probable that Mahlon died shortly after marrying Ruth.  Otherwise they would probably have had some children, since family planning was largely unknown in the ancient world.  Marriage usually occurred soon after puberty and it is probable that no great time elapsed between the death of Ruth’s husband and her migration to Israel.  Ruth was, therefore, probably only in her middle or late teens when the events described in this chapter took place.  She was probably between the ages of 15 and 18.  Boaz was obviously an older man (verse 10), probably, at least twice her age. However, despite the fact that Ruth was clearly marriageable and could most probably have found a more “suitable” husband (again verse 10) she chose Boaz.  Showing remarkable spiritual maturity for one of her age and experience, Ruth recognised that faithfulness to the intention of God’s word required her to marry a kinsman of Elimelech.  In his response to Ruth (verses 10-13) Boaz showed he recognised Ruth’s obedience to God.  He himself (see especially chapter 4) then showed the same obedience to the intention of God’s word. For both Ruth and Boaz these were costly decisions to make.  But they were both motivated by a desire to obey God in all things.  In obedience they found joy and blessing.  The same obedience is required of us. There is another lesson.  Once again we notice that Ruth and Boaz fulfil God’s word by meeting its deepest concerns.  Strictly speaking, Ruth had no obligation to Elimelech.  Similarly, Boaz did not have a obligation to Elimelech either.  But they both knew that God’s laws were intended to show his deep concerns for the welfare of his people.  Thus they both went beyond mere obedince to the letter of the law, to the fulfilling of its intention. Such obedience is expected of every true disciple.  Jesus said: “A new commandment I give to you that you love one another as I have loved you” (John 13:34,35).  Though they did not have the full light of the gospel, we can see that Ruth and Boaz were obedient to God in precisely this way.  How much more we should follow their example who also have the example of Jesus to follow. One final lesson emerges from this chapter.  In the New Testament, Jesus is described as the great “kinsman-redeemer”.  Boaz by his actions foreshadowed Jesus. Consider the following facts: i)  A ‘goel’ had to be a kinsman.  Jesus became like us, to be our kinsman-redeemer (see Hebrews 2:17,18). ii)  Jesus loved God and delighted to do God’s will.  So did Boaz. iii)  Boaz’s redemption of Ruth was expensive (see chapter 4).  Jesus gave up his own life to pay the price of our redemption. iv)  By redeeming Ruth, Boaz made her his wife.  In so doing, he was ready to share his bed with a penniless alien.  By redeeming us, Jesus has made us his bride and has been ready to share himself with his enemies. v)  Boaz acted to provide a future for hopeless Ruth.  How much more has Jesus done in securing our eternal glory. 4:1-17a With these verses the book of Ruth reaches its climax.  Once again, the sensitive reader is expected to discern for himself the lessons which lie in the story. There are several remarkable contrasts in this chapter.  First, there is a contrast between Boaz and the other, un-named, kinsman-redeemer.  The nameless man was only willing to act on behalf of Naomi and Ruth if it were to his advantage.  This decided the matter for him (verse 6).  Doubtless the same obstacle lay in Boaz’s way as well.  However, Boaz was ready to follow the path of obedience to God whatever the consequences.  Too often we only do what is right because it suits us.  We need to learn from Boaz.  Once again we notice that Boaz was motivated by mercy (see 2:13) as one who had received mercy.  At this point, however, the author of Ruth plays a subtle joke on his readers.  He must have known the name of the kinsman.  After all, he knew a great deal about Elimelech and his relatives.  However, he does not reveal the name and surely he does not reveal it deliberately!  The un-named kinsman acted to secure his name:  but it has long since been lost.  Boaz “risked” the loss of his name; but he is not only named but his fame will live on till the end of the world! Jesus taught the same truth.  We have already commented on it (see Matthew 10:39; Mark 8:35; Luke 9:24; John 12:25).  It is the great message of the book of Ruth; to hold fast to our own ambitions will lead to the loss of all.  Faithful obedience to God will enable us to inherit eternal life, a lasting inheritance and an honourable name before God. This same point is made by another contrast in this chapter.  In chapter 1 Naomi was described as bereaved and hopeless (1:5,12,20).  In chapter 4 she has comfort in her old age made sure by the birth of a grandson (4:13-17).  In her own experience, Naomi had to learn the lesson of obedience.  She also learnt that God is merciful to the person who turns back from a path of folly.  Finally, she learned that God was far more merciful to her than she deserved. The final contrast in this section is seen in Ruth herself.  In chapter 1 she ws a friendless, penniless and childless stranger.  However, she put her faith in the God of Israel (1:17,18).  In chapter 4 the same Ruth has not only become the object of a levir’s attentions (see chapter 3) but is his wife (verses 10,13)!  She is the centre of an admiring community (verse 15) and the mother of a son (verse 13).  To have a son was a blessing indeed in the ancient world.  Thus Ruth found that her sacrifice was rewarded by God.  God is never anyone’s debtor.  As we follow him, we will learn the same lessons. 4:17b-22 In this list of names we have a lovely postscript to the book of Ruth.  In 1:1 our thoughts were directed back to the book of Judges.  In that book there is one phrase that is regularly repeated.  In Judges 17:6; 18:1; 19:1; 21:25 we are told that “there was no king in those days”.  This is not a careless or accidental repetition.  In Old Testament times the life of the nation was seen as closely linked to the life of the king.  His example set the example which his people were expected to follow.  But in the time of the Judges there was no such example.  Everyone did “as he saw fit” (Judges 21:25).  The people were, then, in need of a leader after God’s own heart.  This is the verdict of the book of Judges.  The book of Ruth picks this thought up.  It tells us of a farmer in Bethlehem and a strange from Moab who lived not for themselves but for God.  It shows that their faithfulness was part of God’s plan to meet the needs of all his people and to bless them more abundantly than they could ever have imagined.  Ruth bore a son who was to be the grandfather of Israel’s greatest king, David.  And David himself was a king among whose descendants “great David’s greater Son” would be born. One student of the book of Ruth once said: “And his life (that is, Jesus) in terms of physical descent was linked to the story of a Moabite girl gleaning in a barley field miles from home; to a caring mother-in-law and a loving kinsman; to a night-time conversation at the threshing-floor; to the willingness of a wealthy farmer to go beyond the requirements of the law in his care for the needy.  In short, it is in the ordinariness of the lives of ordinary people that God is working his purposes out.  Future significant lives were bound up with the history of Ruth”. And doubtless those very qualities which David possessed were the fruit of a great-grandparental example (how often is this true!).  And thus Ruth and Boaz’s apparently insignificant lives are seen to be of vital importance for us all.  What an encouragement to our own faithfulness and obedience, even though we may feel ourselves to be insignificant.                           Commentary 2011-01-11T11:22:09+00:00 http://ferndalechurches.org.uk/resources/detail/grace_upon_grace_the_message_of_judges/ http://ferndalechurches.org.uk/resources/detail/grace_upon_grace_the_message_of_judges/#When:11:21:26Z A fantastic story of the grace of God to undeserving people! Read it!GRACE UPON GRACE: THE MESSAGE OF JUDGES The Old Testament narrative books tend to finish rather like a good televised serial story! Just at the point when you and I are anxious to know what will happen next, the book comes to an end! Take Genesis for example. The latter part of the book is woven around the promises made to Abraham and his family. Little by little we see God working out his purposes (often in highly unpromising circumstances) until, in chapter 50, we are brought to the point where we are asking, ‘ How then is God going to fulfill his plans?‘. This question is re-enforced by the description of Joseph’s death-bed affirmation, God will surely come to your aid and take you up out of this land to the land promised on oath to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (Genesis 50:24). But we are left ‘suspended in mid air’. It is not until we turn over the page and begin to read Exodus that the answer begins to unfold! The book of Joshua is little different. The account of the initial conquest is given up to the death of Joshua himself. Again we are left anticipating the sequel. Once again our anticipation is heightened by Joshua’s final address (recorded in Joshua 24). There Joshua reminds the people of their past experience of God’s blessing; he reminds them of their election (2-4), redemption (5-7) and their recent experience of the LORD’s actions on their behalf (11-13). The people recognise the truth of what Joshua said (16-18) and, pledge themselves to the LORD (see, especially, 21, we will serve the LORD) and His Law (25f.). What can God not do with a people thus devoted to him? There remained, of course, much to be done. A comparison between Joshua and the early chapters of Judges indicates that though a general conquest had been undertaken pockets of resistance remained. The war had been won, the decisive battles had apparently occured. Effort might be required to secure peace but it now seemed achievable. So, the people’s pledge and their past experience of God promised well for the future: despite Joshua’s warning (19f). And on this optimistic note of expected victory the Book of Joshua closes. Jensen says, ‘Thus they [had] entered into the promised blessings of the inheritance- victory, prosperity and happiness- which is the life God would always have His people lead. They were surrounded by enemies; indeed some enemies still lived within their boundaries. But if they would obey God and His commands concerning these enemies, they would have the power of the Almighty with them’ (Survey of the Old Testament, Moody Press, p.154). Moreover, as Keddie notes (p.9) the ‘momentum’ was not with their enemies but with them: the Canaanites were terrified of the Israelites. So we turn over the page and, with high hopes, begin to read the sequel.—————————————————————————————————————————————————————— 1:1-2:5. Trust and Obey Initially all went well for the Israelites. The people sought the LORD’s direction and help (1,2) in the manner he had appointed (compare Numbers 27:18-21). Following the specific advice that he gave them that Judah is to go, they quickly experience the fulfillment of God’s promise: I have given the land into their hands. God went with them and brought them victory (see, especially, verse 19). Successes followed for both Judah/Simeon (3-26) and also for the other tribes (27ff.). Obediently, Judah responds to the word of God and remarkable successes followed! The author of Judges records that they struck down ten thousand men at Bezek (4); an unimaginably vast victory for the relatively unpopulated world of the time. Moreover, the king of Bezek was no local clan-chief but a mighty emperor with many people groups subject to him (7). Success followed success. Jerusalem itself was captured (8) and, significantly victory was experienced wherever Judah went, whether in the hill country or the south country (or Negev) or in the low-lying western foothills (9). But victory in different terrain and over a wide geographical area was not all that was experienced. Mighty cities fell to the Judahites. Hebron, one of the great towns of Palestine taken (10). Significantly, we are reminded of its other name: Kiriath Arba. Arba was the name of the father of the Anakim (compare, Joshua 14:15 and 15:13) the giants before whom the Israelites had trembled in the wilderness. Apparently this city was their stronghold but it was taken so summararily that it gets but half a verse! In addition, the great cultural city of the region, Kiriath Sepher, the city of books, was subdued (11ff.).  To destroy the military and cultural centres was to destroy the civilisation built around them. Victory for the Judahites was total! At this point, and perhaps surprisingly, we are introduced to a bit of family history (11-15). However, when the Scriptures offer us little (or big) surprises we should not pass over them to rapidly. We need to ask the question why such incidents were recorded.  Some commentators suggest that we are intended to see this story about Othniel and Acsah as something of a parable and develop this idea in two possible directions. Here we are introduced to two young people who were ready to venture in faithful obedience on God and found him fully able to supply their needs. Not only the nation but the individual could expect God’s help when they lived in humble dependence on him. Or, perhaps, we are intended to see in them a mirror image of what God was looking for in the people as a whole. If this is so, disappointment quickly follows for, increasingly, the story takes a less than happy turn. Initially we are offered further accounts of victory (17,18); although we might ‘smell a rat’ in verse 18 when we are told that Judah also took Gaza, Ashkelon and Ekron, since elsewhere in the Old Testament we are told that there were five not three cities of the Philistines! Was the Judahite success beginning to run out of steam? This certainly appears to be the case in the describes which are subsequently recounted since Judah failed to gain a hold on the lowlands, where the chariots of the Canaanites gave them the upper hand (19). Anyone with a basic knowledge of Palestine will immediately realise the significance of this. James Jordan notes that ‘The plains were in the center [sic] of the land of promise. The continuing strength of the Canaanites had effectively divided Judah and Simeon from the rest of the tribes. Over the centuries, this isolation brought about cultural division, and caused more and more trouble until the two kingdoms split from one another. Thus do minor compromises grow into major troubles’. A brief but significant flashback is then recorded; faithful and elderly Caleb had led the rout of Hebron (20, compare verse 10) and was given to him as God had promised through his servant Moses.  By way of (surely intended contrast) we are told that Benjamin failed to secure Jerusalem (21). From this point onwards the story rapidly plunges downhill into darkness. The success of Joseph (22-26) stands out like a beacon amid the accounts of Manasseh’s failure to exterminate the inhabitants of Bethshan etc. (27) and the record that the Canaanites were not exterminated but dwelt in the land as subjects (29-30). More serious was the fact that in some places the situation was reversed: Asher failed so miserably that the Canaanites held the upper hand. They ‘lived among the Canaanite inhabitants’. But worst of all was the situation of Dan. They failed to dislodge the Canaanites and had to seek ‘alternative accommodation’ (34 and compare 18:1ff.). Thus, a careful study of a map reveals that the Israelites were only able to hold the hill country rather like modern guerillas. They had failed entirely to establish themselves as God had promised. Indeed, as verse 35 indicates, the places where Joshua had been buried (Mount Heres, compare 2:9) and where he had experienced his most spectacular victory (Aijalon, see Joshua 10:12) were now in Amorite hands, behind a sort of established frontier (36). But why this ‘day of small things?‘ Chapter 1 offers a hint (19). The military capability of the plains-people was too great for the limited resources of the Israelites. They could only get the upper hand where the chariots were valueless. Yet can the writer of Judges expect us to take this comment seriously? Surely the entire story of the Israelites up to this point has been of God’s intervention to turn their impossibilities into his victories? The God who had subdued Pharoah, divided the Red Sea and the Jordan, fed millions of his people in a barren wilderness for forty years and had brought the walls of Jericho tumbling down was surely not going to be baulked in his purposes by a few Caananite chariots! Doubtless, then, we are intended to ask the question, ‘Whatever the human reasons for failure, why does God not appear to be working among his people now?‘ We are not left long to discover the answer! Moreover, when it comes it is God himself who speaks in the person of the angel of the LORD (2:1). This mysterious angel appears frequently in the Old Testament from Genesis 16 onwards. When he appears he is distinguished from other angels and when he speaks he not merely speaks God’s words but is recognised as God himself. Some, therefore, identify the Angel with Christ himself. Whether or not this is true, the Angel had been sent before Israel to ensure their success (Exodus 23:20-23) and appears as captain of the LORD’s host in Joshua 5:13ff. Bokim may possibly be another name for Bethel. Whether or not this is so, the Israelites seemed to have gathered for a national convocation, possibly some form of war-council.  While they were there the Angel arrived from Gilgal. This is immensely significant. When the people entered the land they had pledged themselves to the LORD there and He had guaranteed their success (Joshua 5:13). Perhaps the people were complaining that He had failed them. In reality the Angel revealed that the boot was on the other foot: the people had failed their part of the ‘bargain’ and this in two ways. They had been told that their blessing depended on their obedience (Deuteronomy 30:16) and, in particular, that they were to make no covenant with the Canaanites and no compromise with their religion (Exodus 23:32f; 34:10-16). It was their unfaithfulness that had brought disaster. Later (chapters 4,5) the LORD would prove that the chariots of the Canaanites were no problem to Him! Equally, later chapters demonstrate that these two faults characterised the life of the people throughout the period of the judges; in an ever more serious way. Confronted with their sin the people wept and offered sacrifices (5). We may, however, question their sincerity since there is no evidence of respite. Tears can sometimes be the result of having been caught out- not genuine sorrow. The LORD looks for rent hearts not garments (Joel 2:12-14; Psalm 51:17). Thus, as Lewis points out,  ‘ true repentance must go beyond tears of sorrow and achieve a right-about-face, a turning of one’s entire self from sin to a walk that pleases God’. But what has all this got to do with us? We need to see that we, too, are the people of God. We, too, are called to avoid all compromise with enemies whether within or without. There can be no compromise with the world nor any acceptance of sin. Mighty enemies though we are facing (and the New Testament never underestimates the power of the opposition, see Ephesians 6:12) they are no excuse for our failure. The only excuse a powerless church and a defeated Christian has is their, or, his or her disobedience. Defeat is not part of God’s programme for us, ineffectiveness is not His plan. The ‘day of small things’ is a ground alone for self-examination and penitence. Yet we can always hide behind apparently good excuses and, tacitly at least, blame God. We always have enemies with chariots! But God’s programme for His church and His people is growth and like the ancient Israelites we have our past experience to strengthen our confidence and resolve. Moreover, we need to learn to trust God. One cannot help feeling that, by and large, the people won the victories which they were able to achieve with their own resources. It was when they were at the end of themselves that they failed to look to God. How easily we can do the same. Our vision for the Lord’s work is no greater than our own strength. Perhaps, then, the Saviour (prefigured in the Angel?) is calling us away from our compromise and small ambitions to loving obedience and victory. May His work in our hearts be deeper than that recorded in 2:5! There is one final word, so typical of this book. Amid the judgment is a word of grace (3). The people are not totally cut off as was to be expected. God left time for penitence. May we redeem, too, it Questions: 1. It is easy for us to read this passage and point the finger at our nation. However, the people of Israel were first and foremost the ‘congregation of the LORD’. What might we learn as believers and church-members from our failures in the light of this passage? 2. Reflect on the example of Othniel and Acsah. What lessons might you and I learn from them? 3. What do you think are the characteristic marks of true repentance? 2:6-3:6. The downward spiral of disobedience and defeat. It is a feature of Hebrew writing that often a story, or part of it, is told twice over with slight differences of emphasis in order to derive different lessons from the same events. This is true here. The same period of Israel’s history as occupied 1:1-2:5 is reintroduced but the lessons to be learnt are different. As we look at these verses it is clear that they were intended to teach the danger of resting upon the experience of past generations (2:6-15). Verses 6-9 repeat Joshua 24:28-31 but with one significant difference: in Judges the LORD’s dealings with the Israelites are said to have been great (7). Joshua and the elders had seen much success as they rested in the LORD. But it is easy for the next generation under such circumstances to presume upon such blessing (and even the generation who have received the blessing not to pass on the knowledge of it in an adequate way). Then when things start to go wrong the new generation shows that it has not the faith of that which has gone. Doubtless the generation after Joshua were aware of the nations past history; but they knew neither the LORD nor what he had done for Israel (10).  In other words their knowledge was not something that had become personal and   led to a loving obedience and trust in the LORD (this is what knowledge of God usually means in the Bible).  Rather, various faithless attempts were adopted to ‘bolster up’ the situation. Any respite in such circumstances is, however, only temporary and any apparent blessing illusory. Powerlessness results and leads to successive defeats. This is what is described in this paragraph. The new generation did not have that intimate knowledge of the LORD which had characterised the servant of the LORD (8) and his colleagues. As a result they had not seen the mighty deeds of God themselves (10b) and they were insufficiently aware of their past history, even second hand, to be able to derive any benefit from it (10b). The result was that they turned to the religions of the land they had begun to conquer. We know that they never, in their own minds, exchanged one religion for another. Rather they looked for help from the gods of the land in matters in which the LORD seemed unable to help them. But the writer of Judges knew better: They did evil ... [and] forsook the LORD (11,12). Rather than turn to self-examination they turned to self-help. But such flabby religion led to flabby people, without the will to resist the LORD’s enemies (14). The final result was utter defeat (15). Yet, sadly, the people failed to realise their true situation: it was the LORD into whose hands they had fallen (14f.). This a lesson we need to learn. The twentieth century church in England has reproduced this picture almost exactly. In the early years the churches were able to rest upon the success and the momentum of the past. But gradually, as the tide turned against it more and more, there was little evidence of penitence: only numerous attempts to shore up shaky structures. Spirituality, even among the faithful, went into rapid decline. Hope was lost and the ‘great distress’ became and to some extent remains the situation today. The choice is ours: will we return to the LORD of our fathers or continue to grieve the LORD and experience His wrath (13-14) by our efforts at faithless self-help? A further lesson here is the danger of looking to the LORD for what Arthur Cundall calls ‘crash-aid’, (16-23). These verses summarise the remainder of the main section of the Book of Judges (3:7-16:31), a period of 200-400 years (depending on chronology. This is debated among the scholars and those interested are referred to more scholarly commentaries or dictionaries for a full discussion of the issues). As such, they issue a very important warning. Even in their great distress (15), the people refused to turn back to the LORD. This was despite the fact that the LORD encouraged their return by granting them leaders who were able to bring them success again (16,18). Even in such circumstances they would not listen to their judges (17).  Even where there was evidence of repentance the sequel indicated that their penitence was, at best, partial. All too quickly (unlike their fathers they quickly turned away, 17) they succumbed to the faults from which they had so recently escaped (17,19). Moreover, each time they sank lower and lower (19b). Cundall says, ‘The voice of conscience can become dulled by successive acts of sin, and repentance can become more and more superficial until, ensnared in the character formed by a multitude of thoughts and actions, a miracle is needed to produce a genuine repentance and a seeking of the LORD with the whole heart’. The lesson for us is this. We are not simply to seek the LORD because we are in a mess and need help. Rather, we are to desire His glory above all things and come right back to Him. Only then is there any hope of permanent blessing in the future. Or is a miracle already needed to rouse us from our selfish preoccupation with our own distress? In addition to this, this section teaches the need to re-learn spiritual warfare (3:1-6). Three reasons for the continued presence of enemies in the land is given in this passage. As a result of their failure, the people were being punished (20f.). In addition to this, the enemies remained to test their faithfulness (22). But there is a final reason. Enemies remained to teach the new generations the art of warfare (3:2). Joshua and his contemporaries had not overcome the nations of the land by their own power or earthly weapons (as the defeat of Jericho and defeat by Ai showed). Rather it was the miraculous help of the LORD to a people utterly dependent upon Him and obedient to Him that had brought success. It was this lesson that the people needed to relearn. Only then would the selfish religion that characterised them have its power broken. If there is one lesson in this passage it is this. Spiritual battles are won in no other way (compare 3:10; 6:34; 9:23; 11:29; 13:25; 14:6,19; 15:14,19 with Zechariah 4:6). As we labour and seek to be obedient in all things we look to Him who, alone, can effect an increase. This is a solemn passage in a solemn book. And yet it is encouraging too! For it is the merciful LORD who was ordering the Israelites way (as ours) even in defeat. This section is full of God’s acts of righteous vengeance against the poeple who had forsaken his covenant: the LORD was provoked to anger (12), the hand of the Lord was against them (15) and the LORD was very angry (26). Yet all this is admixed with his mercy: the LORD raised up judges (16) and he had compassion on them (18). His hand of the wrath was mixed with mercy to the end that the people might come back to the place of blessing and success. May we learn the lesson well and not fail His mercy. Sadly, it failed to work for the Israelites. Forbidden marriage contracts were made and idolatrous worship adopted (3:5,6) and the people refused to give up their evil practices and their stubborn ways (19). Questions: 1.  ‘Count you blessings, name them one by one’. As you reflect upon God’s mercies to you, what effect can you detect that they have had upon your faithfulness (or lack of it)?  How might this passage apply to your situation? 2. In the light of this passage, what can you and I learn about the nature and the progress of sin? In what ways does your experience confirm the truth of this passage? 3. What does this passage teach us about the relationship between blessing and God’s approval of us? How might your answer be relevant to situations known to you? —————————————————————————————————————————————————————— Introduction to 3:7-16:31 In 3:7-16:31 the cycle of sin, judgment, deliverance and blessing introduced in 2:16ff. is illustrated by a series of examples. 13 ‘deliverers’ are described: six are very briefly mentioned (Shamgar, Tola, Jair, Ibzan, Elon and Abdon) but seven of them have their activities described more fully. The story is designed to provide a somewhat repetitive and depressing story and we should not fail to notice this! Judges was written to emphasise the fact that God’s people seldom or but slowly learn the folly of deserting Him. Repetition only goes to show how slowly we sometimes are to learn and, at the same time, emphasises how vital is the lesson. While the previous observations suggest the nature of the basic framework for the central chapters of the book of Judges, it is important that we do not miss the distinctive features in each of the stories. Thus, as we proceed, we shall concentrate upon the distinctive lessons of each episode in the story. But though we shall do this, we must not forget the overall message of this central section of the book. 3:7-5:31 is the first part of this large, central section of the Book of Judges. If the chronology which is preferred by the present author is adopted (see comments above on p xx) these chapters cover a period of over 200 years from about 1435 BC to 1229 BC. So the story begins shortly after the death of Joshua (who died about 1442) and proceeds to recount three separate periods of oppression and deliverance. These are: i) the subjection to Chusan-rishathaim from which was brought to an end by Othniel (3:7-11). ii) the Moabite and Philistine incursions into the land against which Ehud (3:12-30) and Shamgar (3:31) rebelled. iii) the oppresion by Jabin, king of Hazor from whom the Israelites were delivered by Deborah and Barak (chapters 4,5) 3:7-11: The cycle begins. Any visitor to modern Palestine today is very quickly made aware of the vital importance of water to the economy of the modern state of Israel. Tour guides emphasise the importance of drinking little and often to avoid dehydration. A bus tour around the country emphasises how important modern irrigation schemes are to agricultural success. Jerusalem itself rests on the edge of the barren desert wastelands of the southern part of the country. It was ever so! And living on the knife edge between plenty and want (depending on whether the rains came at the right time) the ancient inhabitants of Canaan had developed a religion designed to ensure that drought was averted. Modern students would describe the religion by the term ‘ sympathetic magic’. So, if the worshipper desired a particular blessing from his god he would try to draw his god’s attention to his need by doing something designed to remind the god of the need. The prophets of Baal (1 Kings 18) tried to remind Baal of their need for fire to descend from heaven by cutting themselves so that blood (red like fire) would run down their bodies. It was hoped that this might encourage Baal to send fire down. Similarly, when the Canaanites sought good flocks they would go to their shrines and have sex with the pagan shrine prostitutes, in the hope that Baal might fertilize the land. This is the background to the mention of the Baals and the Asherahs (the female partners of the Baals) in verse 7.  The Israelites found Baalism a constant temptation. On the one hand they were called to simply trust God for their needs and humbly look to him who had done so much for them. On the other hand, faced with the possibility of ruin, there was always the temptation to feel that it might be worth trying something else to ensure their well-being. Moreover, the situation could be looked at another way. It was true, of course, that the LORD had done some spectacular things in the nation’s history. But in Canaan their needs were rather different. Here it was not spectacular interventions in history that were required but the provision of day to day necessities. Perhaps, the local gods were more adept to meet these sort of needs? Either way, Israel’s error was, as Michael Wilcock puts it, ‘the classic sin of preferring the local gods to Israel’s own God: the sin, that is, of centering her life on the values of the world around her, and of assuming that in practice they are more important and valid than the Lord is’.   Such apostasy began (and begins) when the people forgot the LORD (7). This is a significant phrase. God’s people seldom take a decisive step and reject the LORD. If they did it would be so much more easy to spot and so much easier to handle pastorally. But it is not usually like that. No deliberate decision is taken to exchange the LORD for the gods of this world. Rather a gradual decline takes place often so imperceptible that those who are on such a path do not even notice what is happening. Little by little the LORD has a smaller and smaller place in the lives of such people and a length he is ‘forgotten’ for all practical purposes and apostasy is complete and the individual or nation conforms to the prevailing world-view. This can happen, of course, even while the LORD is still, at least nominally, worshipped and it is what happened to the people of Israel shortly after the death of Joshua. Only by care and diligence can we ensure the same does not happen to us: after all consider how many this has been true over the years of in the churches we know.  We surely cannot rest content when others who once walked with us have forgotten the LORD. One of the most graphic passages in the Old Testament is found in Deuteronomy 27 and 28. There the Israelites were commanded to divide into two groups upon the slopes of the two mountains, Ebal and Gerizim. One group were to shout out the blessings of faithful obedience to God’s covenant with his people. The others were to respond by calling out the curses that the LORD would bring upon those who failed him. There God had promised the very things the Canaanite gods claimed to provide (28:3-6) if his people were faithful but had threatened destruction at the hands of their enemies if they failed (see, especially 28:20ff.). All too quickly the people aroused the anger of the LORD (verse 8). Their first enemy arose from the north. Aram Naharaim means ‘Syria of the two rivers’ and probably refers to the Mesopotamian territories between the Tigris and the Euphrates.  Because of the Arabian Desert lying east of the Jordan all the ancient trades routes from Mesopotamia circumscribed a great loop north and west before entering the Jordan rift valley and sweeping south. Hence Cushan-Rishathayim was the first of many to attack the people of God from the north and he may well have been the head of an ancient ‘super-power’.  His name as given here actually means ‘Cushan of the double wickedness’ and is the sort of name oppressed people’s grimly give in jest to their enemies. This being the case, it hints at the severity of the sufferings the people experienced under his rule. Indeed, the cruelty of the peoples from the north was a by-word in the ancient world. Remarkably, we are told that it was the LORD who sold the people into Cushan’s hands. This emphasises a vital biblical truth. God would sooner suffer reproach than an apostate people. When God’s people suffer disgrace He can become a reproach among the ungodly. But, this passage emphasises, the LORD would sooner this than His holiness is ‘endangered’ by His people. When the people did evil (7,and see 12) the LORD punished them and allowed them to be trampled under foot by the people (and let us not forget it) the gods of other nations. Doubtless the Israelites had not yet sunk to the level of the peoples around them. But they had declined from righteousness: the only thing that could outwardly distinguish themselves as the LORD’s. Thus, he sold his people into slavery to other nations and their gods (8). As their benevolent master he had every right. As their covenant God it was His duty to those who had torn up the covenant agreement. Today both individuals and churches are too often in precisely this situation. In unrighteousness we find ourselves powerless and forsaken by the LORD. It is often assumed that when they cried out to the LORD (9) the people were responding to their suffering in repentance. However, Davis suggests that this was not the case. He note that when the phrase is used elsewhere ‘the emphasis remains on the condition of distress rather than on any expression of repentance’. Thus, he suggests, when the LORD raised up a saviour for Israel, ‘he was responding to their misery rather than their sorrow, to their pain rather than their penitence’. In this way the LORD’s mercy, even for a sinful people, is exalted. The deliverance was sheer grace! We have already met Othniel (see 1:11-15). Presumably now an aged man, he was none the less raised up by the LORD to venture forth against the LORD’s enemies and secure victory and a lasting peace of forty years (11). For this task he was equipped by the Spirit of the LORD who came upon him (10). Thus a good man was raised up, and equipped with the resources necessary (which outran all human ones) he was able to deliver God’s people. Would the lesson be learnt by Israel? Questions: 1.  What are the equivalent of the Baals and the Asherahs in today’s world? In what way have they exercised a fatal fascination over the church today? 2. What lessons might you personally learn from the information we are given about Othniel in this passage? 3. Are there situations today that you can identify where God seems to be allowing his own name to be ill-spoken of, rather than be seen as the God of a sinful people?  What might we learn from this? 3:12-31: Saved by the Unexpected. These verses describe Israel’s bondage and deliverance from an enemy from the east (Moab) and one from the west (the Philistines). It is surely not without significance that Israel’s first three enemies come from different points of the compass. The point should not be lost on us. When we fail to love in trusting obedience we are surrounded by potential enemies! In fact, as we shall see, Judges even goes on to speak of the enemy within (chapters 4,5). While reflecting on these enemies it is interesting to notice how different they were. Cushan, as we have seen, was probably a great king. The Phoenicians (Philistines) were also a powerful race; though scarcely in the same league. But Jabin and Eglon were only local petty rulers. But the Israelites fell before them all! Sadly, all too often departure from the LORD means that we, too, are powerless both morally and spiritually. Apostasy was quickly seen in a decline in morality. This is inevitable. As we show less concern for the LORD we will be less interested in His standards and, therefore, will be more quickly ensnared by sin. Spiritually, too, the people knew no success or blessing. How could they? And how can we? We note that apostasy is followed by increasingly harsh punishment. First it was eight years (8), then eighteen (14). In 4:3 it will be twenty years. This shows two things. The people may have been slower to turn to the LORD. Or, perhaps more likely, the LORD found it necessary to punish his people more and more severely in order to seek to awaken them to the realities of the situation. This point was surely pressed home here when the people became subject to Moab, and the Ammonites and Amalekites (13). These three peoples had arisen as a result of faithlessness among those who were among the ‘family of God’ (see Genesis 19:30-38: 36:9-12). That the people of God were now subjected to utterly godless peoples should have brought them up short with a start. When we are powerless before the attacks of apostates do we feel the rebuke we should? Nevertheless there is another side to the story here. It describes the people and the tactics God uses. It is instructive to compare the three saviours of Israel described in this passage. As we have seen, Othniel was a senior citizen. It seems almost certain that he had known Egypt as a child, he had known the wilderness wanderings and had, probably, become a leader among the people in the land (this seems to explain the note about him in 1:11-15). Ehud was a ‘handicapped’ person: quite literally, since he was left-handed (15). Both in Israel, as in many societies today, this was regarded as a disadvantage. But cunning, brave Ehud (see again below) was able to turn his disability into a strength. Shamgar may well have been a Canaanite: his name and home town/family name suggests this (more scholarly works offer the reasons for this conclusion). Perhaps he was a recent convert to the LORD. Stirred by the contradiction between God’s promises and his experience and concerned for the honour of the LORD he took up any available instrument and wielded it for the LORD (the ox-goad (31) could be made into a vicious eight-foot long weapon!). Perhaps the Philistines had made this necessary by disarming the Israelites (compare 1 Samuel 13:19-22). The lesson from all this is obvious. The LORD will use anyone for His glory: all those who seek His honour above everything else. Through them He will establish His righteousness (10, this is what ‘judge’ implies). Through them He will win victories. There are none too old, too green, too handicapped to work for Him! Under His blessing God can use us all whatever our personalities and gifts: after all He made us the way we are and called us to work for His victory! Our warfare is spiritual. We are called to establish the kingdom and the glory of Jesus. As a result of this we are not called to armed resistance but we are called to put on the whole armour of God and go forth to undertake spiritual warfare. May we not prove apostate and faithless but find in the Spirit of Jesus our strength and victory! There are some further details in this passage that are worth noticing before we conclude our study. Eglon seems to have established his base in Jericho, the City of Palms (13). What an irony! The place where Israel had experienced its greatest victory in the conquest of the land was now occupied by the enemy and oppressor. A further irony is that Ehud was presumably chosen to be the envoy of Israel precisely because he was a cripple and could not, therefore, be seen as a threat. The Hebrew text makes this more apparent than English versions by telling us that Ehud could not use his right hand. He was left-handed of necessity! And surely a left-handed cripple is no threat for anyone? [Note that there may be a further irony, in that Ehud was a Benjamite (15); literally, from the tribe of the ‘son of the right hand’]. Some commentators make a great deal of the fact that there is no mention of the Holy Spirit as equipping Ehud for his saving role. Here, it is suggested, God allows human efforts to triumph. For some expositors this helps resolve the embarrassment that they feel about God giving a deliverer (15) who didn’t fight by the Marquis of Queensberry’s rules!  But we can be unduly squeamish. Life in this world is not conducted within a sanitised environment. A sinful world is a world which is messy. And most of us work with some sort of definition of a ‘just war’ where sometimes the ends justify the means. However, this passage tells us that God is willing to get his hands dirty (very dirty!) in order to effect the gracious salvation of his people. What a joy that is! Graeme Auld describes this story as ‘delightful’ ! That may not be our opinion but surely the details of this story are described with a view to making Israel laugh again. How is the mighty oppressor overthrown! And what a victory ensued! Again a phenomenal number of the enemy were slain (ten thousand, 29 and see 1:4) and a period of extended peace (eighty years or two generations, 30) followed.  How gracious is our God. Questions: 1. Is it ever right to deceive others or lie? Compare this passage with Exodus 1:19-20 and give reasons for your conclusions. 2. What comfort can be drawn from this passage and its description of God getting his ‘hands dirty’? How might the lessons apply to your life today? 3. Reflect on the way this passage exalts God’s grace. What response ought you and I to offer to the revelation of God given here? 4. This passage shows that God often works in unexpected ways. He saves his people in unexpected ways and by unexpected people. What might we learn from this? Are there any limits which God places upon himself when doing the ‘novel thing’? What are they?—————————————————————————————————————————————————————— 4:1-5:31: Saved by two women! This glorious deliverance of the people of God by Deborah and Barak brings to an end the first cycle of the stories about the judges (3:7-5:31). The details of the battle described here are not easy to reconstruct and there are not a few scholars quick to point out apparent contradictions between the two accounts of victory in chapters 4 and 5. However, when we bear in mind that the second account is a poem and that poetry, by definition, is less concerned with literal factual truth than of seeking to capture the spirit and the emotions associated with what is described the problems evaporate! Moreover, it is questionable whether the disparities are any greater than the variations between two people who give their testimony of the same event. There are no irreconcilable contradictions. Happily, moreover, none of this inhibits our general understanding of the passage nor its application. Time came when Ehud died and, with the external restraint taken away, Israel reverted to her true character and did evil in the eyes of the LORD (4:1).  Davis notes,‘ There is something wrong with religion when its degree of fidelity depends solely on outside pressures, influences and leadership’. However, this fundamental weakness will charactersie Israel throughout this book. Israel’s faith was never more than skin-deep. It failed to become a religion of the heart. That this is the issue here is demonstrated by Deborah’s words in 5:31 when she speaks of true believers as they who love you.  This verse is crucial to an understanding of the present section for it describes the LORD’s purpose for His people as one in which their glory and power increases like the sun to its zenith. Such a defeat of His enemies then becomes the LORD’s own vindication: a fact which Deborah clearly recognised in her song (5:3, 10f.). God’s desire is His own glory seen in the victory and honour of His own people. We need to rediscover this optimistic perspective which pervades the Scriptures. It is sadly lacking today and Christians sometimes glory in their reproach. Not so Deborah, who recognised that she needed waking up out of such a dishonouring and slothful attitude! Yet we must not fail to notice that God would sooner deny his glory than have those who own his name fail to live for him alone and love him above all else. What then was the failure of the people at this point?  The key word is again (4:1). Wickedness, as Wilcock notes, is desperately unoriginal and in Israel’s case it varied only in that it got worse. Once again, the people were guilty of apostasy; they chose new gods (5:8). But this apostacy was the result of unbelief. Failure to trust God and His word forced them to seek substitutes, other means to secure their well-being. We are no different: we often look to programmes and techniques rather than to the LORD and His Word. The root of such an attitude may lie in a failure to believe that God can do anything more than we can achieve for ourselves. It can also be found in wanting guarantees beyond the Word itself. Some think that that was Barak’s problem (4:8). So, they argue,  while there is a proper sense of inadequacy when faced with a responsibility given to us by the LORD (compare 2 Corinthians 3:5,6) this was not Barak’s problem as the following judgment (even if mildly expressed by a gentle God) makes plain (4:9). Others, however, suggest that this is unlikely. Wilcock, for example, notes that Hebrews 11:32 commends Barak’s faith (not that of Deborah or Jael). Moreover, he is willing to go, if the conditions are met. This is not downright disobedience! Moreover, says Wilcock, ‘Barak’s missing the honour of killing Sisera, is not necessarily a rebuke - it is just as likely to be a plain statement of fact’ (obscured by the NIV translation). In the light of this it is perhaps best to see Barak’s faith as weak but genuine and that he was seeking the assurances that most of us look for when God calls us to step out boldly for him. That he was willing to step out is all to his credit in the circumstances since he was being invited to lead a small band of peasants, without weapons (5:8) against a crack professional army of enormous size (note the repetition of nine hundred chariots in 4:3, 10). Small wonder the writer to the Hebrews sees him as a champion of the faith! However, if this was not Barak’s problem, it certainly had been that of the people as a whole.  For over twenty years (4:2) the people had done nothing; despite the fact that God had promised them the land occupied by their enemies and that his glory and their blessing was at stake.  We can sympathise with their reasoning. What use would the 10,000 Israelites be against the enemy’s 900 chariots. But Paul could warn against seeking to live by appearances and not faith (2 Corinthians 5:7): it is a fault to which we are all inevitably prone. But we must recognise it for the sin it is and place ourselves, once and for all, under the Word of God: under its promises and revelation of the character of God and under the evidence of God’s faithfulness in the past. Interestingly, the fact that it was Jabin, a king of Canaan who reigned in Hazor (4:2) should have given Israel pause for thought. Not only had God promised time and again that he would expel the Canaanites from the land but (as Joshua 11:10f. tells us) a former Jabin had been routed. The situation was clearly not hopeless if God was on his poeple’s side! This passage emphasises, however, the desperate consequences that result from a failure in God’s people to trust Him. They lost their honour and the name and favour of the LORD was greatly obscured. They were subjected to war, weakness and servitude.  The oppression was severe (4:3); a word used, as Jordan notes, of the Egyptian bondage in Exodus 1:13-14.  Communications were disrupted, agriculture affected. In sum, they were in a sorry mess (5:6f.). Davis says, ‘Times were so bad folks couldn’t even travel safely- they had to take the back roads because thieves and thugs freeloaded on the highways. Israel was totally defenceless, having neither warriors (v. 7a) nor weapons (v 8b…)‘. When faith goes out the window the same is always true: far from securing what little we have (the usual motive), we lose even that! God’s people are not called to defend ground already held but to go out to win fresh victories and possessions. Humanly speaking the odds against the Christian and the church are always too great. Barak, as we have seen, recognised that in his own situation. However, we are not to use the ‘realities of the situation’ in such a way as to overthrow faith. There is a place for realism and common sense among believers: but it is not here! God had spoken: The LORD, the God of Israel, commands you: Go…(4:6). Living in obedient faith, Barak soon discovered that the battle was not his because the LORD routed Sisera (4:15). He did not have to fight for victory: all he had to do was to pursue a fleeing enemy (4:16)! As to the battle itself, Barak is not mentioned! What then did those fearsome chariots mean to the LORD and those who believed in Him? Indeed, as the sequel pointedly shows (4:17-22 and parallel), a lone believing woman was sufficient to break the power of the Canaanites once and for ever. Never again did they constitute a threat to the people of Israel. They were an enemy routed once and for ever. How slow we are to learn the same lessons. The hymnwriter says, ‘Soldiers of Christ arise, and put your armour on, strong in the strength which God supplies through His eternal Son’. This attitude has always accompanied the expansion of the church. The Bible is full of ironic humour. This is evident here. The Israelites were tempted, as we have already seen, to look to nature gods to meet their daily needs. Hence Baal was often depicted as the god of the thunderstorm. Here Barak (which means ‘thunderbolt’) was assisted by what appears to be a thunderstorm (see, especially the description of its results in 5:20ff.) to overthrow the Cannanites who worshipped the ‘thunder god’.  As far as the Canaanites were concerned the only thing that thundered for them were the horses’ hoofs; in retreat! Perhaps we are intended to grasp at this point that, as Jordan puts it,  all ‘pagan religion is a cheap and perverted [we might add, powerless] copy of the truth’. A faithful leadership is a great blessing.  5:2,9 makes it clear that responsible, believing leadership can transform a cowering people into the horde who rushed down Mount Tabor to victory. The people willingly offer themselves….When the princes of Israel take the lead. The world, of course, knows this well. A people are seldom more visionary and confident than their leaders: those who are expected to show them an example. Thus, if the lessons of these two chapters are to be learnt by all of us, they are to be carefully considered, especially, by those who are or aspire to being leaders. Leaders are to lead! These two chapters also introduce to us the tragedy of the spectator.  Some, but not all, those who were available to fight for the victory of the LORD took up arms. Some, however, did not respond. In trans-Jordan there was a great deal of talk and searching of heart (5:15,16) but the needs of their flocks of sheep took precedent over the ‘flock’ of Israel. Self-interest took precedence over seeking God’s glory and obedience to his command. A similar situation pertained in Dan (5:17). They had developed a ‘nice little line’ in trading; to abandon profit-making for obedience to the call of God’s prophet   was a non-starter! Whether farmers or merchants they stood aloof from the battle.  There were even those who, with success surrounding them, remained aloof. We do not know where Meroz was (5:23) but all the indications of the context suggest a location need where the battle took place. This is so often the tragic truth about the LORD’s children. Lazy, self-centred, concerned not for the LORD’s glory but only their own security and critical and aloof even when blessing is evident they invite God’s curse. The angel of the LORD first appears in Genesis 16. In this and all subsequent appearances the angel is both identified with God but distinct from God. Many conclude that he is a pre-incarnation appearance of Christ. Whether or not this is so, the presence of the angel indicates that this is no message mediated through a prophet. Failure here by Meroz invited a curse from God’s own lips! Before we leave these two chapters we cannot but fail to note that this is a very odd story! Deborah is both a judge and a prophetess who was leading Israel at that time (4:4). Yet, paradoxically, though scarcely any others of the judges are portrayed as ‘the wise, mature, godly person that she is’ (Wilcock) she does not stand at the centre of the story. Then, while the words of her prophecy ‘the LORD will hand Sisera over to a woman’  (4:9) lead us to expect her to take centre stage, it is Jael who is described as the most blessed of women (5:24) for the part she played in Sisera’s death. But this is not all! Jael is celebrated in glowing almost gloating terms as the saviour of Israel (5:24-27, see, especially, verse 27). However, commentators are not slow to point out her ‘sins’. Jordan is not untypical. He mentions insubordination to her husband in breaking a treaty he had made (4:17), breaking the household treaty with Jabin (4:17), deception (4:18), lying (4:18), violating the laws of hospitality (4:18-21) and murder (4:21). The list is not exhaustive! Klein suggests that the fact that the LORD is not mentioned in 5:24-27 implies disapproval; blest among women she may be, but not by the LORD. In response, Jordan may overstate when he says, ‘we cannot escape the clear approval of God for Jael’s actions’.  However, we are at least faced with a question which, as Wilcock notes, ‘will press on us increasingly: how does God’s concern with the thing he wants done relate to his concern with the motives and the methods of the person who does it?‘ Possibly, those of us who have never experienced cruel oppression are more squeamish than we ought to be when faced with the messiness of life in this world and God’s actions in it. Sisera, the agent of Jabin cruelly oppressed (4:3) Israel and probably enjoyed raping captive Israelite girls (a girl or two for each man, 5:30). He was, as Davis puts it, ‘not exactly Mr Clean’. The mystery, however, continues. Israel was living in the midst of a male dominated world. What are we to make of the fact that Deborah started the ball rolling which Jael so startlingly concluded ‘while God was orchestrating the piece’ as Wilcock so effectively expresses it? For it was God who took on the gods of Canaan, as Deborah realised (5:2-5). It was he who was in control, even while his people were being circumstantially led to the point where they sought him in their distress (5:6-8). He was leading the armies of Israel (5:9-13)...so the song continues. All was his doing. And, finally, before him the Canaanite ‘confidence is seen as an illusion’ (Wilcock). For those with eyes to see it is those who love you who will be like the sun when it rises in its strength (5:31). The poet, William Cowper could say, ‘God moves in a mysterious way his wonders to perform’. It was ever so! Thus, our passage concludes with the celebration of God’s salvation, achieved by such unlikely methods (5:31) and which lasted for at least a generation (forty years). Questions: 1.  What does this passage teach about the qualities we should look for in our leaders? To what extent do these qualities match up with those things for which we usually look? What lessons might we learn from the disparity? 2.  Trace the activity of God through the variety of situations described in these two chapters. What implications should these facts have for us when we view our own circumstances or those in the world around us? 3. Look again at 4:8f. When do you think it is appropriate to test God’s call? 4. Look at 5:13-23 and the different responses people made to the call to stand up and fight for the LORD? Can you think of parallels in the church or your own life?  6:1-40: Grace for the stubborn and timid This chapter begins the second cycle of stories about the judges (6:1-10:5) and, in particular, decribes in considerable detail the call of Gideon and his early steps as the leader the LORD had appointed to deliver Israel. Indeed, as we shall see, this is the particular contribution of this chapter to the Book of Judges. Other Judges simply appear on the scene. Here we are given a glimpse into the background story: the making of a faithful man of God. This second period of the judges lasted less than 100 years. In that time there was, apparently, only seven years of chastisement (1). But the misery wrought by the judgment of God described in this chapter (especially in verses 1-6) far surpassed that of previous stripes. Indeed, there is evidence of God’s increasing impatience with the people; he did not ‘sell them’ but gave them into the hands of the Midianites (1) This time the enemy came from the east. They were traditional enemies of Israel; ‘nomads, scavengers…they had no culture and no home, but wandered from place to place, robbing and pilaging’ (Jordan). Allied with the Amalekites, a people who were a by-word for cynical cruelty in Bible times, and other eastern peoples (3) they constituted an appalling threat. Thus, here the Israelites were obliged to take refuge in mountain clefts, caves and strongholds (2) gathering together what few possessions they had as year after year like a swarm of locusts (5) the ememy stripped the land of all those things vital to the ongoing life of a peasant economy. Innumerable enemies were sent, as Wilcock notes, ‘as a punishment for the rejection of innumerable mercies’. Effective threshing has to be undertaken in the open and where there is a breeze. So severe was the situation, however, that Gideon is first introduced to us threshing wheat of such meager quantities and in such dangerous conditions that he was doing it in a small, airless winepress (11)! The very existence of the people was, therefore, seriously threatened by the danger of famine (The story of Ruth probably fits in here). This chapter teaches that there is a sorrow that falls short of true repentance (6-10). In their extremity the people cried out to the LORD for help (6). But there is that despairing seeking of God that seeks Him not for Himself but for needed blessing. Even today, people will often become very religious in want but once these needs are met they turn back to their previous infidelity. This appears to have been the problem with the Israelites. Thus, first of all, the LORD sent not blessing but an unnamed prophet. Davis says, ‘That would be like a stranded motorist calling a garage for assistance and the garage sending a philosopher instead of a mechanic’! But Israel needed to relearn several things: they needed to re-learn their history of salvation (7-9) and to give attention to God’s commands to them (10).  Thus the prophet was sent to awaken the people to the real reason for their distress: to remind them of His ability to help but also of His exclusive claim to them. The learning of this lesson marks the difference between a true and counterfeit believer. The counterfeit believer is selfish and thinks only of his or her needs and how they can be met by the service of God. The true believer delights in the LORD and willingly obeys His demands: thinking first of Him. But we also learn of the nearness of the LORD to His erring people (especially 11ff.). There is something rather marvelous about this story. The people were in a desperate state, they sought the LORD, but incorrectly. Yet the LORD did not wait for them to come to a more true repentance. There is no evidence that the prophet’s ministry had any effect; Gideon appears to have known nothing about his message and by the time the book of Judges was written there was only some vague awareness that ‘someone’ had said something! Yet God, who is a God of kindness and mercy, met them, even in their half-heartedness, and took the initiative to bring them back to Himself. So the angel of the LORD reappears (11). As we saw in 2:1-5 the ‘Angel’ was the fullest and most intimate manifestation of the LORD Himself before the incarnation of His Son. Thus, appearing to Gideon in this way, He emphasised His nearness to the people, even in their rebellion! The LORD who had walked with Adam and Eve in the Garden was ready to commune with His erring people and to restore them to Himself. Moreover, it was the Angel who had fought with the people against their enemies in the past (Joshua 5:13). This fact surely was to be a source of great strength to Gideon All this is unspeakably marvelous. We fail the LORD. So often our labours for Him are half-hearted and we seek Him so slothfully. How can we expect to come again to the place of blessing. For us, as for ancient Israel, the lesson is the same: He will bring us there. Our most halting and hesitating steps will speedily be accompanied by His own supporting arm! We noted above that this chapter is distinctive in the way it describes, in detail, the early stages of Gideon’s call and response. Thus, we are told, first of all, about the call of Gideon (12-16).  In many respects this call parallels those of Moses and Joshua; though Gideon seems to require more convincing of God’s presence and purposes that they did. In view of the immediately preceding events and the less dramatic nature of the encounter, we can, perhaps, understand this! At first sight Gideon does not seem a very likely ‘winner’, hidden away in the winepress. But the LORD sees Him not as he is but as what he will become; a mighty warrior (12). Gideon is not altogether impressed. It is all very well for this stranger (not immediately recognised by Gideon) to mouth the words the LORD is with you (11) but such claims (expanded in verse 14!) don’t seem to tie up with reality. After all, Gideon cynically responds, God doesn’t seem the same God today who accomplished the wonders that our fathers told us about (13). Moreover, there are practical problems to overcome; my clan is the weakest in Manasseh, and I am the least in my family (15). This seems to have been a genuine reservation: later the Ephraimites (who considered themselves ‘top dogs’ were to complain to Gideon, (8:1ff.). Gideon might well ask, ‘Could a leader gain support from a small group in despised Manasseh?‘ In response to this the LORD reminds Gideon of the only two things that count. First of all, He Himself will empower Gideon (14 and compare 34) and, secondly, will guarantee His presence (16, cp. Psalm 23:4). When this is the case the mighty enemy will seem as though they are a single weak assailant. We need to learn these lessons. God has called each of us to a life of service and victory. We might seem unlikely candidates for such a high calling. Moreover, there are difficulties in the way (wherever we are and whatever the task we are called to do: howsoever humble) and there is the temptation to doubt that the God of the past could ever be the same for us. But, as for Gideon, the same is true for us. He who has called is the One who equips and guarantees His victorious presence. Sometimes, of course, the LORD seems to be calling us to a totally unexpected course of action. Then we need to be sure that it is, indeed, He who is calling. That was true with Gideon. By now he seems to have guessed who his visitor is! So he seeks some guarantees that God is truly in fellowship with him (and the people). In war-ravaged Israel, Gideon invites his visitor to a lavish feast (17-18). Since an ephah was a large enough vessel to hold a person (Zechariah 5:7), Gideon provides a bakers-store amount of bread for his guest! Moreover, bearing in mind that sheep, cattle and donkeys (4) had all been commandeered by the eastern hordes, a young goat must have been worth a small fortune (19). More significant than the munificence of Gideon’s feast are, however, two other factors. First of all, to offer and receive a meal in Bible-times was an offer and acceptance of friendship. Secondly, these particular items were those associated with the peace offering (see, especially Leviticus 7).  Thus, by sharing this meal/sacrifice God confirmed Himself (17-21), especially in the matter wherein Gideon needed the greatest reassurance (22-24). He wanted an assurance that the LORD truly was in alliance (one of the meanings of peace in the Old Testament) with him. That confirmation was given and Gideon was ready for action…...well not quite! For, next, we are introduced to his first hesitating steps in the way of believing discipleship. And how like us Gideon proved to be! Gideon could never hope to deliver God’s people unless he himself demonstrated his willingness to obey the LORD despite the cost and danger and unless a change of heart could be effected in the people. We should not miss the point in verse 25! ‘Next God will tell Gideon to kill one of the few bulls left in the land’  notes Jordan, who then adds that when ‘fellowship with God is restored, reformation must begin immediately’. A clear break with Baalism had to be made; the symbols of Baal worship (the altar and the Asherah pole) had to be cut down, (25) and a proper (26) sanctuary to the LORD put in its place. The powerlessness of Baalism was to be demonstrated by using the hewn Asherah pole as firewood for the LORD’s offering! It is easy to criticise Gideon for being afraid (27) and doing what he was commanded at night. But, as Davis notes, ‘Did God tell him to do it by day? Did God tell him he couldn’t be afraid? Or did God simply tell him to do it? Evidently, obedience was essential and heroism optional’. Gideon’s first steps (he did as the LORD told him) were rewarded by the LORD (27) in the first glimmerings of faith in Joash, his father (28ff.), and then, apparently, the people, who soon proved willing to follow him (34). Thus, Gideon was strengthened for his life’s work. He was no longer alone! Jordan notes of this scenario that, ‘The first to rally to his side were the Abiezerites, his own home town! All those men who had seen little Gideon as a child, now follow him as their leader. This required a monumental work of grace’. But what an encouragement it would have been for Gideon to find family and friends supporting him! Yet Gideon still had to wrestle with his temperament and the magnitude of the task to which he had been called. He still needed props for his faith (34-40). The desire for a sign was not evidence of unbelief, but of a weak faith struggling for assurance in the face of the great task that lay ahead. Perhaps the requests were symbolic. Did the first ‘sign’ indicate that the LORD would once again refresh His people? Did the second indicate that the LORD would do this despite the fact that others seemed to be flourishing and blessed? We cannot be sure. What we do know is that in the sequel Gideon sought no more signs, even though the LORD pared down his army to 300 men! He had learnt to trust the LORD and to rely upon the Word alone. There is a remarkable tenderness in the LORD’s preparation of Gideon. He knew His man, as He knows us. Gideon was ‘diffident, modest and shy’ (Wilcock) and God recognised that Gideon could not arrive ‘overnight’ at maturity. Weakness along the way would need to be met and Gideon strengthened for the realities of the battle and victory ahead. Little by little, like a father with a child, the LORD raised him up. Then Gideon, the man who hid in a winepress, led the people into one of their most remarkable ever victories: a victory which required superhuman faith in the LORD…..........The same LORD leads us. Little by little He will lead our halting steps till we too are ‘more than conquerors’. We are called simply to place our hands in His and He will gently lead us though we be as those with young: weak and defenceless (Isaiah 40:11)! Thus the dour book of the Judges proves to be one of great comfort. It does not mince words with apostasy and sin. Yet it also declares the mercy and tenderness of the LORD to those who hesitatingly tip-toe back to Him. Moreover, it teaches us that God can make us ‘mighty warriors’ (12) too. For the resources are His and His presence will go with us! How great is our God! ‘Thus’, says Wilcock, ‘ the scene is set, and the saviour prepared, for the confrontation between Israel and Midian in chapter 7’. Questions:   1.  Recall some of the experiences which you have had where God took the initiative to restore you to himself, despite yourself. What lessons might you learn about God from such experiences? 2.  List some of the characteristic marks of false and genuine repentance?  How does your own spiritual life match up to the list which you have made? 3. What tasks has God called you to undertake for him? How might God’s dealings with Gideon help you to step out in obedience? 4. The restoration of communion with God requires immediate steps to be taken to reformation of life. What are the ‘idols’ that we should sacrifice on the LORD’s altar?  What sort of lifestyle should characterise a reformed life?  7:1-23: Magnificent Warrior This and the following chapter describes Gideon’s victory over the Midianites and recount sev Commentary 2011-01-11T11:21:26+00:00 http://ferndalechurches.org.uk/resources/detail/gods_word_through_the_unordained_the_message_of_amos/ http://ferndalechurches.org.uk/resources/detail/gods_word_through_the_unordained_the_message_of_amos/#When:11:19:51Z An ordinary ‘bloke’ shares God’s message with us all!GOD’S WORD THROUGH THE UNORDAINED: THE MESSAGE OF AMOS Amos and his Setting Amos, a name born only by the author of this prophecy in the OT (the name of Isaiah’s father is spelt differently), is not known outside of his book. Thus, internal evidence alone is able to furnish us with information about him. Khirbet Tekoa, 20km south of Jerusalem is generally identified with Tekoa (1:1). It is not clear that this was Amos’ birthplace. Khirbet Tekoa is a desolate area, surrounded by hills. 7:14 indicates that he was a herdsman (working for himself or a landowner?) and, as a side-line, cultivated sycamores. The latter was impossible in Tekoa and was probably undertaken on the slopes surrounding the Dead Sea. ‘Shepherd’ (1:1) is to be understood in a wider sense than used conventionally in English. His ministry was apparently short and he distanced himself from the ‘professional’ prophets. His message is directed to the northern kingdom, which he shows evidence of knowing well: probably through commercial travelling. He had evidently been present at some of their religious festivals and was familiar with the social evils, judicial corruption and religious presumption of the people. He was also familiar with the history of Israel, referring to the exodus from Egypt, the preservation in the wilderness and the defeat of the Amorites which enabled the people to settle in Canaan. Amos does not regard himself as proclaiming a new message but as calling God’s people back to the old ways. He was a master of the Hebrew language as is seen in his free use of verse and his editorial prose. Perhaps he is best viewed as a well-educated merchant. The book fits appropriately into its historical context. Jeroboam II enjoyed a flourishing economy and political success (with major victories east of Jordan). As yet there is no trace of the emerging Assyrian power (750 BC onwards). We cannot date the earthquake (1:1) with any certainty. 1:1 Surprisingly the book dates the oracles of Amos against the northern kingdom with reference to the south. This suggests that Amos himself could well have edited his prophecies into book-form: later authors would have been more likely to have related his message entirely to the north. The verse (typically of the Bible) shows little interest in the mode of inspiration (‘what he saw’ translates a very general Hebrew word). More importantly this section stresses: 1) the divine initiative in the revelation (hazah, ‘he saw’  points to this); 2) the verbal character of the revelation (3); 3) the fact that divine verbal revelation is not inconsistent with human authorship (1, ‘the words of Amos’); 4) the transcendent quality of the revelation; a mere ‘shepherd’ could scarcely come to it! Nockri (‘shepherds’) is an unusual word found only here and in 2 Kings 3:4. An Arab cognate hints that the word refers to a particular brand of wool-bearing sheep. A Babylonian cognate might suggest an employee of the king or a major landowner. We cannot be sure and the book seems to hint at an independent ‘shepherd’. The earthquake, also mentioned in Zech. 14:5, cannot be dated with certainty. However, it must have had a considerable impact on the nation in view of the several references to it. The detailed dating points to a period between 780-740 BC (Jeroboam II reigned 786-745, Uzziah 783-742). The middle of the period (760) when peace and prosperity florished and before the emerging threat of Assyria fits best. 1:2 This is a summary heading or motto of Amos’ message, especially of 1:2-3:8 which begins and ends with a lion’s roar. The message is one of judgement as God appears (‘thunder’ often accompanies theophany in the OT) from the place associated with his presence in the OT (‘Zion’) and stands ready to pounce (sha-ag has this force e.g. in Judges 14:5). The judgement is one of nationwide destruction in which valley bottoms (‘pastures’) and mountain peaks (‘Carmel’) and all between (the Hebrew idiom here) together mourn (abal under the onslaught of God’s wrath. Significantly Carmel was in the northern kingdom. Judgement is to come to those who lay claim to being the people (or part of the people) of God. Moreover, the emphasis in the verse is upon Yahweh. It is the covenant God of his people who is seen to arouse himself to judgement. 1:3-5 Note: 1) These verses are part of a section which extends to 2:3. Oracles are addressed to the nations surrounding Israel. Each of them is judged for habitual rebellion (‘three…four’ is a typical Hebrew idiom emphasising repetition). Each are identically structured: stated formula, declaration of the nature of the sin, declaration of punishment. 2) However, the question naturally arises: to whom were these oracles actually addressed? Since the whole of the prophecy is primarily addressed to Israel the same would appear to be true here and elsewhere where the OT prophets address the nations (Isaiah 13-23; Jeremiah 46-51; Ezekiel 25-32). Indeed, structurally, it would be better to say that the present section extends to 2:15 (for both Judah and Israel are also condemned in oracles which are constructed similarly to those in 1:3-2:3). The literary effect of this is to throw the judgement of these two peoples into emphasis. Like a thunderstorm (verse 2), the storm rages all around until, in all its fury, it falls upon Judah and Israel. Thus, the judgements against the nations are made here in order to emphasise that the sovereign Lord (1:9 etc.) does not exempt his own people from universal judgement. If the nations stand condemned for wrong-doing, then so do his people. This is further emphasised in the fact that the judgement of the nations is on the basis of their sins against conscience and humanity whereas the judgement of God against his people is on the basis of their disobedience against revelation. 3) It is also noteworthy that here (and throughout Amos) God’s condemnation is based not on religious failings but on moral grounds. Motyer suggests that a careful study of these oracles reveals the following absolute moral principles (here transgressed): people are not things, there is a priority of human welfare over commercial profit, the pledged word is inviolable, hatred nourished in the heart is inadmissable, personal ambition is limited by the needs of the helpless and vengeance is always wrong. The historical referent of 3-5 is probably Hazael’s military campaigns (842-806) in which Syrian power was re-exerted over territory to the east of Jordan: Gilgal (cp. 2 Kings 8:12; 10:32; 13:3). Apparently, his son (Ben-Hadad) had established that rule and built expensive houses (armanoth) markedly in contrast to the mud-and-wattle homes of the subjugated peoples. These actions had filled up (‘three…four’) Syria’s bowl of wrath and made God’s judgement proven beyond all doubt. God would not revoke it (shuv is used in such a legal sense in Numbers 23:20; Isaiah 14:27). Significant is the reference to ‘threshing’ (3): such is dome to things not people but Syria has treated people as ‘mere things’. Motyer says that this is the essential sin of warfare. God’s judgement is to send the people back from whence they came (the fulfilment is described in 2 Kings 16:9). Divine authority is emphasised by ‘This is what the LORD says’. The word for sin here (peshah) emphasises rebellion against an overlord. Yahweh is not merely the Lord of his people. 1:6-8 Gaza, one of the five great Philistine cities, is here condemned for the pitiless way in which it had prosecuted its slave trade; acting as a middle-man in the slave market. Situated on the trade route from Egypt to Mesopotamia with routes inland to Edom they had traded Israelites to Edom. Probably kidnapping rather than those taken in war are in mind here. The Philistines were a Phoenician race, originally from Crete (see 9:7) who had settled as traders on the coastal plain of Palestine after Israel had taken possession of the land. They were of completely different race, culture and religion and frequently held the upper hand over the Israelites because of their superior military prowess. Gaza is apparently singled out as the largest and most culpable of the Philistine cities. The pitiless Philistines (all the major cities except Gath are mentioned in the judgement) will be pursued without pity: not one will escape (8) from the Lord God (adonai-Yahweh). 1:9-10 Tyre was another Phoenician city to the north of Israel, 50km north of Carmel. It was the most important Phoenician port at the time of Amos and, inevitably, was a major trade centre. The charge is similar to that in the preceding oracle but the basis is not merely inhumanity but the breach of a treaty. The commentators debate whether Israelites are understood as the slaves and which treaty is in mind and between whom. Conclusive resolution is impossible, though perhaps 1 Kings 5:1,12; 9:13 is in view. 1:11-12 From patriarchal times onwards relationships between Edom and Israel were tense. David subdued the Edomites but they achieved freedom from Joram in 850 BC. Subsequently, partial authority was restored (2 Kings 14:7; 16:6). Verse 11 refers to the way in which Edom had continually (the force of the verb here) brooded in hate over Israel and had always been ready to strike out against her (the succession of warlike actions against Israel is exhaustively documented in Pusey). Yet such was an un-natural action (‘stifling all compassion’) directed in a perverse direction (‘brothers’). This action against both the better instincts of the heart and in flagrant disregard of those for whom particular care ought to have been shown is the basis for God’s judgement. The latter is described in terms which emphasise totality since Teman was a district in the north of Edom and Bozrah a city near the southern frontier. 1:13-15 The Ammonites dwelt to the east of Gad and Reuben. Israel viewed them as related (Genesis 19:30-38). However, there were numerous clashes over the years (cp. Judges 10:7-11:33; 1 Samuel 11) until Ammon was subjugated under David (2 Samuel 8:12; 10-12). They were not, however, exterminated and harried Israel whenever opportunity arose. The particular sin (13) is to be interpreted literally and is to be seen as an attempt at extermination of the enemy which goes far beyond the exigencies of war. Predatory action against the innocent and helpless for purely selfish ends is described. God cannot stand idly by! Like a storm (a double image of tempest is found in 14) the Ammonites will be driven before their enemies. Those who have sought to enlarge their own borders at any cost will find themselves dispossessed. Note, that this judgement is given in expanded detail to emphasise that God’s fury is aroused to an excess by Ammon’s dealing with the helpless. 2:1-3 Moab was east of the Dead Sea and was bordered by Edom to the south and Ammon to the north. Israel subjugated it briefly under Eglon before conquering it in the time of David (2 Samuel 8:12). This, however, proved of short duration. Moab was also regarded as related to Israel through Lot. Ammon had violated the helpless and innocent, Moab the dead since verse 1 is a reference to the burning of the bones of a long dead corpse. Pusey suggests that the reference is to the burning of the king of Edom’s son and as a common criminal for whom the punishment of death is insufficient. Such an action would have been regarded as a severe profanation among peoples who placed considerable stress upon peaceful burial of family. The crime is, thus, of the basest nature. Note this offence is not against Israel. Yahweh takes displeasure in every offence: not just those directed against his people. 2:4,5 This short oracle demonstrates the consummate communication and literary skills of Amos. Though the burden of his message is the northern kingdom the present section (1:3-2:16) has devoted itself to an unfolding of the sins of surrounding nations. The complacent hearer could easily place himself/herself in an exemption category: the people of God. However, when the prophet turns to Judah, there can be little doubt who is next! Moreover, the basis of Judah’s judgement: sin against revelation (law, torah (3), refers to everything God has revealed not simply ‘law’) is no different from Israel’s situation. The following oracle (6-16) indicates the consequences of such a rebellion: the central sin. Jerusalem fell in 587BC. 2:6-16 Since the main point of the present section has now been reached, the judgement of God against Israel (the northern kingdom is in view here), a longer oracle is demanded. There are three sections: 6-8: the sins of Israel; 9-12: the sinfulness of Israel; 13-16: the judgement of Israel. In prosperous Israel, the man who has money not right on his side wins judicial favour, even if the money exchanged is only a trivial amount (6). This seems especially the case in lust for real estate (could the reference to sandals be to conveyancing, cp. Ruth 4:7) where the wealthy even begrudge the soil placed on the head of the ousted owner in mourning. Might is right. 7b introduces a further sin: womanising. The word for prostitute is not used here. Rather, a general breakdown of sexual morality is described: all openly take themselves or offer themselves to one another. Emphasis surely is placed upon this as a preoccupation of the entire population. Some see the reference to cult prostitution in which a religious act is undertaken (in the name of Yahweh). However, this ‘sacred’ act is, in reality, ‘unholy’ blasphemy. The cultic element, possibly present in verse 7, comes to prominence in verse 8. Wild drinking bouts were part and parcel of the debauchery of Canaanite religion. Here, however, this is taking place in the temple and in the name of Yahweh (so the best interpretation of 8b). Yet what makes these generalised religious observances (‘every altar’) still more perverse is the fact that both the garments lain upon and the wine drunk is that heartlessly distrained from the poor. In these few brief sentences Amos vividly depicts the consequences of the rejection of revelation. Moral and religious perversion inevitably becomes rife, religion is used and abused by the rich at the expense of the poor in their pursuit of hedonism. In vivid contrast to this picture of self-seeking corruption is the picture of the holy and compassionate God of 9-11. This is brought out by the emphatic anoki (9a); ‘I, on the contrary, and for my part…‘. Verse 9, with its picture of the total destruction ‘root and branch’ of a people who seemed secure in their strength (the cedar was a byword for secure strength) is a reminder of the God with whom the people have to do and a gentle hint that what happened once…. More positively, however, the people are reminded of the grace of God towards them. Redeemed, preserved and established (10), they had enjoyed the revelation of God and the example of holy men (11). Such was incontrovertible (11b) and solemnly true (n’um Yahweh). However, rather than be inspired by the good they had sought to bring the good down to their own tawdry level and, far from listening to God, they had closed their ears to God’s messengers (or, more properly, closed the messengers mouths: always more final and effective!). Moral and spiritual inspiration had been rejected. Verse 12, thus, emphasises the grossness of Israel’s sin. Such sins, grosser than those of the surrounding nations who already stand condemned, makes judgement inevitable (13-16). Verse 13 is obscure but NIV has probably caught the meaning: ‘one day you will find yourselves no more able to escape judgement than something/someone trapped under a heavy cart (see commentators for detailed discussion). No highly prized human ability will make escape possible (note the effective use of repetition, 14-16) declares Yahweh with utter solemnity (16b). In applying this passage we do well to note that it is God’s people who are condemned. It is easy for us to think that we are an exempted category too! Moreover, we need to note the fact that what is described here is the ejection of revelation from its central place in the faith. Indeed, it is not heterodoxy that is condemned here but a profession of orthodoxy unaccompanied by faith in revelation and by a life consistent with that revelation (at work, at play and in worship). Viewed thus it comes uncomfortably near to home! 3:1-2 These verses commence the main central section of Amos’ prophecy (extending to chapter 6, but see comments on 3:9)). They are a joint denunciation of both the northern and southern kingdom and act as a summation of the preceding two oracles. Verse 2 is a summary of the theology of Amos. In the face of the ‘election theology’ of his contemporaries Amos emphasises that special status does not bring with it so much security as place greater obligations upon its recipients. The two verses thus depict Israel as elected, adopted, redeemed and possessing the privileges of a unique covenantal intimiacy as a consequence of which they have a heightened responsibility and liability to judgement. A brief word is in order on ‘chosen’ (NIV, 2, Hebrew yadah). It emphasises deep communion in love and oneness and its first usage is of the conjugal relationship (Genesis 4:1). 3:3-8 These verses offer Amos’ credentials as a prophet: a necessary task in the light of his words in 1,2. All the questions are expected to be answered by a negative, consequently his hearers are expected to concede a close relationship between Amos’ preaching and Yahweh’s command to him to prophesy. Verse 6 may point to God’s sovereignty even in misfortune (such is taught elsewhere, e.g. 2 Samuel 24:1) but the phrase could be translated, ‘shall evil be in a city and God not take action’ and this may make more sense in the present context. Most commentators regard Amos’ words as also containing a symbolic meaning. Thus, 3) there could well be a reference either to God and Israel and express the veiled rebuke that the latter were no longer walking with God since they no longer agreed to meet in fellowship. Alternatively, the words could express the idea that since Amos is Yahweh’s prophet and they walk together in agreement, therefore the prophet’s message is God’s command. 4) Most see this verse as a declaration of the inescapability of judgement. God’s warnings are not idle threats! 5) This verse is often seen as emphasising the culpability of those who are under judgement. It is not uninvited: the bird is in the trap through no fault but its own. Calvin suggests the image is rather one which stresses that no destruction comes unplanned. 6) Emphasises the need to fear the coming judgement. See also the comments above. However the earlier verses are understood the climax is reached in verses 7,8. Just as inevitably as in the earlier similes there is an inevitable relationship between cause and effect, so it is inevitable that in the face of judgement God should send his messengers in mercy and warning. Several important observations can be made from this verse: a) the privilege of God’s people in receiving a warning is stressed; b) the relationship of the prophet and Yahweh is described as one of friendly intimacy (‘counsel’). It is out of this intimate knowledge of God that the prophet speaks. Prediction is one of the consequences of this intimacy; c) prediction is stressed as central to the role of a prophet. While the prophets were forthtellers they were also foretellers, though the latter was not mere ‘fortune-telling’ but, as with a modern preacher, was a declaration about the future which was intended to evince a response in the hearer now. The final verse draws together the earlier verses: God has a prey, his prophets must declare the warning (8). 3:9-15 Motyer suggests that a new section of the prophecy begins here: a section again to be determined by Amos’ use of inclusio. Earlier the lions roar (1:2,3:8) demarcated a section, here ‘the enemy in the land’ (3:11;6:14) marks out a section. In fact, Amos’ shows considerable literary skill and 3:1-8 is probably best viewed as a ‘bridge section’ which concludes one part of the prophecy only to introduce a new one. 3:9-4:13 is devoted to diagnosing the failures of Israelite society and religion. 9,10) In verse 9 two of the inveterate enemies of the people of God, who did not share the revelation of Israel and were not known for their high ethical standards (and before whom Israel had suffered the very things they were meting out!), are invited to gather on the mountains surrounding Samaria (the capital of the northern kingdom) and to witness and condemn what is taking place in the city. Such vividly emphasises that the people were not only failing to live up to grace but also failing to live up to nature: even flawed fallen nature! It is notable that in this and the subsequent verses that images of national solidity, strength and prosperity are singled out. Yet for all the outward strength the nation is going to be plundered, for the glory had departed. Motyer sagely notes that this passage indicates the seriousness not of a people fallen into the power of the Devil but a people fallen out of the power of God. The four words used here in 9,10, unrest, oppression, plunder and loot are significant. They describe (first and last) the opposite of order in society and (second and third)  the opposite of justice. Such ‘do not know anything about doing good’. However, such are hording up a different ‘treasure’ than they imagine!  11) This verse describes the consequences (‘therefore’) and there is a logic in the judgement described: violence and robbery is met with the same. 12, 13-15) These two brief oracles mark a shlit in the nature of the charges against God’s people. Personal spirituality rather than morality is the focus here. NIV has botched the translation (but note the footnote). It is not an oracle of salvation (a word not mentioned in the original) but of total destruction. In the law the evidence required to prove the demise of an animal that once was (Exodus 22:10-13) was as described here. It is then used as an analogy of the coming destruction of Israel: except that when Israel has disappeared what will be left as evidence is the corner of a couch and ?coverlet (demesheq). Symbols of sensuality, luxury, idleness and bodily care rather than the evidence of a spiritual people are all that will be left behind. The second oracle (spoken by the prophet or, scandalously, by the Ashdodites and Egyptians!) describes the consequent judgement. Reminded of what they once were (and still claimed to be), ‘the house of Jacob’, the destruction of this luxurious society is depicted (15) in terms which emphasise the powerlessness of their religion to save them (14). Many suggest the image in verse 14 is one of assylum, here denied. However, Motyer emphasises that there is no OT evidence that the horns of the altar were so viewed in biblical religion. While, therefore, a pagan image may be used here, it is, perhaps more likely that a more biblical image is in view. In the OT the anointing of oil on the horns of the altar was primarily associated with religious effectiveness (Exodus 29:12; Leviticus 4:7). This seems best here. Motyer also notes the interweaving of the political (Samaria) and the religious (Bethel) here: the latter apparently being the royal sanctuary (7:13). Religion had become a crutch for a corrupt society. As such both the religious and the political will fall together and the support of ‘religion’ prove illusory. This is a powerful section which puts both church, state and the individual worshipper under the microscope. We do well to meditate upon its contemporary relevance and challenge to us . 4:1-3 This oracle continues the theme of the previous chapter but with a change of emphasis: women, in particular, is singled out. ‘Cow’ was not a derogatory word in the ANE, rather the contrary: it could be a compliment emphasising beauty. Bashan was well known for its fatstock. The women of Samaria are thus compared to sleek, fatstock. Such achieve their beauty and opulence by their inordinate demands upon their husbands (lit. baalim) in order that ‘we can hold parties’. However, if their baalim have been active on their account, another Lord, whose essential holiness has been affronted by their actions, is ready to act on behalf of those who have suffered as a result of their inordinate demands. The two classes mentioned here are those utterly cast on God because of their need. The details of 2-3 are not altogether clear. Perhaps, best, the picture is of these women being led (like cattle and captives) in the direction of the place they have, by their conduct, suggested is their natural hime: the mountains and hills of Bashan (consult the commentaries for the details). Note, the solemnity of Yahweh’s utterance (3b). 4:4-5 Alongside of the description of the conduct of the ‘hostess class’ is the description of their religion. Notable is the fact that it is not condemned for unorthodoxy but unreality. Bethel and Gilgal (the point at which Israel had entered Canaan had always been a venerated site for Israel) were major worship centres for Israel. There is no reason to suppose they were not valid centres: the OT is less interested in one sanctuary than valid sanctuaries. 4b,5 describe actions rigorously in conformity to revealed religion: even eagerness to ‘outdo’ the demands of such regulations. The people were proud of their scrupulous faithfulness in their ritual observances and found self-gratification in what they did (‘you love to do’). However, these same actions are viewed by the prophet from God’s point of view: transgression (rebellion) compounded by transgression (4). Self-regarding ritualism devoid of reality and righteous actions only aggravates God’s wrath rather than placate it. 4:6-11 The activity of the false worshippers is matched by the activity of God (gam ani). The people ought not have been blind to the folly of their actions because repeated warnings had been given yet the people had failed to ‘return right back to God’ (shuv: emphasises the movement reaches its mark completely). This emphasises, incidentally, that the purpose of God’s judgements are always moral and spiritual and that his lordship extends both to the religious and moral and (by his providential control) over the world of nature. God cannot be compartmentalised as he was being by his people. Various judgements are described: i) nationwide famine (6). ii) patchy, but disastrous drought (7-8). In Palestine there are two rainy periods. In October-December the early rains germinate the seed. In March-April the latter rains bring the crop to full maturity. The early ending of the latter rains would clearly have serious consequences for the size of the crop. This is what is described here. Such should have been seen in the light of Deuteronomy 28:23. The first two judgements refer to the absence of the two basic staples of life: bread and water. iii) blight (9a) occasioned by drought (the ‘sirocco’ is in mind) or too much water (9b. cp. Deuteronomy 28:22) accompanied by a locust swarm which destroyed the most important products after corn, especially olives which were used for oil, medicine and fuel. iv) pestilence and war: complete military disabling (10). v) earthquake (11). This earthquake was clearly of some magnitude (compare 1:1) and unexpectedness (such normally happened in the Jordan bvalley not the hill country) and the miracle that there were any survivors at all ought to have been both a warning and a reminder of God’s grace. Some, however, see the image as metaphorical; to the overthrow of the kingdom (2 Kings 14:25f.) after which the reign of Jeroboam II had offered respite. This interpretation is certainly attractive giving due impact to Amos’ words. 4:12 The repeated failure of the people to respond to God’s warnings made judgement inevitable (‘therefore’). The rather strange grammar may suggest that Amos’ words were accompanied by a vivid gesture which left the hearers in very little doubt of the severity of the coming judgement. The last part of the verse is often seen as a warning to prepare for judgement. However, it is probably better to see it as a further call to repentance: such is consistent biblical theology. Indeed, Motyer argues that the word cun refers to preparation for grace not judgement. 4:13 This verse may well be a quotation from part of Israel’s liturgy. It is cited here to remind Israel of the ability of God to do all that he has threatened. Israel’s God is both the creator (bara) and sustainer (asa) of the visible (‘mountains’) and the invisible (‘wind’) [or the terrestrial and the spiritual, translating ruah as spirit rather than wind]. The omnipotent is also omniscient (‘reveals his thoughts to man’) and sovereign in the world of men as well as nature (‘treads the high places of the earth’). ‘The Lord of hosts’ has a variety of connotations in the OT, referring variously to the heavenly armies, the celestial spheres and the people of Israel. There may be a deliberate ambiguity here, emphasising his essential character (‘name’) as the battling God, well known to Israel,  who here (?) is envisaged as turning on his own people. 5:1-3 In the fourth chapter the LORD’s circumstantial calls to repentance are listed, here his verbal calls are appended. This section begins with a quina (3+2) lament or funeral dirge. It expresses Amos’ grief: he does not merely ‘roar his head off’ (Mays) in judgement. Prophetic perfects are used in verse 2 and Israel personified as a woman (consistently with the Hebrew view that cities etc. are the mother of their inhabitants). ‘Deserted in her own land’ emphasises that God has departed and with the loss of the ‘male’ Israel is utterly hopeless and bereft. In verse 3 Yahweh speaks to amplify the picture: the desertion of Israel will be witnessed in military defeat and decimation. 5:4-13 Motyer suggests that there are four calls to reformation and renewal in the following verses: a) 4-13, spiritual; b) 14-20, moral; c) 21-27, religious. He also notes that Amos takes up the characteristic position of the three shrines: in Genesis Bethel was the place where God was revealed as the transforming God, Beersheba was where God was revealed as the God who accompanied his people and Gilgal was the place where the people first entered the land of promise. If the people are to make God the centre of their life they must abandon religious error (4f.) and moral error (6f.) or else they must face inevitable judgement (8f.). He then adds that 10-11 take up the issue of social injustice to demonstrate the outward evidence for the fact that God is not there and 12-13 exposes the voice of justice as having been silenced. The people had been very religious, travelling even to the far south of Judah to the sanctuary at Beersheba. However, such religious activity can take place in such a way that the central purpose of religion, to seek God for Himself, is neglected. This was the problem with Israel (4). The source of life, the one who alone could establish in the land that quality of life prepared for his people, was not sought. Without a proper approach to God, these sanctuaries had become a stumbling block to Israel and an offence to God. Consequently, though the people may venerate them, God was ready to destroy them. Note, that in the last phrase of verse 5 (somewhat concealed by the NIV translation, but compare the footnote) Beth-el, the house of God, is re-named by the prophet as Beth-aven, a name expressive of the power of evil as well as that which is empty and powerless, with no existence in itself. It was a synagogue of Satan. Thus, the people are encouraged to seek God aright or to face judgement (6). Again, we note that it is not heterodoxy that is exposed but a religion which, though orthodox in appearance, is a veneer and where true spirituality is absent. Motyer notes that 5b-6 express a warning in three different ways: emphasising the ultimate insecurity of false religion (5b), the reality of the wrath of God against disobedience (6a) and the incapacity of false religion to produce any shelter against the wrath of God (6b). The whole exercise is a futile waste of time. The construction of the next verses in this section is unclear. However, it is perhaps best to view 8f. as a familiar cultic hymn which is cited in the surrounding context of exposure of social sins (7, 10) and which, therefore, emphasises God’s capacity to act as judge. Frequency is emphasised by the syntax of verse 7. No mere occasional failure is in mind but a consistent and determined way of life. Such are overturning (hafak, 7a) the proper God-appointed order. The reference to Pleiades (or, possibly, Sirius) and Orion may be intended to emphasise the power of God although they were also regarded as seasonal markers in the ANE. This would be consistent with the diurnal changes emphasised in the next part of the verse. 8b,9 seems then to shift the emphasis to climactic changes and his sovereignty in the (the climax and application) affairs of nations. Thus, the people do well to apply the words of their own hymns and recognise that there is no basis for their own self-confident security. If verse 7 condemns the corrupt judiciary, verse 10 makes a slightly different point; it condemns the rich who criticise justice when it is given. This condemnation of the rich is continued in verse 11: the poor is deprived of the basis for continuing existence in the land at the expense of the rich who build homes which, they think, will secure their own. However, whereas they seek to efface justice (even to the point that the worldly-wise consider it prudent not to make themselves unpopular and endangered by commenting on it, 13), God is omniscient (12) and he will condemn them to precisely the fate that they have imposed on others (11b). They will experience ‘poetic justice’. 5:14-20 The earlier call for spiritual renewal has led to the exposure of social sins. This prepares Amos for the next section of his message in which he calls again to the people to come right back to God and to demonstrate it by a new direction morally. Renewal without moral reformation is thus exposed as a sham. Motyer notes that Beersheba, in particular, was associated with the presence of God among his people. This seems to be reflected here in the assumptions of God’s presence (14), grace (15) and ‘Day of the LORD’ (18). Amos seeks here to explode the myth. Such security is only to be found among those who seek God in morally upright lives. There is only one way to favour and stability: the moral way (14) in which the decision of the will leads to a concomitant response of the emotions (15, ‘hate’). This is ever the way. 15b does not imply that God is unwilling to change his mind in the face of repentance. Rather it stresses the prophet’s pessimism as to whether his hearers will actually listen. This is emphasised in verse 16f. The established dogma in Israel’s eschatology which saw the ‘day of the LORD’ as a judgement of God upon his enemies and the blessing of his people had doubtless been used to support the false-security of the people. Amos, however, re-interprets the image. Without renewal the ‘Day of the LORD’ will be judgement for the professed people of God too (18)! This fact, repeated in 20, is re-enforced by verse 19. Most view this as a series of images but Motyer is probably best when he views them as successive. Disaster after inescapable disaster is vividly described. 5:21-27 This section introduces a third area in which God calls for renewal: religious renewal. Concentration on sacrifice and ritual at the expense of moral law is emphasised. Verses 21-23 describe an active cult in which meetings (21), sacrifices (22) and worship (23) proliferate. But active orthodoxy unaccompanied by abundant (‘roll down…mighty’) and lasting works of righteousness is ineffective (22) and abhorrent (21) to God. Despite many of the commentators, verse 24 expects the answer ‘Yes’. How then are we to understand verse 26? Perhaps the best expedient is offered by Motyer. Puzzled by Amos’ criticism of what appeared to be God appointed practices, the question would naturally arise, ‘But are we not doing what God demanded of us in the wilderness?‘ Amos does not deny this but indicates that when the ‘lid is taken off’ their present, apparently, orthodox worship a seething mass of paganism is discovered just below the surface. Pagan worship in much of the ANE was astral. This is reflected here. This does not necessarily mean that Israel were actually practising these things as emphasise that a man-centred religion influenced by the prevailing (sacramentalist) religious views of the day had reduced Israel’s religion, whatever the outward appearance, to the level of a man-made pagan cult. The consequence is spelt out (27). Perhaps, significantly, the destination of exile is ‘beyond Damascus’. At present Syria was the enemy but it was Babylon where the astral cult was most fully developed. Here then is a prophetic word which looks beyond the immediate threat and which, as such, is a word of grace giving time for repentance. This chapter, properly applied, is a powerful challenge to much of popular evangelicalism today. 6:1-7 This chapter concludes the central section of the prophecy of Amos. The people were characterised by self-reliance. This chapter outlines the outcome. 1-7 assert the fact of national pride, emphasising complacency (1-3), luxuriousness (4-6a), moral indifference (6b). Those who thought of themselves first, would indeed find themselves first: first at the judgement (7). 8-14 describes the straits to which the nation will be reduced by such pride. The reason for this is grounded firmly in Yahweh’s hatred of such an attitude. Though Amos has concentrated on (and will continue to do so) upon the northern kingdom, he is not unaware of the fact that Jerusalem is characterised by the same spirit, especially by those who ‘tick themselves on a list’ (naqav), as ‘notable’ (1). The first two verbs emphasise wanton behaviour and the verse, in brief compass, vividly depicts the idle rich! Calneh and Hamath (2) were cities in northern Syria conquered by Shalmaneser III in 854-846. Gath was defeated by Hazael in 815. But why are they mentioned? Perhaps best is the suggestion that these were mighty cities who had now perished. If they had fallen in their pride…. Yet (3) the people feel sufficiently secure as to put any thought of disaster right out of mind. Yet while they set aside any thought of danger they, themselves, unleash a reign of terror on the defenceless (3b, this is probably better here than the interpretation which suggests that they were bringing God’s judgement nearer by their conduct). Again Amos vividly portrays the selfish and indolent lifestyle of the rich. Abreast of the latest trends, they had replaced their dining tables with reclining couches upon which they sprawled (sarah, ‘lounge’ for their meals (4a), the menu comprising of the choicest meats (4b) and vast quantities of wine (6). Such banquets are accompanied by (there is a note of criticism here) those who like to think of themselves as aping David in their idle musical pursuits (to fill up the time?: verse 5) and are able to indulge themselves in the finest cosmetics (6). Such people like to be first and produce a lifestyle which they think justifies their claims. Yet their concerns are entirely selfish, their ambitions and interests self-centred rather than directed outward (the mark of true greatness). But God is prepared to honour their hopes (7) and give them pride of place in the exile! 6:8-14 This section continues the theme of pride, outlining the fact (8), re-emphasising the moral indifference (12) and self-centredness (13). The resulting hatred (8), alienation (9-11) and enmity of God (12-14) is also emphasised. God’s threat is made more serious by the oath (8) and the emphasis upon total capitulation to the power of the enemy (8c). The picture of verses 9-10 seems to depict one of the great houses (‘ten’ would be a large remnant in anything else!) already severely depleted but now struck by some sort of plague/seige in which ordinary burial cannot take place and where the conversation between the one remaining and the relative/undertaker is one in which Yahweh is not mentioned lest he hear and they, too, die. Verse 11 may emphasise that the poor will suffer too or (?) refer to the destruction of ‘second homes’ (perhaps better in context). There is some difficulty in the translation of verse 12 but almost certainly two impossible situations are envisaged (as NIV). How unnaturally have the people reversed the true order of right and wrong! 13f. are pungent. Lo Debar means ‘nothing’, Karnaim means ‘horn’; a symbol of strength. They are apparently Amos’ re-naming of cities taken by Jeroboam II. Exaggerated boasting in personal strength over a trifling victory is depicted. Lebo Hamath was the northern frontier of Israel and Arabah the southern boundary of Israel under Jeroboam. The phrase emphasises the totality of the oppression described here (in typical Hebrew idiom). 7:1-9 These verses introduce the final section of Amos’ message. This first section introduces three separate visions of judgement. The first (1,2a) describes a locust swarm which devours the crop after the first shearing given to the king has ben taken away. The people would then be left totally without support. This indiscriminate judgement prompts the prophet’s intercession (2b) and Yahweh’s assurance that it will not happen (3). The second vision is drawn far more from the realm of myth: the holocaust of even the deep (4-6). Again a total destruction is depicted, the prophet intercedes and Yahweh withdraws the threat. Finally, the vision of the plumb-line, with the emphasis upon discrimination is introduced. The plumb-line was used not only to help build but also to decide what to pull down. The picture is still one of judgement and of judgement according to the ‘line’ of the Mosaic law. In this, however, it is also gracious. Not all will suffer, only the culpable. This explains why Amos does not intercede a third time. It also explains the point of the three oracles. The earlier oracles functioning to highlight the discriminating judgement that God will bring. 7:10-17 It is probable that this section chronologically comes at the end of the book. However, it is included here to emphasise the official response to Amos’ message. Amaziah bore a name which is theophoric (‘Yahweh is my helper’) and this suggests that the northern cult was understood by its adherents to be a truly Yahwistic one. Nevertheless, he was opposed to the message of Amos (10b); though it is doubtful if Amos was engaged in political intrigue as he claimed. Summarising the message of Amos accurately (11) he acts, apparently with royal sanction, to end Amos’ ministry. In sneering terms he suggests that Amos return to Judah if he wants to earn an income as a prophet (12). Certainly, such words are quite inappropriate at the royal chapel (13)! Amos’ answer is to distance himself from the professional cult prophets (14a) and to indicate that he had no thought of the prophetic ministry until the LORD called him (14b). Rather he had been a shepherd and incisor of sycamore figs (which were thus sweetened and rendered an adequate substitute for figs). Only the call of God brought him away from his usual occupation. Thus, Amos reprimands Amaziah (16f.) The picture described in the last verse is of a woman bereft of support forced to prostitution. He, himself, will lose his place in the land of promise and will die (horrors to an Israelite!) in a land which reveals his true spirit. And… like it or not, Amos’ words will prove to be from the LORD. There is reason for us to meditate upon Amaziah and the words of this chapter. How easily we can develop the same spirit!  8:1-3 This chapter continues the theme of imminent judgement. It justifies the judgement by explaining the ground on which God judges his people. 1-3 emphasises ripeness for judgement and 4-14 the relationship between crime and punishment. At the heart of this oracle is a (typically Hebraic and prophetic) play on words: qayitz and quetz. The former refers to summer-fruit, the latter (etymologically unrelated) means ‘end’. Together (as NIV) the emphasis is made to rest on ‘ripe fruit’...‘ripe for judgement’. The result of this imminent judgement will be the ending of the activities of the present cult which were so abhorrent to God. NIV catches well the vividness of Amos’ language at this point. 8:4-14 This section describes the crime which merits this judgement. Thus: 4) provides a basic summary of the situation: self-advantage pursued at the expense of the weaker person. 5,6) develops this by highlighting the fact that the people were subordinating everything to selfish gain: i) religion (5a); ii) honesty (5b); iii) other people (6a); iv) moral standards (6b). 7-14) elaborate the punishment. NB the fact that the passage is full of God as the divine agent: he is coming. i) 7-8 emphasise the scale of the earthquake by reference to a nationwide earthquake; ii) 9-14 develop three facets of the ‘Day of the Lord’: a) the reversal of worldly enjoyment (9,10); b) the exposure of true needs (11,12); c) the insufficiency of false religion (13,14). Verse 4 describes again the disadvantaged of society crushed by those placed higher up the social system. Verse 5 emphasises the extreme exploitationist views of those Amos is condemning. A desire to lengthen trading hours to the limit and a deliberate attempt to minimise the quality of the product and skimp on the measures while pushing up the price through monopolisation is described here. In such an environment the poor are increasingly at the mercy of the ‘shop-keeper’ since he is in control of the supply of goods (6). The picture here is vivid. The poor, while being given inferior products (6c) are forced to pay in valued items for shoddy goods even to the point of having to mortgage or sell their lands and even themselves (6a,b). However, while all this is going on there is one who has an infallible memory and an omniscient eye who is ready to act (7). The reference to the ‘pride of Jacob’ is not entirely clear and the commentators offer a number of possibilities. Perhaps most likely is the suggestion that it is ironic. The object of the people’s pride ought to have been Yahweh but they were proud only in themselves. Verse 8 seems to describe an earthquake compared in violence to the inundation of the Nile valley by floods (a well-known image in the ancient world). 8a emphasises the extent while 8b the violence of the occasion. Perhaps, the picture is metaphorical of the world in movement under judgement. 9-10) seem to depict an eclipse (often regarded as presaging judgement in the ancient world). Such occurred in 784, 763. In this context the atmosphere of the hated religious festivals is changed into something more in tune with reality: bitterest mourning (10, end).  11-12) The image of verse 12 is probably best understood if ‘sea to sea’ (12a) is seen as a reference to the east and west (i.e. the Med. and the Dead Sea). Three of the four points of the compass are then mentioned: only the south is excluded, for there, in Judah, the word of God will still be found. The picture is one in which in the teeth of judgement people are alerted to the reality of the situation when it is too late. God’s word has gone! 13,14) Tragically, without God the people are exposed as without any other security. The elders have ignored the Word of God and now the young are exposed, thirsty, but without finding anything in what their elders taught and believed to meet them in their desperate needs. The details of verse 14 contain allusions which are not too easy to unpack. However, note, i) the shame of Samaria, describes the reality of the cult with just the hint that it was, in reality, idolatrous (shame/idolatry is the same word and another word, similar in sound, is used for Canaanite deity). Whatever the appearance, the cult was no better than Canaanite religion…and as valueless: ii) the image at Dan, ostensibly Yahwist (but compare the biblical denunciations!) was dedicated to the living God. Possibly, iii) the same was true of Beersheba. Either way the living, powerful god which the people claimed to worship would prove dead and ineffective to help those exposed in judgement. 9:1-7 These verses describe how the judgement alluded to is accomplished. Motyer notes that the initial command to destroy (1) is followed by a section which stresses the inescapability of this judgement (2-4) since there is neither spiritual refuge (2), nor worldly shelter (9) nor political answer (4). On the contrary (5,6), Yahweh has the ability to enforce his command since he exercises power over both the physical world (5) and the cosmos (6). If there is a relationship between the visions of chapters 8 and 9 it may be that 9:1-6 may refer to the autumnal festival to which the summer fruits would usually be brought. That festival was sometimes considered to secure prosperity: here the reverse is the case. The vision probably relates to the altar at Bethel (1) and the destruction of the sanctuary envisaged as total (‘tops…threshold’). However, this is no mere destruction of a sacred building for with that destruction goes the annihilation of the nation (1b). With God commanding the destruction of his own sanctuary what is to stop the destruction of the people! Verses 2ff. emphasise the totality of the destruction and the fact that such is experienced at the very hands of the one they had (supposedly) worshipped. These verses are almost the opposite of Romans 8:32ff.. A succession of opposites or near opposites emphasises the impossibility of escaping the wrath of God: the words need no explication! Neither depth nor height (2), nor any other spiritual power (Carmel is known in the OT as a Baal sanctuary, the serpent was one of the Canaanite pantheon, 3), nor geographical distance or presence in the lands of other ‘gods’ (4) will be able to save the people. In verses 5f. Amos again seems to quote a song from their own hymnbook, in the section, ‘God, the Creator’: a section doubtless much thumbed at the Autumnal Festival. Amos’ point is surely this; precisely because Yahweh is the sovereign God (note adonai, 5a) of whom you sing, this will happen. An objector might appeal to Israel’s election. However, Amos’ point is that a mere date in history does not (alone) make any spiritual or moral difference. There are always other dates… Bellafonte was incorrect when he sang, ‘man shall live for evermore because of Christmas day’. This is the point of verse 7. In the context of 8ff. this is not a denial of election but the denial of an appeal to election without the fruits of redemption. 9:8-20 Yet, abruptly, Amos’ final words are words not of judgement but of hope. The situation he was addressing demanded that he emphasise the negative but his understanding of Yahweh and his purposes equally required confidence for the future. The God of the covenant (Yahweh) was still the covenant establishing God no matter how much his people fail. Where they might fail, He must prevail. Thus, the judgement of God is seen as discriminatory (8,9a). Those who by their words (10b) have denied the true nature of the revealed message and have revealed themselves to be sinners (false understanding invariably has a moral cause in the Bible), will experience the full punishment of sin (10a). However, an eschatological, messianic day (so longed for in Amos!) will come (the force of the reference to David and Edom, both popular messianic motifs cf. Isaiah 34, 63; Ezekiel 34. In that day the remnant will inherit the fullness of the covenantal blessings of God to his people (11f.; note the emphasis on Yahweh in 12). Such will be ‘heaven on earth’ (13-15). The picture in verse 13 is impossible, but is an exaggerated description intended to evoke a mental picture of paradise regained, a land truly flowing with milk and honey! For them ‘everlasting joy’ will be upon their heads, for the messianic age will never come to an end (15); God, ‘your God’, guarantees it! Thus for the faithful exile cannot be the end (14): the character and the purposes of God forbid it. Commentary 2011-01-11T11:19:51+00:00 http://ferndalechurches.org.uk/resources/detail/an_applied_outline_of_philippians/ http://ferndalechurches.org.uk/resources/detail/an_applied_outline_of_philippians/#When:11:16:47Z One of Pauls’ favourite letters, written from prison, still gives encouragement and challenge today!Philippians 1:1,2: Debtors to God’s Mercy One of the most significant experiences in the apostle Paul’s life was his ‘Macedonian call’ (Acts 16:6-10) for it led to the most fruitful and significant period of his missionary activity as he and his colleagues established congregations in what is now modern Greece. The first church was founded at Philippi, after a remarkably brief visit of a few weeks (Acts 16:11-40). It is clear from this letter that the ‘firstfruits’ of his ministry in Greece always retained, for him, a special affection. At the point of writing the letter Paul is keen to return to Philippi but, presently hindered, is hoping to send his co-worker Timothy to visit them (2:19-24). Meanwhile, he sends this letter…. Verses 1-2 are a ‘Christianised’ version of a typical letter of the period: including the addressors (1), addressees (2) and an initial greetings (3). Anticipating a number of the themes that later appear in the letter, they have much to teach us today. First of all, they remind us of what should be the basic self-understanding of every Christian (1). Paul and Timothy had every reason to speak highly of their gifts and accomplishments – not least as Christian leaders and Church-planters. But there is no sense of self-assertion or pride in their mutual designation as ‘servants’ of Jesus. Very simply, they acknowledged no ground for self-esteem except that found in their relationship with Jesus and they recognised no status except that which rejected every claim to such and was seen in the denial of any rights except those of unquestioned obedience to Jesus. If this was true for them, how much more is it to be true of us. Secondly, we are reminded of several vital truths about the Church (2a): • We are all set apart to reflect the character of God himself through our relationship to Jesus. • ‘Leadership’ in the Church is a partnership with all the congregation and is, itself, supremely seen in its service of others (this seems to explain the word order here). Leadership in the Church is not a status to crave and cling onto: it is a servile task to be performed to the utmost of our ability and modelled on Jesus himself. Finally, and perhaps most important of all, we are reminded that the understanding we have of ourselves and the Church emerges from Gospel ‘realities’ (2b).  • Every Christian is (and remains) a debtor to grace. The undeserved mercy of God underlies and undergirds all that we are or ever can be. I am nothing, God in Christ is all! • Every Christian is the debtor to a grace that has brought ‘peace’ with God. Mercy has restored our friendship to God that was lost at the Fall through sin. We are ‘rotters’ who have experienced the undeserved mercy of God that has restored us to himself. • Every Christian is a debtor to grace and the beneficiary of peace through the ‘combined efforts’ of God the Father and his Son. The ‘effectual call’ of the Father through the self-offering of the Son has brought us, the undeserving, near to God. All of which helps us understand the first verse and a half. We are all undeserving servants and, if the Spirit of Christ dwells in us, we cannot but live as such! Philippians 1:3-8: The Marks of a True Christian A first century letter invariably followed its giving the addressors, addressees and an initial greeting (see 1:1,2) with words of praise for the recipients. Paul follows this pattern here (1:3-11) but in a manner that offers far more than merely conventional sentiments! In the first part (1:3-8) examined here, he reveals his deep affection for the Philippian church (8) a sentiment that extends to ‘every last man jack’ of them (4); though he was not unaware of their failings as the rest of the letter will demonstrate. Such love naturally arouses his thankful intercession for them (3,4a). However, the focus of his delight is grounded in the fact that they are, demonstrably, fellow heirs of God’s grace (7a). It is helpful for us to trace out the logic and the application of his thinking to ourselves. For Paul, the Christian life owes its origin and certain outcome to the work of God himself (6). Whatever other factors may exist in defining the Christian life (for example, my personal response to the invitation of the Gospel and my own struggles to be faithful) these are all secondary to the work of God. It is he who initiates it through new birth, he who sustains it through his indwelling Spirit and he who brings it to its intended and certain end ‘in the day of Christ Jesus’ when he returns and his kingdom is finally established. For Paul, this was doubtless a foundation stone of his belief system but a truth that sustained him in trial and his present imprisonment. It should do the same for us! While it is true that from this statement we might deduce the truth ‘once saved, always saved’, it is the evidences of this fact that delights Paul here: and the implication is that where the evidence is not present we can have no certainty of the saving work of God! So what evidence does he offer us to examine the reality of our own faith? Fundamental to all, is their commitment to the Gospel shown in sacrificial and practical ways (5,7a). As the latter verse demonstrates, this is the basis of his confidence that they really are the heirs of God. These two verses hint at several things expanded elsewhere in the New Testament: • from the very earliest days of the Church and, unwaveringly thereafter, they had given sacrificially to support Paul’s ministry (5); • in recent days, this had been accompanied by their support of him in prison (7b). Thus, whether in the context of his evangelistic and church planting programme or the present need for support while no longer able to function thus freely, they had committed themselves to him and his ministry for the Gospel’s sake. The former made financial demands, the latter more subtle demands in standing up and being counted in a hostile and dangerous situation. Either way, God’s grace in the Gospel had so grasped them that they did all that they reasonably (and unreasonably) could to make the Gospel known by responding practically and specifically to ‘Gospel work’. Herein, therefore, lies perhaps the primary evidence that we are God’s workmanship: those who are his workmanship will be committed to making the Gospel that has transformed them known by practical and sacrificial acts of service. It offers a spiritual ‘litmus test’ to our individual and corporate spiritual health? How do we fare? Philippians 1:9-11: The Leader’s Longing for his People In the previous two studies we noted that a first century letter invariably followed its giving the addressors, addressees and an initial greeting (see 1:1,2) with words of praise for the recipients. Paul follows this pattern here (1:3-11). In the first part (1:3-8) he prayerfully celebrates the evidence that their Christian life is securely grounded in the work of God himself and demonstrated in their sacrificial commitment to the Gospel. At this point, Paul turns to intercession for the Philippians. But first, as we look back to verses 8, we note he reveals the nature and measure of his love for them as the ground of his prayer: his longing for them is that of someone overwhelmingly homesick, his love shares in the deep gut-wrenching emotion of the Saviour and his affections extend to each and every one of them. What a model for every church leader… and what an example for every church member! His prayer, then, is that, very simply, each one will show the marks of the ordered and developing Christian life. He traces out several stages to this growth as he offers up his prayer. The source and dynamic of the Christian life is the knowledge of God and participation in his love (9). Thus Paul is not speaking about knowledge about God but the intimacy of loving fellowship with him that marks out a truly Christian encounter with God. And, as with human intimacy and love, the primary fruit is empathy with the other (9, end). And, again as in the best of human relationships, such loving empathy enables the wishes of the beloved to be recognised and effects a transformation in the lover’s sustained attitudes and conduct (10).  Thus, the right relationship with God, specifically, ‘union’ with Jesus, will produce the harvest of ‘righteousness’ (the truly Christian lifestyle of delighted obedience to Christ, 11)…. And such a lifestyle inspired by God, completes the circle, and brings glory to him. Note that Paul does not define the Christian life by a list of ‘dos’ and ‘don’ts’. Clearly there are things that God approves or disapproves! But such lists are fairly ineffective to effect obedience and are not characteristically Christian unless they spring out of a deepening relationship of love for God…. And it is this that Paul prays for the Philippians. It ought also be the manifesto of all leaders, and the measure of our prayer for them that they might so pray for and care for the ‘flock’ as to see such lives Philippians 1:12-14: Inexplicable Advance Paul is in prison. Those whom he loved and who loved him are understandably concerned and, perhaps, puzzled. The imprisonment of the one who seems indispensable as evangelist to the non-Jewish world appears to make no sense at all! Paul’s response is to tell the Philippians something that might not have appeared self-evident (12a). The Gospel has not been hindered by his imprisonment (12b)! He provides several pieces of evidence: • The Gospel has been proclaimed throughout the ‘elite’ military force that protected the Emperor and undertook the Empire’s most important security tasks (13a). As one group of guards succeeded to another, Paul, the captive was presented with a captive audience to preach the Gospel! • The Gospel has penetrated far and wide (13b). We cannot know who ‘all the rest’ were but Paul’s words imply that widely through Rome it was known that this prisoner was a Christian and something of his message, therefore, widely penetrated the nerve centre of the Empire. • The Church in Rome had become galvanised to more energetic and bold evangelism (14)… at least most of them. The implication, therefore, was that far from being a disaster for the Gospel, Paul’s imprisonment was a terrific (but, initially humanly unexpected) boost to it! So much for Paul’s experience… what might we learn from this? • The removal from the ‘firing line’ of apparently indispensable personnel for the promotion of the Gospel does not mean that the cause of God is imperilled or necessarily suffers!  This is affirmed by the apostle and often demonstrated in Church history: not least that of the contemporary Church. We do well not to associate Gospel success to closely with certain persons, groups or strategies. Let God rule! • Personal inconvenience, pain and suffering is, not infrequently, the setting through which new spheres of witness are opened up and the context that challenges others to ‘take up the reins’ and adopt a deeper commitment to making Christ known. • Simply, God’s ways are, inscrutably, not our ways. He works out his purposes by means beyond our comprehension and quite apart from our understanding. We must trust him. None is indispensable, no particular strategy is essential, well-being and freedom are not necessary elements in the extension of God’s work. God’s plans and purposes alone stand firm. Philippians 1:15-18: Hostile Preachers This is a sad passage! Paul has just celebrated the fact that, humanly unexpectedly, his imprisonment has forwarded rather than hindered the work of the Gospel. One of the reasons for this is that many in Rome have been galvanised to a more enthusiastic evangelistic ministry (12-14). He still continues to rejoice in this (18) although he recognises that some (but not all, see verse 15) are doing so for impure motives. So much is clear: much else is muddy in this short passage and we need to do some detective work to establish exactly what is going on! What is clear is that the preachers of whom he speaks are not false teachers. The beginning and end of this passage makes this clear: they ‘preach Christ’ (15) and ‘Christ is proclaimed’ by them (18). There is not even any evidence that they adopted different emphases from the apostle: this was not the ancient equivalent of Methodist over against Baptist! If they had to ‘tick box’ their beliefs, the evidence is that their message would have been identical to that of Paul. Thus, the issue is not a different message or a variety of the same message: it is their motives and, specifically, their attitude to Paul that was the problem. Their aim was to compete, in some way, with Paul (they were motivated by ‘rivalry’, 15,17). We do not know why since ‘thinking to afflict me in my imprisonment’ (17) is unclear without the context. Simply, united in the Gospel they were divided from Paul. Various explanations for this may be imagined: perhaps they resented the authority, ability or success of this ‘new preacher’ on their patch. Jealousy driven by pride is often at the heart of rivalry. Now, possibly, they were thrilled he was out of the equation and thought they could ‘rub salt in the wound’ by stepping into the gap left by his imprisonment. Thankfully, there were others who out of love for the apostle and his God were ready to supplement his currently restricted labours. So much for the situation described…. What is its relevance to us? There are several points that are of immediate application: • All too often it is those closest to us in our understanding of divine truth that are the most ready to rise up against us. • Pride and jealousy, rather than differences of opinion, often explain the divisions that exist among Christians; whatever the ‘presenting’ reason for disagreement. • The imagined or real greater authority, ability or success of others is a pernicious ground to such jealousy. • Such attitudes mean that the motive and goal of ministry is lost. It is love for God and the Gospel of Christ that is to be the driving force of all we do for God… and that may mean taking second place to another. • And this is the big challenge for all of us. When all else is stripped away, what drives us? Is it love for God and Christ’s Gospel or some petty and worldly pride that insists we come first. Anything else and we are not only divided from one another but estranged from God and divided against ourselves. Philippians 1:18-20: Joyful Confidence In prison, Paul has been able to encourage the anxious Philippian believers with the fact that, in a humanly unexpected way, his incarceration has advanced not hindered the cause of the Gospel (1:12-14). Many, indeed, have been galvanised to bolder preaching: though, sadly, some have done so to ‘get back’, in some way, at the apostle (1:15-18). Thus, he rejoices that the Gospel of Jesus, the only thing that really counts to him, is advanced. Not that such rejoicing is easy! The words in 18b almost seem to suggest an act of the will, ‘Yes, indeed, I will force myself to rejoice!’ How realistic! Finding joy for the believer is, perhaps, rarely a warm inner feeling that bubbles up inside of us. It is the considered response, even in the midst of trial, to the truths of the Gospel. This is a lesson to the modern Church where (like the world around) emphasis is placed on feelings. Genuine Christian feelings follow faith and faith is grounded in the facts of the Gospel. Paul has just celebrated the success of Gospel-preaching as a basis for joy. Now, however, he adds another reason. Paul has no certain outcome as to the future: it may be his meeting with the Emperor will result in his death (as we see at the end of verse 20). But, whatever the outcome, he has absolute certainty of both his successful perseverance (‘now as always Christ will be exalted in my body’, 20) and his ultimate happy vindication (‘I will in no way be ashamed’ (20). Also, see 19 where ‘vindication’ is a better translation than ‘deliverance’). Life and death can both be faced with some equanimity. How can he be so joyfully confident? Paul offers two reasons (19). On the one hand, he refers to the ministry of Christ’s Spirit within him. This might not surprise us: if anything can keep us going it is God himself! Yet, for many of us, that certainty is, perhaps, absent. We look too much to ourselves and too little at him! We forget who is at work in us. No wonder we feel uncertain of our ability to stand firm for Jesus! We have every reason to when we alone are the basis of our hopes. But the other reason is a surprise! It is the prayers of the relatively small Philippian church! It is not clear whether the help of the Spirit is consequent upon the prayers or that we have two separate matters. Perhaps it doesn’t really matter. What we are assured of is that prayer for others is a significant (far more significant than we imagine!) basis for their faithfulness to the end. Together, the Spirit of Christ and the prayers of God’s people ensure an individual believer’s successful pilgrimage… and, wee might suggest, any successful work of God. Together, then, these two things reassure Paul that, possible storms ahead, he will have sufficient courage to honour Jesus (20a). There is much for us to learn here. We need to remind ourselves of what actually is true about us if we are Christians… and we need, too, to recognise how important the fellowship of prayer is to the successful outcome of our lives and witness. When we do so… we can rejoice. Philippians 1:21-26: For me to live is Christ Paul, in prison, faces trial and possible death at the decision of the emperor. For many in the ancient (and modern) world, death was the great enigma: scarcely something to be welcomed. While Paul was human, and the process of dying was plainly not something he looked forward to (it might be horrendously painful as it sometimes is for us and our loved ones), death itself was ‘gain’ (21). How can this be? The key to the answer lies in verse 23. Since Christ Jesus dominates his life to the (relative) exclusion of all else and death merely issues him into deeper conscious fellowship with him… to be with him is, understandably, ‘better by far’. This reminds us that at the heart of the Christian faith is not a creed but a person, that Christianity is not so much a system of beliefs but the enjoyment of the presence and fellowship of Jesus. To the extent that this is not true for us, to that extent Paul’s perspective appears strange and alien to earth-bound and world-driven people. It is a mark of our spiritual maturity and the genuineness of our faith that we can utter, from the heart, Paul’s words. However, Paul was faced with a genuine dilemma (23a suggests the picture of being hemmed in by a ravine): while to be with Jesus in heaven is ‘far better’ there are (for the moment) other considerations that, ultimately, outweigh his desire for deeper fellowship with him. Thus, he refers to ‘fruitful labour’ (22) and, specifically, explains that this lies in the benefits that he can bring to the Philippian believers (24). Specifically, with every one of them in mind (again), he refers to the fact that his ongoing life in the present world will effect their spiritual progress leading to the experience of deep inner joy that characterises him and that is the fruit of faith (25,26). Once again, we note that Paul was driven by the Gospel. His great longing is that ‘each man Jack’ of them might come to experience deep in their inner being the joyful fellowship with Jesus: whatever their circumstances. We sometimes sing ‘Jesus, all for Jesus’. For Paul this was the great reality. He longed for Jesus himself and ever deeper fellowship climaxed in the life to come. And he longed that others might know what he knew: the bliss of fellowship with the Saviour. Thus, he sets himself here as an example and challenge to us. In the face of ‘all for Jesus’ what are our petty disputes, our differences of opinion and perspectives? Philippians 1: 27-30: The Centrality of Christ Paul, in prison, has commenced his letter to the Philippian church in the usual way with greeting and commendation (1:1-11). He has followed this with some reflections on his present situation (1:12-26). Such has been intended to do two things. Firstly, he wants to encourage the Philippians to recognise that God is a work even in his imprisonment (1:12-18) and share his conviction that, whether in life or death God will vindicate him (1:18-20). Secondly, he wants them to learn from him that fundamental to the Christian life is fellowship with Jesus and that this fact shapes all his actions and hopes… as it should theirs (1:21-26). All of which proves to be something of a preamble to the main body of the letter which commences with the present passage that acts as something of a summary of all that follows. Thus, he begins by stressing that Christ and his Gospel are absolutely critical to all that they are (27). Consequently, together (‘yourselves’) they are to act as his followers (‘conduct’ hides a word usually used bears the sense of ‘act as true citizens’): belonging to him, copying him and empowered by him. Paul notes that, when such is true, he expects (whether through a visit or news conveyed to him) that: • they will experience the unity that the Spirit brings; • they will do so as an army gathered around its leader and his cause. (27, end) Moreover, they will be able to do so in such a way that they will not be fearful of the enemies that stand against them and, in so doing, will demonstrate to the watching world (not least the enemies) that they are God’s people (28). The implication is, perhaps, that only by being a ‘Gospel church’ will they actually be able to do this: divided among themselves, lacking the focus that the Gospel brings, out of fellowship with Christ and his Spirit, they cannot possibly expect success! But Paul makes one further point. Paul sufferings and those of the Philippians that are occasioned by their fellowship with Jesus are battle scars or, in a sense, trophies (29,30). For Paul, being in fellowship with Jesus implies victory (see 19) but a victory that cannot be achieved by any other means than the resurrection power of Jesus being manifested through the scars of spiritual battles. So what are we to learn? • A true church is one which is characterised by a unity of purpose and shared conduct consistent with those who are fellow-citizens of Jesus’ kingdom; • A true church must expect opposition and suffering at the hands of its enemies; • A true Church will recognise the scars of battles as the trophies of successful combat and ultimate vindication. The power of Jesus’ resurrection is seen in his keeping us together and using us together amid the surrounding darkness and pain. Philippians 2:1-4 The Successful Church Paul began the main body of his letter at :1:27 and introduced his theme: to ‘conduct yourselves in a manner worthy of the gospel of Christ.’ Typically it is Jesus who is the focus and reference point for how we should live. In 1:27-30 the emphasis lies on how to live in the face of external threats. Here the focus lies upon conduct within the community (2:1-11, at least!). How then should ‘Gospel’ people live together? In response, we cannot fail to notice Paul’s passion here: his words are surely less to be analysed and more to be felt as he piles up one adjective after another! It is a passion drawn, possibly, by the parlous state of the Philippian church. It may reflect the need for that which ought to be true to be demonstrated. Certainly, it emerges out of his passion for Jesus. In this short paragraph, then, he makes two points (with a third to follow): the Philippians (and us) are to develop a serving heart through the way they view themselves (1,2), others (3,4) and Christ himself (5-11). Here we trace his argument, especially with regard to the first two. Christian churches, Paul argues, are to be composed of those whose minds, affections, will (‘spirit’) are united in a common purpose: the glory of Christ and his Gospel (2, and the surrounding context). This is his longing and desire for them: indeed, when fulfilled it would fill to the brim his joy in God. How then can such occur? The first answer lies in verse 1. Such unity is the fruit of Gospel realities. Simply, if they know Christ and the comfort that his love for them brings and if they have experienced a genuine encounter with the Spirit then they cannot but know the tenderness and compassion for one another that they have experienced from God himself (1).  Yet, such needs to worked out and, in particular, pride is to be rooted out (3). Note: • The first phrase (‘selfish ambition’) is not intended to ‘knock’ ambition per se. The key word is ‘selfish’. A Christian simply cannot be driven by self if embraced by Christ: his grace drives out all pride and only the one who has not looked deep into the abyss of the human heart and cried out for mercy, can be proud. • Failure here, invariably leads to ‘vain conceit’, an empty, showy decking of oneself with trappings that cover a fundamental filthy nakedness. • Faced with real self-knowledge it is difficult to assume that others are not more deserving of honour (3b). • Faced with such, whether the call is to consider their needs or gifts (the text is uncertain), equally, it is such that is the focus of a life that has met with Jesus. Of course, the greatest incentive of all, is the example, of Jesus. WWJD might be better HDJL ‘How did Jesus live?’ It is the litmus test of our own growth in grace. If we live as he did, driven by the same motives to glorify God in selfless self-sacrifice we will be nearing the mark. And if we are nearing the mark, we will live in unity with a common purpose to glorify God ourselves. How rarely is this true. How seldom do we witness the reality of Christ dwelling by his Spirit in us or the Church? We might be encouraged to ask ‘Am I truly a Christian?’ or, at the very least, to be driven to seek to know more fully our own poverty and his amazing grace. Philippians 2:5-11 The Mind of Christ After his introductory comments in 1:1-26, Paul begins his letter ‘proper’ in 1:27 by introducing the main theme of the correspondence: his desire that the Philippian believers conduct themselves worthy of the Gospel of Christ in striving to make Christ known. So far, he has applied his ‘wish’ to two areas: 1) their relationship to the hostile world (1:27b-30) and their relationships with one another (2:1-4). In each case, he has emphasised their need for unity (1:27b, 2:2). In the latter verse, he stressed that such unity can only become a reality through that self-knowledge that comes from knowing Jesus and being empowered by his Spirit. Those who know themselves as debtors to Jesus’ loving mercy cannot but echo the tenderness he has shown them to others and cannot but strip away their self-seeking masks of pride and abase themselves before one another.  With this as the background, we notice that, here, Paul picks up a phrase that has occurred in each of the previous sections: the call to ‘one/the same mind’ (1:27, 2:2) and says that they are, each one and together, to ‘have’ the ‘mind’ of Christ Jesus (2:5). It is likely that, by this, he means more than Jesus is our example. He is, but he is more. Jesus is both the measure and the means to living worthy of the Gospel. The hymn writer caught it well, ‘May the mind of Christ my Saviour live in me from day to day’. By the indwelling of his Spirit, our mind becomes his mind, we think and act as he acts since we are united to one another. And we are not left in the dark as to what sort of ‘mind/set’ characterises those among whom Christ dwells by his Spirit. Note then what Paul teaches: • While human self-assertion is evidence of vain conceit (2:3), Jesus’ could never claim any dignity or right to authority that was greater than his by right (2:6a). He was God, yet the very nature of God is to be self-denying (‘being in very nature God… he humbled himself’). • In order to make the Gospel known (always the context here), his willing and loving self-denial was demonstrated in 1. the incarnation, 2. his obedience, 3. his death and 4. the nature of his death: the ultimate humiliating scandal (2:7,8). Sinners, we have nothing which we can strip off. He had everything yet, ‘emptied himself of all but love and died for Adam’s helpless race’. •   Jesus was not given honour except on the basis of his ultimate act of self denial (2:9-11). Divine honour was his only through the unparalleled act of selfless love and self-giving sacrifice. The implications, in the light of Paul’s previous words are not difficult to determine. In a world (like Paul’s) that despises humility we are to be ‘counter-cultural’ and be marked by the evidence of the life of Christ within us that makes no empty boasts and refuses all self-assertion.  We are to defer willingly to others, to look to their interests, to spend and be spent (even at great cost) in the service of others. Why? For only the way of self-immolation is the way to the divine ‘well done, you good and faithful servant’. This does not make us doormats. Jesus certainly wasn’t. It does mean, however, we take our stand not for self but for him and his Gospel: that is the measure… and, even here, we need to ask whether what we are doing is actually done for him (the worst form of vainglory is to hide our pride behind a ‘Gospel’ mask). Philippians 2:12-18 Lights to the World In 1:27 Paul introduces the main theme of his letter: that the Philippians live a life worthy of the Gospel of Christ and do so ‘standing firm in one spirit, with one mind, striving side by side for the faith of the gospel’. In the following verses, he explains how this unity is necessary to successfully stand together against external assault (1:28-30) and is vital to their effectively functioning as ‘Church’ (2:1-4). He then sets out the standard and the means to such unity: in fellowship with Christ, reflecting his own self-denial humility (2:5-11). The present passage is linked both to the main theme and the immediately preceding passage, the ‘therefore’ picking up both the main theme and the emphasis on Jesus’ example and union with him. However, his argument takes a new step. Whereas in 1:28-30 emphasis on unity is presented as a means to counter attack from without, here he emphasises that the unity of the fellowship becomes an attacking weapon: thus, his primary aim is that through his people, the Gospel of Christ may shine out in a dark world as they hold forth the word of life (15,16a). His secondary aim is that in this way his own ministry will be vindicated (16b). Simply, successful evangelism and mission is dependent upon the local church showing itself not simply by word but in its character as indwelt by Christ’s Spirit and living his life before a watching world. As we consider what it means to be ‘Church’ we need to think Paul’s thought after him. We note, too, that the measure by which he wished to measure his ministry (and ministers should wish to measure theirs!) is ‘forming’ congregations into a unity that effectively engages and wins the unbelieving world. As far as he was concerned, even if his life was ‘poured out’, such would merely be the icing on the cake of their own faithfulness in unity (17). In such he could rejoice and bid them rejoice, too (18). What, then, are the marks of a fellowship living in unity and ready to be a powerful witness to the world around? Here we need to backtrack to the first verses in this paragraph. • The people will be those for whom the greatest reality is God himself: a conviction that discovers his empowering grace in their seeking to live in obedience to this awesome fact (12,13). • Such people, he says, recognise that they live in a perverted and perverse world, which (implied) is ever ready to welcome those who demonstrate the conduct of the pit, in whose sphere they themselves dwell (15 middle). • It follows that certain things will characterise the true children of God: a) they will be free from all selfish complaining, unbalanced criticism of others in small matters, impatience toward what is not understood, grudging willingness to be helpful, all demonstrated by word and action (all ideas contained in ‘without grumbling’, 15a); b) their ‘inner thoughts’ will be similarly free from such negative attitudes (‘disputing/questioning’); c) more positively, they will be free of any conduct that the unbelieving world can seize on as a ground to expose their hypocrisy (‘blameless’); d) similarly, their inner life will be one unsullied by that root of sin that produces such a fruit (‘innocent’): Paul is, notably, interested in both the negative and positive traits that emerge from that seat of what a really person is! Thus, they will be ‘children of God’ who demonstrate their family likeness in being ‘blameless’. And so we are called to turn this mirror on ourselves. When we describe our ambitions for ‘Church’ do they fall in line with those of the apostle (and God)!? When we examine ourselves, do we find a ‘filial likeness’ to Christ? Are we so dominated by the reality of God that our lives are shaped by both him and his empowering presence? These are serious questions and we cannot evade them if we are to ‘work out our own salvation’ and find our way to the heavenly home. Philippians 2:19-30 Exemplary Service Certain passages in Paul’s letters offer us an interesting ‘bird’s eye view’ into his own experience and the life of the first century Church. The present passage is one. In a nutshell, Paul is in prison: though still hopeful of release (24). Meanwhile, while in prison, the Philippian church had sent one of their own, Epaphroditus, to offer the sort of personal support that Paul needed but that, in view of the distance, they could not all supply (25,end, 30 end). Unfortunately, while in Rome, Epaphroditus seems to have been taken seriously ill and nearly died (26,end,27).Miraculously, he recovered (27) and, in the ministry of supporting Paul in prison, had risked his own life as a his friend and collaborator (30). Nevertheless, this had all taken its toll. With great pastoral sensitivity (and despite his own needs) Paul wished to send back the home-sick and/or stressed out messenger (26) so that his own concerns for Epaphroditus’ well-being be met (28,end). Lest, however, Epaphroditus is deemed to have failed (or felt that he himself had failed), Paul gives him a glowing testimonial (25a). Since Epaphroditus was probably both the bearer of this letter and was present when Paul dictated it (he may even have been the scribe) this commendation must have been an enormous encouragement to him. Meanwhile, Paul’s concern for the Philippians extends beyond Epaphroditus to the congregation as a whole. With this in mind, he plans to send Timothy, hopefully as some form of advance guard for him (19,24), as soon as he can release him (23). But why speak of Timothy (someone familiar to the Philippians) in the way that he does in 20-22? The answer may lie in three things that are mentioned about him: a) when people encounter Timothy they meet a ‘second generation’ Paul (22): what one is, so is the other; b) unlike other half-hearted disciples, he is single-minded and selfless in his devotion to Jesus (21); c) such devotion goes hand-in-hand with Timothy’s genuine interest in the Philippians (20). In the context of 1:27-2:18, it is likely that such comments are intended to set forth Timothy, Epaphroditus (and by implication Paul himself) as examples of Christ-modeled living. This, in turn, helps us understand its application to us! Note, therefore: • We are reminded that Christian discipleship places Jesus, his will for us and his own selfless example at the heart of all we are called to be and do; • We have our attention drawn to the fact that such discipleship will have at its very core a passionate concern for our brothers and sister in Christ; • We have emphasised that discipleship can be time consuming, disruptive, personally uncomfortable, dangerous and, even, life-threatening; • We are told that discipleship (especially leadership in the Church) can create such insuperable pressures as require the individual to step down from service but to do so without any sense of failure but with the LORD’s ringing commendation in our ears… even if others condemn and we condemn ourselves! Thus, Paul stresses the high calling of each and every believer, those united together in the Gospel, while (at the same time) showing a deep realism for the realities of Christian service; sometimes enough is enough but human weakness or overwhelming stress is not ground for condemnation. It is the Lord who judges and he understands and speaks well of the over-burdened Gospel worker. Philippians 3:1-3 In Christ Alone Paul moves to the practical climax of his letter (‘Finally’). Yet his theme, to encourage the Philippians to walk worthy of the Gospel, continues. Moreover, he picks up the reference to false-teachers in 1:28-30 and expands upon his comments there. The first point he stresses (by the threefold repetition of ‘Look out for’ (2)) is that it is very easy for the Church to be infiltrated by false teaching. Constant watchfulness is, therefore, vital, lest the people of God are led away from dependence on Christ. While he is dealing with a specific threat that appears to have arisen among Jewish believers who had failed to recognise the significance that Jesus’ coming had had upon the religious system they had inherited, their mistakes have been (and are often) repeated. The language of verse 2 sounds harsh, but reflects the language of the false teachers. They spoke of the ‘ordinary Christians’ as like ‘unclean animals’ (‘dogs’) who did not serve God in the proper way (‘evildoers’) and who, specifically, lacked the ‘proper’ sign of circumcision that showed they were his (‘mutilation’ is a similar word to ‘circumcision’ in Greek). The Philippians were, therefore, scarcely Christians at all in the view of this group of false teachers since they were placing their confidence in the wrong place. Not infrequently such claims reappear: those who follow the ‘simple’ Gospel are besieged by those who wish to add something to the message that has been received. Paul, however, rejects this . Boldly, he suggests that circumcision, without the proper grasp of the Gospel is mutilation; painful and valueless. He offers three reasons for this conclusion: * the one object of the Chistian’s boasting is Christ Jesus. * the true believer places no confidence in anything they are or have done. * the Christian can alone serve and obey God through the empowering of Christ’s Spirit. This, he says, is the ‘mark’ of a true Christian (he uses ‘circumcision’ here in a symbolic way). How does this apply to us? * Human beings are reluctant to believe that they are completely dependent on Jesus for their relationship with God. They (‘we’) always want to think that somehow, something we do clinches the deal, makes us a superior form of believer. Paul will have nothing of this and neither should we! * To serve Christ Jesus we must live in utter dependence on the empowering presence of his Spirit. We cannot live too the glory of the glorious Jesus unless he lives within us and works with us to accomplish his will. So the final word is Paul’s first word: ‘Rejoice in the Lord!‘: a command that he loves to share and is beneficial to the Philippians (and us). Our confidence and delight is to be in him and him alone. All other grounds prove illusory and unsatisfying. We are saved by Christ alone! Philippians 3:4-7 None but Jesus Paul is deeply concerned that the Philippian believers will be led astray by false teaching: specifically errors that promote a Jesus plus theology. In other words, a view that argues that faith in Jesus is merely some form of supplement to the practice and teaching of Judaism (3:1-3). In the verses that commence with the present passage (3:4-7), Paul, by means of an autobiographical illustration, shows how far a Jesus plus theology is from the Gospel of Christ. The marks of one version of the Jesus plus theology is it places self back at the centre. It exalts in what I am or what I have achieved. The reasons for such confidence can vary but, reflecting upon his life before he became a Christian, Paul lists those things that he placed in the ‘credit’ column when it came to ensuring he was ‘on-side’ with God. Consider to what he appealed: • he had the benefits of the perfect start in life (‘circumcised on the eighth day’); • he was part of a community that had not compromised on the faith of his ancestors (‘of the people of Israel’ contrasts with those whose adherence to Judaism was defective); • he was a member of the ‘aristocratic’  elite of the people (‘of the tribe of Benjamin’); • he was a member of the small religious elite (‘a Pharisee’); • he showed a religious zeal to hunt out all those whose beliefs departed from those he had received (‘as to zeal, a persecutor of the Church’). There is deep irony here, but we must acknowledge his absolute fidelity and consistency to all that he had received. His attitude, activities and achievements were exemplary; • by the standards of the most rigorous and demanding version of the ‘old paths’ he scored 100% (‘under the law, blameless’). This claim must not be watered down. Paul was probably the best Jew who ever lived! There was, however, one damning feature about it and he discovered this on the road to Damascus. He uses the language of accountancy to emphasise his point… in language that is incredibly passionate and strong! On the one hand, he discovered, were all the accumulated ‘credits’ that he has listed. On the other was the personal knowledge of God in Christ. From this perspective, all the accumulated credits were equivalent to a massive deficit. No help, if anything they were a hindrance! Paul will explain this more fully in the following verses, especially 8-12. However, the point is well made: if you and I build our security with God on any supposed basis that we can bring and see Jesus as the icing on the cake or some sort of starting point to our life with God (rather than its beginning, middle and end) we have, very simply, lost the plot and abandoned the Christian faith and any hope of a relationship with God. So we can return to his earlier list and apply it to ourselves. Are there parallel grounds upon which we build… if we do we are none of Christ’s! Philippians 3:8-11 Gaining Christ! There are certain passages in Scripture where one feels one is walking on especially holy ground. That is true here. Zealous to ensure that the Philippians live worthy of the Gospel (1:27), he has focused in the preceding verses on the need to avoid the sort of Jesus plus theology that is, in fact, to miss out on Christ altogether (3:1-6). Appealing to his own experience, Paul demonstrates that to build on anything other than Jesus is ruinous. To look elsewhere is to take pride in a deficit balance (3:7)! Paul had discovered this in his encounter with Jesus on the Damascus road. Now, years later, that discovery has deepened and come to dominate his entire life. Thus, the earlier judgement has not changed: literally, verse 8 reads, ‘Indeed, I continue to count everything as loss.’  But it has deepened. Thus: • ‘for the sake of Christ’ (7) has become ‘because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord’, that I may gain Christ and be found in him’ (8,9); • ‘loss’ (7) has become ‘rubbish/dung’ (8); • ‘whatever gain’ (7) is supplanted by ‘suffered the loss of all things’.  For Paul, knowing Jesus, is better that the loss of reputation, career, friendships, even family. A quiet life without Christ is not to be compared with a life with Christ even though subject to all the trials that he had had to face, to imprisonment, even the prospect of painful martyrdom! But how can we gain Christ? From using the language of the accountant that has dominated the earlier verses, he, first turns to that of the law court: he speaks of ‘righteousness’ or ‘acquittal’. Simply, he says, the way to ‘gain Christ’ is not (even as a supremely ‘good’ person) to build the case for acquittal and restoration to fellowship with God through Jesus but to rest in the faithfulness of Christ (9). It is Christ’s faithfulness to the demands of God, received by simple faith, that is the basis and the entry point into knowing him.  Yet, the path to ever deepening fellowship is to discover the power that raised Christ from the dead through discovering him and his empowering presence along the path of ‘obedience unto death’ (10, see 2:8) that characterised him. The language here is general: • it embrace, perhaps above all, the pursuit of the death of pride that has always characterised the Christian life in its best exponents, especially in those who think they are spiritually ‘mature’ ; • it probably includes the sort of experiences through which Paul had been led (see above); • it may include the crucible of suffering and pain, faithfully borne. All of which is the royal road to intimacy with him that will characterise the age to come. Consequently, Paul is a ‘driven man’: driven by an overwhelming and life-defining pursuit of Jesus (11). A very different path and prospect than that offered by the Jesus plus theology that separates us from fellowship with him and, almost invariably, offers a relatively pain- free, instant route to a spiritual maturity that rests on personal achievement and not the longing for intimacy with Jesus. What, then, about you and me? What defines our life, its expectations, our conduct? Can it be said of us that we walk worthily of Christ, that his experience in 2:5ff defines us, too? Philippians 3:12-16 Getting Spiritual Paul’s great concern in this letter is his desire to see the Philippians (and us!) walk worthy of the Gospel of Christ (1:27). In the present chapter he has emphasised that this cannot be achieved if our understanding of the Gospel is defective (3:1-3). Specifically, he rejects all attempts to reach Christian maturity / perfection by means of a Jesus plus theology. On the road to Damascus he had discovered the only way to such maturity was ‘in Christ alone’. There, he had rejected all those things he had ‘once held dear, built my life upon’ and recognised his orientation was now to be ‘Jesus, all for Jesus’ (3:4-7). Decades later, imprisoned and in danger of death, he remained convinced that the focus and aim of his entire life was to ‘gain Christ’ and prepare, through his present struggles, for that intimacy with him that characterises the age to come (3:8-11). All of which brings us to the present passage: in which Paul prepares to apply his experience to that of the Philippians (3:12-16). Thus, perhaps unlike false teachers who so often offer a quick route to ‘perfection’ or ‘maturity’ he picks up the language of the Olympic athlete and refers to his strenuous efforts to make good what Christ has already done for him (12). It is possible to see what Paul says here as his striving after holiness and that is, surely, not absent; but the stress is upon the pursuit of Christ and intimacy with him… and this is a life-long pursuit after the One who has, first, sought him. To achieve this, certain prerequisites are required: • the first, is not to assume we are ‘there’: every relationship stagnates and fails to reach its fullness without constant effort and the recognition that there is more to know and experience; this is Paul’s meaning here (13). Nothing quite so effectively stalls growth that the assumption we are fully grown!; • the second, is not to carry with us the burdensome baggage of the past (13, ‘forgetting what lies behind’).  Such may, variously, be pride in our achievements / experiences or, by way of contrast, the burden of past failure. Each inhibit growth. We must, says Paul, set aside both!; • finally, we must be focussed on the goal (‘straining forward to what lies ahead’). The language here and in verse 14 emphasises strenuous and focussed effort. Aimlessness always fails to hit the mark. Simply, that call is the invitation to heavenly intimacy with Christ Jesus (14). So Paul throws out a threefold challenge: • ‘OK’, he says, ‘if you consider yourself spiritually mature’ you will inevitably agree with me (15a)! • ‘If not, you may lack maturity; but don’t despair, God will make the truth known to those who seek him’ (15b). • ‘Whichever’, he says, ‘don’t fail to live out the reality of where you are now’ (16). Paul longs after Jesus. He wants to know him better. This is the sum and substance of every ambition and aim in his life. He knows that he has not ‘arrived’ (whatever others might claim) but with undeflected aim he casts aside every entanglement and ‘goes for broke’. How far do we measure up! Philippians 3:17-21 The Marks of a Cross-centred Life Paul’s burden throughout this letter is that the Philippians (and all who read his words) walk ‘worthy of the Gospel of Christ’ (1:27). He has emphasised that this is both a matter of thinking straight and acting appropriately and is, above all, Cross-centred and, as the previous verses have stressed, requires sustained effort (3:12-16). This, obviously, prompts the present impassioned appeal. Students of this passage continue to debate the identity of the ‘enemies of the cross’ that Paul speaks of here and whether they are within or without the Church. As to the former question, we best recognise that the description fits many throughout Christian history up to the present… even, possibly, us. As to the second, the vehemence of Paul’s words suggests that such are a threat that arises within the visible Church. As such, then, Paul is suggesting that within many (any?) gatherings of those who bear the name Christian, two very different groups of people are to be found. With deep sorrow, he reminds his readers that some of those who, presumably, gather among them are actually ‘enemies of the cross of Christ’ (18). It might be assumed that such are easily identified but, apparently, this is not the case: there is no suggestion that they deny any fundamental Christian truth nor that their outward conduct is obviously a departure from Gospel norms. They are recognised at a more deep-seated level. This is the point in verse 19 where Paul says four things (in reverse order): • their ambitions are dictated by worldly standards. The way we think dictates all that we are. If we fail to think like ‘Gospel people’ we will be driven by the hopes, expectations and ambitions of the fallen world. • their values are earth-bound. This inevitably follows. Those things that, as Christians, we should value above all things… perhaps, here, above all, the self-giving humility that characterised Jesus (see 2:1-11) are absent. Bluntly, says Paul, to place our ambitions anywhere else is to glory in that which should bring us the greatest embarrassment if we but had eyes to see. • their appetites are unspiritual. This inevitably follows. Our world-view shapes our values and dictates our conduct. • their destiny is Hell. And Paul’s point is that lurking behind outwardly impeccable Christian lives, can lurk the attitudes and conduct of the pit. We should be warned and discerning… and we should be different. • we should follow the example of Paul and others whose lives, under scrutiny, bear the marks of genuine Christianity (17: the verse is perhaps best translated, ‘join together with others and imitate me…’ • we shall recognise them by their ‘heavenward’ orientation (20,21). Such will not be dictated by the standards of the world but the recognition that they live under a different citizenship, their ambitions dictated by a longing to see Christ’s saving work on the cross perfected in them and in his world. We neglect Paul’s words to our cost. We should be always about self-examination (and listen to the critiques of others and, above all, God’s word). Hypocrisy is a peculiarly ‘Church’ trait. So what drives and shapes you and me? Philippians 4:1-3 That the World may know its Saviour The dominating theme of this letter is Paul’s desire to see the Philippian believers live ‘worthy of the Gospel of Christ’ (1:27). He has traced out this theme in various ways, beginning, at 3:1, a section of more specific application (‘Finally’ best has this sense). With the present verses, this application becomes very specific: very simply, two women leaders within the Church (and who have a good record in Christian ministry) are struggling to be reconciled to one another and need ‘help’ (3). To assist their progress an un-named colleague is beckoned to help (‘true companion’), possibly with the assistance of Clement and others (3b, which might however be a reference to other fellow-workers of the two women). We notice that these people are not part of the group whose ‘end is destruction’, 3:19) since these women’s names are, apparently, ‘in the book of life’. We learn, then, that colleagues in the Christian Church, even those in mission/ministry, may sometimes struggle to live in harmony with one another.  We note, further, that we have an obligation to seek to work with them to assist them to the place where they ‘agree in the Lord’ (2). Blessed are the peace-makers. Significantly, Paul does not attempt to arbitrate (or encourage arbitration) on their disagreements. This may have a place, but, first, there is the need to ‘agree in the Lord’ (2). Clearly, this does not mean that they must have the same opinion on every matter (an impossible goal!) but that they/we are to be refocused on the ‘one thing needful’ and him who is the example and empowering presence to unity of mind and spirit. It is not without significance that ‘in the Lord’ occurs twice in these verses and again in the verse that follows! It is also not without significance that the apostle refers to those who have ‘laboured side by side with me in the gospel’. In the light of his emphasis upon Gospel life and witness throughout this letter, it is the damage caused to the Church’s witness that troubles him here. A disunited Church damages Christ and his Gospel. A divided Church closes the door to effective proclamation of Christ: men and women are left in spiritual darkness through our self-seeking attitudes. But we have neglected verse 1! Significantly, the verse reminds us of two vital truths. Firstly, the ‘therefore’ reminds us that Paul’s teaching here flows out of all that has preceded: perhaps, especially the reference to our ‘citizenship is in heaven’ (3:20) and the servant-hearted humility of Jesus (2:1-11). Paul is insistent that Christians live to another master than the world and that such a master is supremely revealed in self-denial. Secondly, we note Paul’s passionate concern for those whom he ‘loves to bits’ and yearns to see both now and in eternity as the garland that is his supreme honour. The following verses might seem harsh unless viewed from this perspective. How he longs for them to stand with him in the Lord that he may know them as his present delight and his future glory. It is the deep longing of his pastoral heart that dictates his comments here. The application is obvious. Typically of this letter, Paul’s pastoral scalpel probes, painfully, our deepest desires and longings and seeks to bring healing by refashioning them into conformity with Jesus. Are we ready to welcome the pain so as to find true healing of our innermost lives. Only so will be learn to live as Paul calls us to live. Only so will the world be able to welcome its saviour. Philippians 4:4-9 Peace with God and one Another The Philippian church were subject to persecution, threatened by false teaching and subject to division within (the latter highlighted in the previous verses). Such must have caused anxiety, depression and disillusionment. Paul, however, has been concerned throughout his letter to emphasise ‘walking worthy of the gospel’; not least so that the dissemination of the gospel of Christ is not prejudiced. Thus, he responds to the Philippians’ concerns with a command! Insistently, by repetition, he demands that what is indeed humanly impossible, is to be characteristic of them: they are to rejoice ‘in the Lord’ (4). Now, Paul is no triumphalist nor a stranger to the pressures of life, Church and ministry. However, he does recognise that a) another perspective and b) the empowering of Another does provide a different viewpoint. Seen from the recognition of all that we are in Christ and strengthened by him, joy can be expressed not on account of but in our difficulties: even if it need to be an act of the will! Consequently, unreasonable anxiety has no place in any activity or context (6). How will such a Christ-centred joy be shown and stimulated? Paul offers us several answers: His answer includes the following points: 1)  perhaps, susprisingly, he suggests that it will be seen in the ‘sweet reasonableness’ or winsomeness that is characteristic of every relationship (5); 2) This attitude will emerge out of a deliberate attempt to focus mind and heart and cultivate those biblical virtues as supremely exemplified in Jesus (8); 3) Such a mindset leads to a quality of ‘inner life’ that knows the peace that flows from security in God: a security grounded in who Christ is an what he has and does do (7). 4) It will be grounded in the knowledge that ‘the Lord is near’: both in the sense of ‘being at hand’ and to be depended on and ‘is returning’ and, therefore, conduct is undertaken in the light of our preparing for eternity. 5) Mature believers will provide the example and inspiration (9). And such will remove petty disputes, self-assertive demands, self-righteous opinions, over-occupation with hurts and offences. It will refocus our lives on Jesus and his Gospel and, despite our trials, will provide a deep inner peace that can only be known by those who walk before him, follow his example and seek his empowering. Philippians 4:10-20 (I) The Marks of Gospel People Paul begins to draw his letter to a close and first, he offers a sort of ‘receipt’ for the recent gift that the Philippians had sent to him by the hand of Epaphroditus. What is said reflects, among other things, upon the nature of the relationship that Paul and the Philippians had with one another, the response that they had made to him and his Gospel and, consequently, their priorities as a church and, finally, Paul’s attitude to money! Each bring with them contemporary challenges. Paul’s missionary visit to Philippi had been brief but the response to his preaching had been wholehearted and, despite the fact that the Macedonian churches were not wealthy, they had (uniquely) immediately taken steps to provide him with financial support: both while in Thessalonica and when engaged in ministry elsewhere. Most recently, after a period of time in which they had been unable to get their support to him, they had sent Epaphroditus to bring a gift and personally spend time with Paul… thus, sharing with Paul’s in his difficulties. Paul is clearly grateful (slightly embarrassedly so!) but the accent of his words appears to lie in seeing this conduct as a reflection of what he had taught and how he had lived; each, in themselves, ‘walking worthy of the Gospel’. So here is concrete evidence of what ‘walking worthy’ may look like! What, then, are the lessons? When we have been grasped by the Gospel: • we give freely for the Jesus of the Gospel as we do for those we love (15, not for Church!); • we show a sustained and practical interest in the work the Gospel-bearer (10,14-16); • we participate in the difficulties of such workers (14); • we benefit from our sharing with others in their work: both now and to eternity (17b); • we bring joy to the heart of God (18, end). At the same time, we observe the relationship between Paul and the Philippians. It was clearly mutual (14), viewed as a matter of ‘giving and receiving’ (15) and warm. While Paul was the apostle/evangelist who had brought them to faith and while they would have included citizens and slaves, there is no real sense of ‘them and us’. Love destroys the barriers that human society builds and love for Christ reduces us all to mere fellow brothers and sisters of him. A people walking ‘worthy of the Gospel’ will show such a mutuality as that which characterised Paul and the Philippians. These is, of course, more to be said about this passage… but that can await the next time. For the present, it is enough to ask the questions ‘to what extent do I show that I have been grasped by the Gospel?’, ‘to what extent is that true of us as a Church?’ and ‘what sort of relationships characterise us? Are they those that flow from the Gospel? Philippians 4:10-20 (II) Contented Security Paul has begun to draw his letter to a close. He offers a sort of ‘receipt’ for the recent gift that the Philippians had sent to him by the hand of Epaphroditus. What is said reflects, among other things, upon the nature of the relationship that Paul and the Philippians had with one another and the response that they had made to him and his Gospel. Each, as we noted in the last study, bring with them contemporary challenges. Here we return to the same verses but concentrate our thoughts on Paul’s attitude to the monetary gifts they had supplied and continued to supply him. Note the following: • he is very grateful for their support in the past ‘when I was in need’ (16b) and the present support that has ‘amply supplied’ for his needs (18b). Their support has left him comfortable. • he is not driven by the pursuit of money (17) and his delight in receiving gifts is as much for the blessings that the givers receive as he does (17b). • his joy, therefore, is less in the gift than in the LORD who has worked in them to provide so generously (10). • His security is not determined by his physical and material well-being (11,12). He has known the range of human experiences of want and plenty, and there is no suggestion that he found the former a blessing in itself. Contentment has arisen from his recognition that whether his situation is good Commentary 2011-01-11T11:16:47+00:00 http://ferndalechurches.org.uk/resources/detail/obadiah_a_little_book_with_a_big_message/ http://ferndalechurches.org.uk/resources/detail/obadiah_a_little_book_with_a_big_message/#When:11:11:45Z The smallest prophet carries quite a punch as these noted demonstrate!This short book is, nevertheless, long enough to justify the claim that Obadiah is ‘the theologian of human history.’ To say as much may be a ‘turn off’ but, in fact, we all need a way of understanding the circumstances in which we individually or corporately and, sometimes, agonisingly find ourselves. Thus it is a profoundly practical book: designed, especially, to bring comfort to the people of God in desperate times. Thus Obadiah teaches the following lessons: As God’s people we sometimes have ‘our day’ of agonising and inexplicable pain and suffering (10-14). This little section bears all the marks of an eyewitness of calamitous events: and what events they were! While there are hints that part of the reason was the LORD’s discipline, this is not fore-grounded here. What is emphasised is the bewildering, overwhelming circumstances of Obadiah and his fellows. Here then are four examples noted by Obadiah: 1. We may suffer from calamity and lose all we treasure (esp. 11, 13 end). Here the inhabitant of Jerusalem had suffered defeat, the entry of the enemy within the city and the widespread looting that followed. As any who have been robbed know, such is worse than the mere loss of goods: there is the pain of ‘psychological’ rape. But there are other forms of ‘loss’: not least that of reputation, status, honour. Whether ‘sticks or stones’ or ‘names’ such are excruciatingly painful and can be experienced by the people of God! Thus, 2. We may find ourselves the objects of scorn (12). We may, therefore, find ourselves, in the depths of pain, friendless and surrounded by those who seem to enjoy our discomfort and make all they can of it. There is something in fallen human nature, the bully in us all,  that is ever ready to hit the person already down. As if our calamity is not enough….! The respect that we are owed as those made in the ‘image of God’ is denied us. Further, 3. We may find ourselves in an inescapable disaster (14). For some of these people a possible ‘light at the end of the tunnel‘, the path to escape, proved a false dawn and only led to greater tragedy, pain and loss. Sometimes to offer the hope ‘things must get better’ is to promise the impossible. There may not be a way out! Finally, 4. Above all, we may suffer from the silence, pleasure and advantage-taking of those ‘near to us’ (esp. 12a). Lying at the heart of this passage is the fact that it is ‘brother Edom’ who is implicated in all that is taking place. Implicated by: a) adopting the role of bystander (11a, ‘its nothing to do with me’), b) worse of joining in the witness against a ‘brother’ (12a, ‘I expect he deserved it, you know’) c) taking advantage of his calamity (13a, ‘well! I suppose I must live with the new situation and make the best of it for myself’)  and d) of assisting the ‘fall’ when looked to for help (14) .    What depths of tragedy we may fall to individually (and corporately) as the LORD‘s people! Obadiah’s realism is one that we need to take to heart. The LORD is watching all we experience and will ‘reward’ those who have acted against us (1-9, 15). Obadiah traces, with great effect, the psychology of the bully: here the bully nation, for he is not just dealing with individuals! Thus we note: a) the fundamental self-confident amorality of those whose wisdom is ‘might is right’ (2) and may even claim ‘religious’ sanction (4) but who, b) when their foundations are destroyed, are quivering jellies (8.9). c) Indeed, it is such over-reaching self-confidence that often constitutes the basis for destruction (7). But all this is preamble. Not only is the bully not as secure as he/she thinks but in his tendency to ‘look down’ he forgets to look up (3,4) to the one who will, in a word, bring him down and expose his despicable nature (4b, 2) as the world’s moral sovereign. Often, indeed, the destruction is total (5,6); as human history often attests and even individual experience frequently shows. This is not the LORD’s final word to either the bully or the bullied… as we shall see. However, there is some robust realism here that we do well to grasp: together with the reassurance that the LORD is in control and ’rewards’ the wicked. And this, too, the Son of God experienced! In Obadiah’s presentation of his practical ‘theology of history’ he mentions two ‘days’ in verses 1-14: the day of his suffering people (esp. 11-14)  and the ‘day’ of Edom (8). As we have seen, the former highlights the tragedies and calamities through which the people of God may pass, the latter foregrounds the judgments that inevitably follow the wicked. But there are three ‘days’ in Obadiah and, without the final one, ‘the day of the LORD’, described in 15-21, Obadiah’s message was and is incomplete. Nations rise and fall but, one day, all will find themselves answerable to the LORD’s justice (15f).  The Edomites and nations may have binged themselves on violence and oppression but the time would come when they would recognise they had drunk deep draughts of a poisoned chalice. They would do so because they had failed to recognise the LORD’s moral governorship of his world. Such failure would result in their total destruction. Often worked out on the page of history, Obadiah here, however, points to a final reckoning. Despite the ambiguities of that same history, evil will not finally triumph.  The overthrow of the nations is the glory of the Church (17-20). Obadiah uses two related pictures so as to make his points here: i) The people of God will act as the agents of God’s justice against evil (17,18). This picture may seem rather ‘unChristian’ in a ‘soft’ and rather ‘namby pamby’ world. However, while we should avoid bitterness and vindictiveness towards those who do us evil (whether individually or corporately), the LORD declares that we will eventually become part of our own vindication. Those who have done us evil will be forced to recognise it and suffer the consequences. ii) The people of God will enjoy full possession of all God’s promises (19,20). Perhaps, more positively, all that frustrates and prevents our full enjoyment of our promised inheritance will be overcome. All enemies will be overthrown: the world, the flesh and the Devil. Whether ‘shut up’ or ‘exiled’ all barriers to the enjoyment of the promises and purposes of God will be overcome. The glory of the people of God is the salvation of the world and the vindication of the LORD (21). This verse contains two final and vital truths. i) There is hope for the wicked (21a,b). For all the description of the utter devastation of Edom and the nations, there will be deliverers/saviours on mount Esau. Deliverance comes alone from despised Zion (see 17) but even Edom is not exempt from the experience of salvation… in Zion! Worldwide salvation is promised. ii) All this is for Him (21c). Simply, the blessing is ours but the glory is His. Thus Obadiah depicts the end of history. Those of us who live the other side of the incarnation ought to understand Obadiah’s message more fully than he himself did. We know the one who is the saviour, we recognise the themes of worldwide domination on a scale that even Obadiah may have failed to grasp. So, then, our hope and confidence should burn more brightly. In a dark and lowering world there is undying and assured hope upon which we can and should build. And strangers to Christ must needs listen to Obadiah’s philosophy of history and wake up! Commentary 2011-01-11T11:11:45+00:00 http://ferndalechurches.org.uk/resources/detail/the_life_of_faith_in_1_samuel/ http://ferndalechurches.org.uk/resources/detail/the_life_of_faith_in_1_samuel/#When:11:02:37Z These studies in 1 Samuel look at the lives of Samuel, Saul and David and explore they way that God revealed himself to them and how they responded. The lessons for today are clear!The Life of Faith in 1 Samuel To understand the Book of 1 Samuel it is important to understand how it fits within its bible context. 1 Samuel to 2 Kings were only divided late in their history and really constitute one book. To understand them, the following points need to be noted: • They are part of a section of the Old Testament that the Jewish Bible (in which some of the books are differently ordered from ours!) names the ‘Former Prophets’. This section includes Joshua to 2 Kings (excluding Ruth). 1 and 2 Chronicles tell much of the same story but are included in a different section, named the ‘Writings’. • This identification of 1 Samuel to 2 Kings as ‘prophecy’ may challenge our understanding of what the word means… but it also tells us that these books are not merely retelling history but are understood to be the ‘word of God’ to those of us reading them. • To help us identify what the message may be, we need to consider, first, the historical and ‘canonical’ context. Secondly, we need to reflect upon how the story is ‘shaped’ and what principles undergirded the selection of the material by the original compiler. Historical and Canonical Context. • Israel’s history began with the call of Abraham and his leading of the Patriarchs, it saw the nation founded in exile in Egypt and then, in fulfilment of his promises, the LORD established the nation in the land of Canaan (or Palestine). • Israel’s history in the land moved through different stages: the commonwealth (described in Joshua and Judges) and the Kingdom (described in these four books) that led up to the Exile in Babylon. • The Kingdom, described here, moves through different stages: preparation, the United Kingdom, the Divided Kingdoms. It ends with on a note of hope… the king still lives! This hints when the books reached their final form and the reason for their being written. God is faithful to his promises! Literary Shape. • These books are often known as the ‘Deuteronomic History’: in other words they are shaped by the ‘theology’ that undergirds Deuteronomy: that of covenant blessing and curse. • More specifically, the story may be divided in the following way:     Samuel: the last of the Judges (1 Sam 1-8) > Saul: the King acclaimed by Men (1 Sam 9-15) > a1) David: the King chosen by the LORD (1 Sam 16-31) a2) David: the Triumph of God’s Chosen One (2 Sam 1-10) a3) David: his Fall (2 Samuel 11,12) a2) David: Troubles of God’s Chosen One (2 Sam 13-20) a1) David: his Last Will and Testament (2 Sam 21-24) b1) Solomon: his rule established (1 Kings 1-3) b2) Solomon: his glory (centred on the presence of the LORD in the Temple, 1 Kings 4-10) b1) Solomon: Apostasy and Death (1 Kings 11) c1) The Kingdom Divided (1 Kings 12-15) c2) Elijah and Elisha: the battle for the Heart of the People (1 Kings 16-2 Kings 7) c1) The Divided Kingdoms: Decline and Fall (2 Kings 8-25) Conclusion: Hope for those with ‘ears to hear’ (2 Kings 25:27-30) 1:1-2:10 1 Samuel is devoted to describing three overlapping lives: Samuel, Saul and David. Thus: Samuel occupies chapters 1-19; Saul chapters 9-31; David chapter 16-2 Samuel. In the chapters especially devoted to Samuel (1-12), there are three major sections: 1:1-4:1a, Samuel’s birth, early life and call; 4:1b-7:17, Israel’s disastrous defeat, repentance and deliverance and Samuel’s role within it; 8:1-12:25, Samuel hands over to Saul. Further: 1:1 picks up Judges 13:2 and depicts Samuel as the last judge; 4:1a presents Samuel as the first in the line of the prophets; 2:35ff describes him as a priest. Thus Samuel is both a transitional figure and one who combines in his own person the ‘ideal’ leader of God’s people: the wise ruler, the spokesperson for God and the mediator between God and man and man and God. Zooming in….we note: The first section (1:1-4:1a) may be divided into four sections: 1:1-20: Samuel the child of a barren womb; 1:21-2:10: Samuel offered to the LORD to minister before him; 2:11-36: Samuel grows ‘in the presence of the LORD’ and ‘in stature and in favour’ with him while Eli’s family serve as ‘worthless men’; 3:1-4:1a: The Lord calls Samuel such that, at a time when the ‘word was rare’ the word of Samuel ‘came to all Israel’. 1:1-20, describes the work of God as commenced among a faithful family amid prevailing apostasy in barrenness (1-5) and distress (6-8) and prayerfulness when there was nowhere else to turn (9-11): a prayerfulness that is bold and uninhibited (12-18) and effective (19,20). What can we deduce from this for our own prayer life? 1:21-2:10 records Hannah’s fulfilment of her vow (1:21-28) and her prayer of thanksgiving (2:1-10). The latter may be divided in this way: 1-3: Hannah records her own experience (1) and draws out the ‘theological’ implication (2) and the practical application (3); 4-8: She extrapolates from the ‘particular’ of her own experience to the ‘general’ or ‘wider’ recognition of God and his ways; and 9,10: Extends this recognition to see its application to God’s final rule. In what way might we copy Hannah? Can we think of a situation to which we might follow the same procedure? What might we deduce? 2:11-4:1a The present section begins by comparing Samuel with Eli’s sons. Thus: • 11-16 is flanked by two verses that describe Eli’s sons ‘wicked/no regard for the LORD’ (11) and amplifies this with ‘they were treating the LORD’s offering with contempt’ (16). The intervening verses provide the detailed evidence. Further, in • 22-25, to ‘liturgical/theological’ offences were added moral failures (22) and in all they were impervious to rebuke and exposed to divine wrath (23-25). Tragically, pride, arrogance (3) and those who oppose the LORD (10) are found among the senior clergy/religious leaders. Finally, • 27-36, Eli is condemned for the fact that rebuke is not accompanied by discipline. He is too tolerant and ‘nice’ toward sin. In this way, God’s grace (27-28) is spurned (29) and judgement is inevitable (30-36). These passages, therefore, help us to trace the growth of sin from ‘loose thinking’ about God to ‘loose living’ before men and explore how such can prevail when not tackled head on. By contrast, • 18-21, Samuel ‘was ministering before the LORD’/ ‘grew up in the presence of the LORD’ (18,21) and his family knew the LORD’s benediction (19-21); • 26, he ‘grew in stature and in favour with the LORD and with men’; • 3:1, Samuel is again ‘ministering before the LORD’ while ‘the word of the LORD was rare’. Then: 3:1-4:1a: if 3:1 commences on such a negative note, it ends very differently (3:19-4:1a, especially the last verse): ‘Samuel’s word came to all Israel’. The failure of the clerical leadership is eclipsed by God’s grace to a nation consequent upon the prayers of a desperate woman (1:1-2:10). In contrast to the refusal of Eli’s sons to listen to their father, is Samuel’s ‘Speak for your servant is listening’ (10b). Listening, where there is widespread apostasy, may, however, mean the first message is a demanding one (11-18) but, in the end, it is impossible to gainsay that the LORD has spoken through his attentive listener. 4:1b-22 Strictly speaking, 4:1b-7:2 are not about Samuel at all, since he is not mentioned. More accurately, it refers to an episode in Israel’s history when God abandoned his people: this is focused in on the account of the history of the Ark of the Covenant during this period. Thus the focus of the story has shifted: or, more accurately, we learn the context of Samuel’s ministry. During the period of Israel’s Commonwealth, the Philistines, living on their western frontier along the Mediterranean, were one of their ongoing enemies. No surprise, then, that we read of a war. Defeated (1b-3a), the leaders of the nation ask the correct question, but reach a faulty conclusion. The LORD’s presence (and, therefore, their certain victory) is grounded not in their seeking him (compare 7:3) but using the ark that symbolised his presence as a magic talisman accompanied by the appropriate personnel (3b,4). Thus, reassured of victory, with the enemy trembling at the presence of a powerful god in the other camp with naught but words to galvanise them, victory is surely certain (5-9). Not so! Another defeat, a loss of the ark and the ending of the priestly line of Eli follow one upon the other (10,11). With a slowing of the story to heighten the effect and with great pathos, this is spelt out. Elderly, anxious Eli, perhaps aware of his failings in leadership but sufficient of a theologian to not go along with the popular piety he has failed to challenge, despite 40 years ‘in charge’ (12-16,18), learns of the defeat of Israel (17a), the death of his sons and, by implication, descendants and, therefore, the ending of his priestly dynasty (see 2:31) and the capture of the ark (17b). All of which is simply too much for the old man (18). The shock also brought on the labour pains of Phineas’ wife (19) but she died in childbirth (20). Not, however, before naming her son Ichabod: ‘the glory/presence of God has departed’ (21,22). Whether she thought, with the wider public, that the glory had gone with the Ark or that the capture of the Ark indicated that the glory had already departed, is difficult to know. The latter, however, is the truth the story seeks to declare.  From this, we learn that we can presume upon God’s presence by the assumption that the proper actions and correct personnel can guarantee it. In addition, forty years of service for the LORD was utterly wasted by Eli! Finally, we note that the LORD is less concerned for his name than his people’s faithfulness. 5:1-7:2 In 4:1b-22, emphasis turned to an episode in the history of the Ark of the Covenant: it unveils the tragic reality that when God’s people do not seek him, he would rather risk his reputation than presence himself among them. The glory of God has departed and, with it, Israel suffers defeat and loses the Ark and its most senior ‘churchmen’. But, as we learn here, God’s ‘failure’ to presence himself among his unfaithful people does not mean that he cannot secure victory over the Philistines all on his own! Placed as booty before the all-conquering Dagon, the local deity, the Lord turns the tables! First Dagon ‘bows’ before the LORD and then (after Dagon is propped back up!) suffers defeat as of a conquered warrior (5:1-5). Thus, the Philistines (and all with ‘ears to hear’) have to discover the helplessness of man-made religion in the face of the invisible God. Powerless and afflicted under the ‘hand of God’, the erstwhile booty proves nothing but a curse! Three of the five major cities of the Philistines (did the others make the wise choice and refuse!?), one by one, receive and expel the Ark under the penalty of an epidemic of tumours (perhaps something like bubonic plague, 5:6-12). Israel’s God is far from a powerless deity who can be domesticated in a rival’s shrine! What, then, to do with the Ark or are the plagues mere coincidence? This is the issue now addressed (6:1-12). People, gods and the land are all alike suffering (5b). With aknowledge of Israel’s history that Israel itself would do well to remember, the Philistines recognise the LORD is not one with whom to trifle (6). Thus they seek religious guidance and devise a strategy that seeks to acknowledge guilt (1-5a) and confirms who is in ‘control’; two milking cows provide a prophetic voice (7-12) and the LORD returns to Israelite territory entirely without the help of the Israelites themselves! The celebration of the Israelites is understandable (13-18) but they, too, needed to be reminded that the living God is not one with whom to trifle (19). Just like the Philistine cities, the inhabitants of Beth-shemesh suffer at he hands of the holy God and send him away (20-21). Only when proper honour is afforded to him, accompanied by penitence and zeal to return to him, is there any prospect of his presence returning in blessing (7:1-2). 7:3-16 The inaugural seven chapters of 1 Samuel are focussed around the life of Samuel. Yet the story is a peculiar one since 1;1-3:21 concentrates on his family and early life, culminating with his call and 4:1b-7:2 do not mention him at all but concentrate upon a particular incident in the history of the Ark of the Covenant. However, 7:3 picks up 4:1a as Samuel reappears, in this specific context, as the preacher and intercessor whom was used to bring Israel back into a right relationship with God. Significant, then, is the fact that the LORD had prepared Samuel, before the event, for such a time as this: evidence of the LORD’s grace and mercy and of the years that may accompany the full maturing of a man of God for his ministry. The stirrings of repentant sorrow appear to have already been present when Samuel commenced (7:2) but Samuel’s preaching sought to assist the people to bring this repentance to fruition. Such is to be more than mere words (‘put away’) and involve the difficult tasks of both a radical re-alignment of an attitude and practice of religion that was based on human ideologies and the submission to the LORD himself (7:3,4).  After due preparation, Samuel draws the people together to formalise their response, to continue his leading and guiding of them and to accompany it all with intercession (7:5-6). No sooner does this happen than the ‘auld enemy’ stirs (7:7). Formerly, the Philistines feared the LORD before a presumptuous people who suffered his judgment for being so. Now there is a change: only by that prayer that issues from a right relationship to God can success be achieved (7:8). Thus, acknowledging both his own and the people’s guilt and, humbly, asking for help an answer was afforded (7:9) which stopped the enemy in its tracks, before Israel had done anything else itself (7:10): all the people had to do was ‘mop up’ the defeated foe (7:11) and celebrate ‘Ebenezer’ (7:12) not mourn ‘Ichabod’ (see 4:21,22). Indeed, substantial gains were made and on more than one front (7:13,14)…. And so it continued under a devoted, spiritual, leader whom the LORD had prepared over many years (7:15,16). 8:1-22 1 Samuel 8 is a transitional chapter. Up till now, the LORD has governed his people through specially appointed persons such as Moses or, more recently, the Judges. Samuel is clearly described as a ‘judge’. However, from chapter 9 onwards, Israel will have a king: this chapter explains how this came about. While it describes events which took place over 3000 years ago it is part of God’s storybook and contains lessons that we need to hear today! The people of God face a dilemma. Samuel has led them well. Called and equipped by the LORD, he has guided them, prayerfully and wisely, for many years and they have flourished under his God-given leadership. Such is the story of chapter 7. However, he is now elderly, he has needed his sons to deputise for him at the more far-flung locations (Beersheba was to the far south of Israel’s territory) and they have proved, like Eli’s sons before him, unfit for the task (1-3). Something clearly needs to be done and so the national leaders gather to address the situation and make their recommendation (4-5). The recommendation seems reasonable and even ‘biblical’ (see below) but ominously, there is no reference to their ‘seeking the LORD’. At this point we are faced with an interesting question. The people want a king and the LORD had earlier indicated to them (see Deuteronomy 17:14-20) that this was in accordance with his plans for them. So why is Samuel displeased and why does the LORD regard the proposal as a (typical) act of rebellion against himself (6-8)? The answer appears to lie in the little phrase ‘as all the other nations have’ (5b, see 20a). In fact, Israel has reverted to ‘type’: just as the ark was the answer to their earlier needs (chapter 4), so now a king, rather than the LORD, is seen to guarantee their future. While chapter 7 placed at the centre of the people’s life and blessing a God-appointed intercessor, their answer to their needs is a good general! Samuel spells out the implications of such a change of administration (his words are realistic and not over-stated, 10-17), stressing that the people must bear the consequences for their choice (18). The people are intransigent and the LORD agrees to their request (19-22). Sometimes it would be better if the LORD did not answer our prayers! 9:1-10:16 Chapter 8 describes how elderly Samuel was pressured by the national leaders to agree to appoint them a king. While the LORD concurs with the people, he does so in the recognition that their request (or certainly the manner in which it was asked) was an act of rebellion against him. So the people go home to await Samuel’s choice and Samuel goes home to await the LORD’s choice! 9:1-14 read rather like an unusual but not unparalleled day in the life of a well-off hill farmer (1). True, he had Israel’s candidate for Mr Universe as his son (2) but nothing is made of this… yet… More to the point, Kish needs to recover his escaped livestock (3,4). The task proved fruitless (4) and Saul begins to be concerned that his family will think him lost too (5)! Only a suggestion from his servant brings Saul to Ramah to ask for Samuel’s help (6-11). Happily he is ‘home’ (11-13) and in the melee, equally happily, they bump into Samuel (14) who is able to assure them of the safety of the donkeys (20a). So, we might suppose, concludes a moral tale that assures us that the LORD leads and guides us individually. But this is far from all…. Significantly, then, we are told that the LORD had prepared Samuel for Saul’s visit (15). The young man is the LORD’s candidate: not as king (the LORD is that!) but leader or prince (16) who is to ‘govern’ (not rule) the people (17) and (mercifully!) to provide the leadership that will deliver Israel from the ever-present Philistine threat (16). What then follows is that Saul is gently prepared for the change in life that is shortly to occur to him. Samuel refers (mysteriously) to his preferment (20), Saul is given a privileged place in a feast where he is given a leg of meat to eat. In Exodus 29:27 this was reserved for the priests: here the suggestion is that Saul has been called to a ‘sacred’ task (24). The following day, privately, Samuel privately reveals he is the LORD’s choice (9:25-10:1). How can Saul be sure? In advance, he is told of three remarkable co-incidences. Saul will ‘bump into’ strangers at a particular location giving news of the donkeys discovery and Kish’s anxiety for Saul (2), others will greet him and offer him the dignity of a ‘priest’ (3,4) and he will have an encounter with some prophets in which he will be equipped to serve (5-7); something that will be evident to those who formerly knew him (8-13). Meanwhile, the secret is kept from the nearest family (14-16) while Saul prepares to meet with Samuel again (8): Saul is to be obedient to the word of the LORD through Samuel. So what has all this to do with us? Its application lies at two levels. Firstly, it reminds us that leadership (whether in ancient Israel or the contemporary church) is to be a divine appointment not the fulfilment of a personal ambition and that such leadership is a sacred calling, marked out by obedience to the LORD’s word, the responsibility to ‘stand between’ people and the LORD and is witnessed by a recognisable (not least, to others) divine consecration to the task. It is supremely seen in the Messiah to whom all earlier messianic figures pointed! Such is a scarily ‘high’ calling. Secondly, it applies to us all in two ways: a) how do we recognise those whom God has given to lead us and how should we respond to them? b) how, then, should we live? We, too, are called to obedient servanthood; ready to respond to God’s call on us in spheres in which he has called and equipped us to serve. 10:17-11:15 Simply, this passage describes Saul’s coronation and first success as the nation’s battle-leader. But woven within the story are elements that have long puzzled students of this book: not least the apparent conflict between sentiments that appear to be pro-kingdom and those anti-kingdom. Some have even speculated that this is the result of clumsy editing of materials that originally belong to two conflicting ‘camps’! We need not resort to such an expedient but we do need to face this apparent contradiction and make some sense of it so that we can learn from it ourselves! Samuel, requested to choose a king, calls the people together at Mizpah for the coronation of his (so far unknown to the people) choice. He reminds them that their demand fails to reckon with the fact that the history of the people is one in which the LORD has shown himself to be their warlord and, thus, to seek another is to abandon their trust in the LORD (11:17-19a). The lesson is one that the people of God under both covenants have regularly failed to grasp. Victory is always the LORD’s and human strategies to meet the needs of his people invariably acts of unbelief. And yet… the LORD uses means… here Saul!  Despite his obvious qualifications for the task the people wanted him to do (11:23) there were (as there always are) doubters (11:27). However, the focus of the story is less interested in them than in the qualities that Saul demonstrates. We note the following: 1) He himself recognised his human unfitness for the task (11:2-23a). If he could have run away, he would have done.  If the people see Saul as the answer, Saul is only too well aware that he lacks the resources for the work he is called to undertake. 2) He does not respond as those in authority often do to those who doubt his competence (11:27) because he has no evidence upon which to affirm it. True leadership is won and consensual, it cannot be demanded… or, if it is, it is not true leadership. 3) He lives humbly in the midst of his people (11:5). King he may be, but high office in the LORD’s kingdom is for those ready to serve not to lord it over the people. 4) His success is wholly dependent upon the Spirit of God at work through him (11:6). Those of us who know the story will know that this is poignant in the light of the eventual sequel of Saul’s later rule… but here the point is well made. Under Saul’s leadership and organisation (11:11) the first threat to the LORD’s people is overcome. 5) He is magnanimous with those who doubted him, even in the face of his victory (11:12,13) since he recognises everything is down to the LORD… at one level the men were right to doubt him! Spiritual success can easily turn the head: not so Saul who knew the source of his victory lay not in himself. And so the people have every reason to rejoice in their king and reaffirm his rule (11:14-15) because, for all the wishes of the people, Saul (perhaps well tutored by Samuel) has proved to be the sort of leader the LORD always intended for his people. Hence, the apparent contradiction noted above is more apparent than real… and Saul demonstrates the grace of God to an undeserving people: he is the sort of leader of God’s choosing not theirs! Once again, therefore, we are encouraged to reflect upon how we face up to the challenges we face as the people of God, with what attitude we apply bible-based solutions, what sort of leaders we are to expect and honour. As a leader, I must take this template and use it to examine my own suitability. Yet, finally, we are reminded that Saul, the first anointed king of Israel point forward to the last and great king, Jesus. There are marked contrasts. Jesus had every right to claim and exercise high office and receive the obedience and adulation of his people. Yet, he supremely, was the ‘servant king’ who came to serve and to give his life as a ransom for all his people… and if we serve him we will live like him. 12:1-25 As we get older we tend to look back more and more (sometimes boringly so) and also reflect upon what sort of legacy (monetary or otherwise) that we can hand on to the next generation. We would like to think that, at least if formal opportunity presents itself, our last words offer something of a comfort and challenge to those who must ‘take up the baton’ after us. Samuel is now in this situation, ‘old and grey’ with a grown up family (2) and he is no different…. Though actually he has a few years before him yet! His opening words look like the words of someone who wants to face death without any unfinished business to trouble them (1-5). But they are really something more than this! They seek to draw out the people’s affirmation as to both his integrity and servant-heartedness… so as to invite his hearers to listen seriously to what he says. After all, none of us take seriously the testimony of the fraudulent and liar… not when we know this to be the case! The first point he makes is that past history can be of vital importance for present and future conduct (6-12). It is often said that those who do not know their history simply recapitulate the mistakes of the past… Samuel is a firm believer of this view. Specifically, he makes the following points: • Earnestly (7) he speaks of God’s grace, compassion and sheer generosity to them (8)… a generosity that led to complacency and to their ‘slipping away’ from following after him (9a). • He invites them to reflect on the sequel. Plunged into a mess of their own making, they recognised their sinful abandonment of God, confessed that they had looked to man-made expedients to meet their needs and were brought face-to-face with the fact that the LORD was the only one who, served faithfully, offered any hope (9b,10). • They had discovered, time and again, that the LORD had raised up people (including Samuel himself) to lead and guide and prosper the people of God when they served him (11). The LORD’s earliest grace was matched by undeserved mercy to those who had sought to live before him and trust him, despite past failings: he had been incredibly longsuffering! • The lessons of the past had, however, been ignored by his hearers (12). The kingship of the LORD was exchanged for a mere human expedient. Old lessons, these are a new as they can be! We fail to acknowledge them to our cost. The second point is that, even if we have forgotten the lessons of the past, we can recall them and act upon them now! But, all is not lost, they have what they want but if both they and the king follow after the LORD they will all know his blessing. But if they fail they, too, will have to face the consequences (13-15). And if they need proof, those things that the ancient world deified are seen as subject entirely to the LORD (16-18). Their well-being (good harvests) is subject to the LORD not nature gods… or the finance markets or capitalism…. This might have been a dramatic point to conclude a sermon… but it was a message in two parts. Once the people had ‘got’ the first part of the message (19) they were offered both reassurance and challenge. The LORD would not abandon them, but they had to learn to serve him ‘from the heart’ (20-22,24) otherwise both they and the king they had based their hopes on would be swept away (25). Meanwhile, Samuel is resolved to pray for the people and speak to them along the same lines… so that they ‘get’ the message. For those who live the other side of the life and work of Jesus we have greater reason to recognise the grace we have experienced, our helplessness without the LORD and the fact that only humble obedience can offer us any hope… but are we going to forget too!... and don’t be surprised if I prove to be a Samuel… banging the drum and pleading with the LORD that I and we all ‘get it’. 13:1-23 Chapter 12 is a solemn chapter. It has exposed the people of God in their rebellion against him, in their desire to find human expedients to resolve their problems. But it has given hope, even with a king, if the LORD is faithfully followed. So we start reading chapter 13 with cautious optimism. At first, such optimism seems justified. A Philistine outpost is attacked and victory secured (1-3) and the people are summonsed to Gilgal:  the place where the people had renewed their covenant with the LORD and heard his word through his prophet (4). But this is not the whole story! Why did Jonathan engage in an action that stirred up a hornets nest (4) and, if justified, why Jonathan not Saul, and if Jonathan why does the national press spin the story to give the credit to Saul? And when Samuel summoned the people to Gilgal (8) what was his purpose? Is verse 12 significant: Saul recognised that he had started a war without the LORD’s affirmation. Saul had run ahead of the word of the LORD. This, in fact, becomes the feature of the tragic story that unfolds. Premature action exposes Israel’s hopelessness. The existing Philistine ‘grip’ had been such as the Israelites were weapon-less (19-22). Moreover, the aroused enemy was of such a size that it dwarfed that of the weapon-less Israelites and instilled panic in them (5-7a) and even those most faithful to Saul began to scatter (8). We can understand Saul’s anxiety and his feeling that ‘he must do something’. But what follows reveals how ‘out of sync’ he was with biblical faith: for him ‘ritual’ acts (9) was more importance that obedience to the LORD’s will (13). On his arrival, Samuel spells this out. He cuts through Saul’s self-justification (11,12) and goes straight to the point. Such actions are foolish (13a) and faithless (14,end). If the ‘kingship’ is to continue, it requires a very different sort of person (14). Then, he who was God’s spokesperson, doubtless at Gilgal to (otherwise) guide Saul in the divine strategy that would have brought success, leaves Saul. He no longer has access to the LORD’s guidance: he is alone! There can have been no doubt about the nature of the Philistine threat: they were strangling the life out of Israel and, now aroused, threatened the very existence of the people of God! The people themselves were impotent and frightened. Something had to be done… but faithful listening were key to them (as to us) but faith without sight proved too high a hurdle to jump. The tragic consequences are a warning to us, too! 14:1-52 The end of this chapter reads like an obituary… an obituary of someone who successfully achieved all that Israel had hoped to find in a warrior king (47-52). Humanly speaking, Saul was a popular and successful leader. But what a peculiar place to put an obituary: Saul does not die until chapter 31…. And why preface this tribute with the preceding story that does not place Saul in the best light? Here a little detective work is required… an ability to read between the lines. The first thing we notice is that Saul, without Samuel to guide him, has sought help from Eli’s rejected family (14:3). Toward the end of the chapter the consequence of this is spelled out in Saul’s question (41): he has no access to the word of the LORD. A rejected king seeks out a rejected priesthood, looks to the ‘trappings of religion’ to support him but finds the skies as brass when he needs divine guidance and help. If he succeeds as a man, he fails as a disciple: and ultimately the Bible narrative (and its God) is only interested in the ‘one thing needful’. Little wonder that the subsequent chapters are more interested in David and his early history and the present chapter ends with a premature obituary (or is it?). Moreover, without the LORD’s wisdom, Saul succeeds, despite himself (24-46): but could have achieved so much more (30,46: the victory is not total and it will be the Philistines who, ultimately, bring about Saul’s death and the near-destruction of the kingdom). And note the irony of verse 45: it is Jonathan not Saul who is the saviour of Israel. It is he who has ‘worked with God’ while Saul had adopted human and, frankly, foolish strategies. So our attention is drawn to Jonathan (especially in 1-23). While tremulous Saul has established his base in a cave, Jonathan shows a boldness that, probably, he knew would not meet with his father’s approval (1b). While recognising the LORD’s sovereignty, he also acknowledges his power to work, even through a couple of people (6). He also seeks the LORD’s guidance (10) rather than look to his own bravado and finds the LORD honours his faith. Meanwhile, Saul is merely chatting to the priest in the presence of the ark…. (19). If Saul is involved in the mopping up process, it is the LORD though Jonathan who wins the day; even if the victory is, ultimately, proves phyrric one! We might note that, to a degree, 1 Samuel is becoming somewhat repetitive in the lessons it is teaching and it will make the same points again. So we need to ask the question, why? The answer is not hard to discover. Just as these lessons were not grasped by Israel, despite repeated and dramatic illustrations being given, we , too, can be slow on the uptake. We, too, can take the eye off the goal, achieve personal success but lose the divine benediction. We, too, need to be reminded that true discipleship looks, humbly and in faith, to the sovereign God to accomplish his purposes through us. That is the one thing that ultimately counts…. Look at Jesus! 15:1-35 At the end of chapter 14 we noted Saul’s ‘obituary’: not because Saul is dead but because of the fact that Saul is ‘spiritually’ dead and the focus in the story must now turn to the future: to the rise of the person who would be a king after God’s own heart. The present chapter is a ‘bridge’ to the new section which will begin with the ‘secret’ anointing of David. It teases out for us the reasons for Saul’s rejection. The story begins with the LORD giving very clear instructions to Saul through Samuel as to the utter destruction of the Amalekites (1-3) who had been given 300 years to submit to the LORD and were no better than they had ever been: mercy had been afforded but the LORD must, ultimately, act against sin. Saul initially seems to do what had been asked of him (4-7) but, very soon, we realise better: the LORD might assist him to victory, but he wanted the spoils (8-9). His God was a talisman who lined his pockets! At which point there is a break in the story, for there is something else we need to know before the tale proceeds. The LORD is about to act in a manner that we might perceive as ‘over the top’ in rejecting Saul. We need to understand that it breaks the LORD’s heart to reject anyone (11a) and it grieves his faithful servants, like Samuel (11). Yet, we also need to understand the ground for the LORD’s actions: not to obey the LORD’s word is to ‘turn the back’ on him (11b). The following verses explore this theme more fully. Saul has already undertaken his ‘devotions’ and is on his way to worship (12) when confronted by Samuel and challenged as to his obedience. In response to being exposed, Saul acts in a manner characteristic of those who seek to evade the call to radical repentance: • he blames others: ‘they… the people’ (15) are blamed: cant that Samuel immediately cuts off in mid-flow (16): he points Saul to his own personal responsibility before the LORD: ‘you’ (repeated, 17-19); • he listens but does not hear: he continues to blame others and promote his own faithfulness (20-21). So Samuel is forced to expose the seriousness of disobedience. He stresses: • the trappings of formal religion are of little importance alongside obedience to the LORD (22); • disobedience is as bad as being a spiritualist or worshipping another god (23). There is only one to whom we are to go for guidance and help: to go elsewhere is high treason before the only true God. Saul’s reaction is tragic: • he shows remorse but still places the blame elsewhere and appears to think that a mere profession of his sorrow will enable him to resume his relationship with the LORD, as previously (24,25). Saul believes in cheap grace. • when faced with the terminal consequences of his actions (26-29), he declares his repentance but only so that he will not lose face (30,31). His repentance is self-driven not conviction-wrought. 16:1-23 The end of chapter 14 offered something of an obituary for Saul… surprising given the fact that he was yet to live a number of years. Chapter 15 explains this enigma: Saul is ‘spiritually’ dead, having shown himself both incapable of that obedience that the LORD demands of those who lead him people and unable to find himself to repentance when confronted with his failure. So what next for the people of God? Sorrow can sometimes be self-indulgent. Samuel was, as we have already noted, right to bemoan Saul’s failure and he may have felt somewhat responsible (1a). However, the LORD steps in (1b). Samuel is commissioned to anoint a new king even while Saul lives (1b). Much of the detail of this chapter is there to provide the setting. For example, Samuel, obviously had to act with circumspection (2-5). Such detail provides the setting for the critical points that are emphasised. Note, therefore, The people clamoured for a king when Saul was appointed (chapter 8). Here, however, the initiative lies with the LORD himself (1). This clarifies the point that it was not so much that the LORD was opposed to Israel having a king but that it was his sort of leader not theirs that was all important. This reminds us that leadership among God’s people is not determined by our choice but his. Samuel’s reaction to seeing Eliab brought a shart rebuke from the LORD (6,7). Not the David was not a ‘pin up’ (12a) but that it is not essentially these qualities that the LORD looks for: he looks for those whose inner life is directed towards him. Leadership among God’s people should be in the hands of those who are seeking to follow him in all things. At this stage David was only a young man, he needed to be brought to maturity, but it was his attitude not his natural attributes that are singled out. David’s leadership was characterised by the clear evidence that the Holy Spirit was present in his life (13). Those whom the LORD calls and are wholehearted for him, receive the divine equipping that they need to perform their calling. The gifting of God will be appropriate to the calling and be recognised by others (18). The last paragraph is something of a peculiar one and understanding the details are difficult. Was Saul ‘possessed’ or are we to understand that when the LORD departed from him, a deep depression fell on him that music could ameliorate? We cannot be sure… in wehat sense is ‘spirit’ to be understood here? But what we do realise is that the marks of David’s future calling were present as the ‘sweet singer of Israel’, as wise beyond his years, as gifted for war and peace… above all of the LORD’s presence with him. And David is now at Saul’s court… the best place (if the most dangerous) for advancement. But that is another story…. What we need to grasp is that the LORD knows his people need to be led. However, determining whom he has called requires more than our choosing the sort of persons we would like best. We must be alert to the spiritual qualities of those we appoint and be diligent to look for those evidences that show their wholehearted commitment to the LORD and that (even if only in embryo) the necessary qualities are present in them. Above all, perhaps, we look to the example of Jesus. To what extent is the spirit of Christ, described in Philippians 2:5-11 witnessed in those we consider fit for leadership? 17:1-58 In chapter 14, an obituary is provided for Saul: as far as the LORD he is no longer the LORD’s anointed. Chapter 15 teases out the reason: Saul’s self-seeking and ongoing reluctance to put the LORD first. So who is the LORD’s anointed now… chapter 16 tells us: it is David: someone the LORD has taken the initiative and chosen himself: someone (16:7, the key text!) whose ‘heart’ is right with God. This naturally leads us to ask the question: what does this sort of person ‘look’ like? Chapter 17 is intended to supply us with an answer. The story commences with Israel in a ‘big hole’ about 15 miles west of Bethlehem where the story last left us. They are faced: a) by an armoured super-man, probably near double the height at just under 3 metres of most of those in either the Philistine or Israelite camps (4-7: note, we are spared no detail that is not intended to make us quake in our boots)! b) by his ‘super-words’ (8-10), oft repeated (16) such as produce the natural reaction: c) panic (11, see also 24)! Consummate story-teller as our author is, he builds up the tension as he re-introduces us to David (12-22) and takes us step by step with David till he finds himself in the front line and he hears Goliath for himself (23) and witnesses Israel’s reaction (24). We know, of course, the rest of the story… but do we? What are the human and divine authors wishing us to grasp? The key to understanding this chapter is the repetition of a word in the original Hebrew that is variously translated in the NIV ‘defy’ (10,25,26,36,45) and ‘disgrace’ (26). The clue to understanding this is that Goliath’s act is to be viewed as defiant mockery of the living God of Israel (26,36,45) and it is David who grasps this. Goliath (10) and the people (25) merely see the event in terms of political power games. It is this reality that guides David’s conduct… even if there is a prize at the end no-one is likely to win (25,27)! It is not without significance that this is the first time that David speaks in the Bible: his heart is revealed here. Away in the wilderness as a shepherd boy he has learned to one thing needful and is ready to apply it. But before he is able to put his faith into practice he has to face the faithless comments of others… first, interestingly, by both ‘macho’ men of the sort one might have humanly expected to have relished the challenge of tackling Goliath. Thus Eliab mocks David with the typical scorn of a cornered faithless bigger-brother (28,29). Big brute as he is, Eliab is already speaking not for Israel but for Goliath. Thank God he is not Israel’s anointed! And David must face a second Goliath before he tackle the ‘real article’ (30-39). The encounter with Saul highlights David’s weakness (33,38,39 and Saul’s thinking like Goliath: might is right. No wonder the LORD has rejected him. David does not stand a chance against Goliath. Finally, he has to face the bravado of Goliath himself (41-44): words that send a tingle of fear down the spine!  But David recognises the score and has confidence in the LORD (45-47); not in his faith! After all the build up, the denoument is brief (48-51) and Israel’s subsequent victory complete (52-54). It is almost as though the author’s interest in the story has waned… it was inevitable, after all, wasn’t it? So what sort of person does the LORD look for? Someone single-hearted for him and his glory. Someone ready to face mockery and contempt. Someone whose confidence ig God outweighs any personal sense of weakness. Someone confident in the victory of God himself. Someone like great David’s greater Son (Phil. 2:5-11). And the warning: we can sometimes have the mind of Goliath when faced with our David’s. 18:1-30 The LORD has rejected Saul (chapter 15) and, secretly, appointed David in his place (chapter 16). Why the rejection of one and the choice of the other: chapter 18 has spelt this out in showing that David (not always perfectly… but that is another story) put the LORD first! Yet chapter 17 ends with a strange scene. Saul, who already knew who David was, asks who he is! Here is no reason to suppose the author is confused (the expedient of faithless interpretation) but to use the imagination! Saul’s spies (for every good ruler has them) may have picked up something about Samuel’s trip to Bethlehem…and David is the ‘son of Jesse of Bethlehem’ (17:58). Ah now…. However, as we read through the story we notice that nearly everyone loves David: Jonathan (1,3), all Israel (16), Michal (20,28), Saul’s attendants (22).. all except Saul, who fears David (you cannot miss it: 12,15,29). And why did the crown prince divest himself of his person and position (1-4) and why is Saul antagonistic (see, especially, 29):  ‘because the LORD was with David’. Both recognised that the Goliath incident pointed the finger at who was the LORD’s next king. Whether they liked it or not, friend or foe, especially foe, recognised that the LORD was with David (12,14,28). Meanwhile, David goes from strength to strength. He is feted for his success at overthrowing Goliath (5-9), seems to do everything right as military general (12-16) and even when Saul attempts first to kill him directly (10,11) and adopts a similar strategy to the one that David will use with Uriah, the husband of Bathsheba, it backfires and David become a member of the family (17-27)… and success continues (30). Was David blind to what was going on? Possibly. 10f could be dismissed as ‘one of Saul’s bad days’ and 17ff. a naïve response to what, in the circumstances, might seem an incredible and privileged offer…. The LORD’s blessing may have obscured |Saul’s malice! So what does the story teach us? • some of us can become so blind to the blessing of God of others that we strive to work against the LORD; • for some of us to recognise the LORD’s blessing of others may mean we have to ‘decrease’; • some of us can be so caught up with the LORD’s blessing of us that we fail to detect the signs of real and sustained evil behind the apparently affirming or ‘explicable’ words and actions of others. The New Testament is full of those who were like the first… even one of Jesus’ closest friends, John, Jesus’ older cousin knew the second and, repeatedly, Jesus and his followers warned against ‘wolves in sheep’s clothing’. There is much for us to learn here! 19:1-24 In the last few chapters Saul has been rejected by the LORD (14): the reason, disobedience (15). Consequently, David is, secretly, chosen (16) and the wisdom of the LORD’s choice demonstrated in David’s faithful trust (17). At the end of the chapter (17:55-58) the ‘penny drops’: Saul recognises that David is the one appointed to succeed him. Indeed, David’s continuing success marks him out as the entire nation (bar one) come to love David. Saul is roused to fearful hatred… a showdown is to be expected! But the two do not slug it out because David, the great warrior, is willing to be a refugee rather than force the issue before the LORD’s time. It will be 13 chapters more before David ascends to the office to which the LORD has appointed him. Meanwhile, the present chapter, describes four different attempts by Saul to ‘liquidate’ David: 1) ‘he was found dead in a dark alley’ (1-7): the work of the secret assassination squad 2) ‘oops! It slipped again! (8-10): Saul’s murderous attempt. 3) ‘Oh! He unfortunately lost his life when being taken in for questioning’ (11-17): lets try the Police; 4) ‘Get the traitor!’ (18-24): no pretence now, ‘Just get him’. But what are we to learn? • The evident success of God’s ‘anointed’ can prompt repeated attempts at termination by those opposed to the LORD. The approval and blessing of God will frequently bring to the surface the evil dispositions of those who are not really seeking God but only themselves; • Sometimes the opposition against the LORD’s ‘anointed’ appears highly effective (David has to run away), humiliating (helped by a woman to escape through the bedroom window) and leaves us powerless and unprotected (Samuel might be God’s prophet but he had no temporal power and received no respect when the enemy was in view! • Sometimes reason may succeed (for a time), and friends may prove valuable, but only the LORD can keep us safe. There is of course an irony that the two who helped David were Saul’s own children. The former used reason, the latter guile. Each offered a temporary protection. But ultimately, only the LORD could protect David and, sometimes, the Spirit needs to do so with brute power. And there is irony here, too. What ‘prophesy’ means is unsure; possibly it means they were coerced to join in the worship of the LORD. Intent on destroying the LORD’s anointed they forced to offer worship to his LORD. How utterly embarrassing! • Sometimes the fact that we are still standing is testimony to the fact the Lord is with us. David was still not safe… and would not be for some time. But he was still standing and sometimes the evidence the LORD is with us is just that! Of course David’s greater Son can stand alongside this chapter and say ‘Amen’ to it… and so can many others in the history of God’s people. How, then, might it apply to you, me… us? 20:1-42 David now knows he is in trouble (3): the fourfold attempt of Saul to liquidate him in chapter 19 can leave him in no doubt but that, as far as Saul is concerned, his life is forfeit. So what can he do? Humanly speaking, the last place to go is Jonathan. Saul makes the point in verse 31 in the words, ‘you and your kingdom’: simply put, for Jonathan to ‘side’ with David involves his own forfeiture of his own future as the King of Israel! But David’s actions don’t make sense either: he promises (14,15) to preserve Jonathan and his family when he becomes king. Again, put another way, David risks his own well-being by not liquidating the potential challengers to his authority. Neither actions are common sense to those who live by the world’s standards: which is why Saul gets so angry: he doesn’t ‘get’ it (30). Why, then, such strange conduct? It is not simply that the two men were fond of one another (little is made of this in the present chapter). The key lies in verse 8: ‘you have brought me into a covenant of the LORD’. Simply, in obedience to the will of God, they have committed themselves to one another: the ‘greater’ (Jonathan) submitting to the ‘lesser’ (David) and the ‘lesser’ promising to honour the ‘greater’ when, he himself, has risen to power and authority. In this relationship, there is security ‘peace’ (42) and the certainty of protection and help. And it is this that stands at the heart of the chapter. As a story we can pass from 11 to 18 but to understand its ‘theological’ point, 12-17 are essential! That, then, is the lesson of this chapter… and it provides us with ‘pre-echoes’ of the New Testament where the language of covenant re-emerges in the interpretation given by Jesus of his own death. From that perspective: • Jonathan prefigures another ‘prince of peace’ who, to fulfil his covenant obligations to us, ‘made himself nothing’ that we might receive all! • If we are in such a ‘covenant’ then it is a place of ‘peace’ and security. The communion service understands the security of Jesus’ covenant with you and me: ‘the body and blood of Jesus Christ keep you to eternal life’. And the New Testament is full of statements that declare he ‘saves from death, destruction and despair’. • Those who have entered into God’s covenant, live the life of a covenant community. Baptists have always emphasised this and been quick to seek to disciple the erring. The challenge is this: within the Church ‘Life does not consist in achieving your goals, but in fulfilling your promises.’ (Davis) Or, from another perspective, life in community is the place where security, trust, peace, the fruit of self-abnegation, is to be found. • Finally, this life-style is counter-cultural. It doesn’t make sense except to those for whom obedience is the primary virtue and who know the empowering presence of God’s Spirit in their own lives. Once again, then, an obscure chapter in the Old Testament proves that all Scripture is inspired by God and profitable…that the man and women of God may be … equipped for every good work’ (2 Timothy 3:16f). May we so view Jesus and appreciate the covenant into which he has brought us that we live as those who are the covenanted people of God… not by the standards the world expects.   21:1-15 David’s life is forfeit… Saul is determined to ‘have’ him and covenant with Jonathan or no, the future does not look bright for the LORD’s anointed. So what happens next… It is easy to read chapters such as this ‘moralistically’ (e.g. Should David have gone to Abiathar and eaten the ‘bread of the presence’? Was he wise to flee to the Philistines? Should he have gathered together with the ‘riff-raff’ of society?). This is especially so when until 22:5, God does not seem to figure in the picture at all! Indeed, the LORD, until 22:5 seems silent and best and absent at worst! But this fails to recognise that this is part of a ‘succession narrative’ that traces God’s replacing Saul by David. It is telling us how the LORD brought this to pass. We need to read the section in this light: the LORD is at work here… but how? Note then: He gives us our daily bread (21:1-9). The reference to Doeg (7) is ominous, as we shall see, and Abiathar is right to suspect that David is not telling the whole truth; and David may have done so to protect him, we cannot know! However, the point is that David obtains what he needs ‘then and there’: a meal and a means of self-defence. This was enough for the moment. He saves us from ourselves when we are witless (21:10-15). That David flees to the Philistines is testimony to his confusion. He is, presumably, worried witless and makes a serious and possibly fatal error of judgement. But he gets away with it. Surely there must be someone ‘upstairs’ looking after his case. He provides protection from the most unlikely sources (22:1-2). They were not the friends that David would have chosen: ‘Give me a band of crack, trained military personnel’ might have been his own request. But friends and supporters were provided… people who would fight ‘tooth and nail’ for him: after all; they were more desperate than him, he was their only hope. He over-rules our past so as to provide answers in the present (22:3-4). David’s Mum and Dad probably did not want to be uprooted at their age. But David had a Moabite ancestry (Ruth was his Greatgranny) and that past was to be able to provide and answer to David’s family needs. He leads us (22:5). This is the crux. The LORD has abandoned Saul. He is without divine guidance or witness. But the prophet is sent to David! In extremis, the LORD is not silent: he speaks and guides. And if he did this for David, he will do it for us. While we may long for peace and he seem far away, he is present, if unseen, working and shaping our circumstances to his purposes and so as to fulfil his plans for us.   22:1-23 We have already noted that we are in that part of 1 Samuel that is often described as the ‘succession narrative: it shows how the LORD effected the transfer of power in Israel from Saul (whom he had rejected) to David (whom he had appointed as one ‘after his won heart’ and in Saul’s place). The story continues to outline how the LORD protected David from Saul but, here in particular, contrasts Saul’s self-destructive decline with the LORD’s provision and leading of David. Saul’s power-base is weakening under the impact of his murderous megalomania and, as history repeatedly depicts, such leads to his resort to threats and brutalised conduct (after all he now has nothing else; even the Benjamite bodyguard, selected from his own ‘tribe’, are not wholly at his beck and call!). This is accompanied by bewilderment that any should side with his rival (a typical reaction of a bully who has lost touch with reality). Such a person is pitiable… but dangerous. However, having apparently lost the full confidence of the other tribes, he uses a typical appeal for self-preservation to at least keep his own tribe on side: though it appears he believes they, too, have abandoned loyalty to him… like his son (6-8). Meanwhile, his belief/fear that the high priest has betrayed him and played the traitor (or, simply, his frustration that another seems sympathetic to David), comes at a tremendous cost to Ahimelech and his family (18,19) but also to Saul. He loses the support of the palace guard (17) and (by means of his own action) the LORD’s guidance. Along with the prophets, the priests were the guardians of the ephod, through which the LORD revealed his will, and such were his spokesperson’s. Here Saul ignores the one (14,15) and loses the other (23:6). Instead, he mimics the LORD’s commands whose disobedience of which had lost him the LORD’s support (compare 22:19 with 1 Sam. 15:9). Antichrist is revealed. The passage is instructive. Disobedience, unaccompanied by repentance, means that we can suppress (and even seek to destroy) the LORD’s testimony. We can. ourselves, become ‘antichrist’.  But this is not the whole story… Abiathar escapes to David (22:20-23) and, brings the ephod with him (23:6). And with both Gad the prophet (22:5) and Abiathar and the ephod, the LORD is seen as present with David to guide and protect him (23:13). All that Saul had lost, David has received: in the case of the ephod, through Saul’s own madness. Saul may huff and puff but is, ultimately, powerless against the LORD’s anointed… as Satan was with great David’s greater son! We note, therefore, the contrast… Saul, disobedient, unrepentant, worldly in attitude, left ultimately with nothing except an ever more isolated brutality against those who seek the LORD and his ways. And… on the other side, the divine presence and his guidance and protection. True, it may not come the way it did for David… (and even for him it was in the midst of death-defying difficulty!) but the certainty is, nevertheless, one to which we can hold on! 23:1-29 Those of us who have been following the story are well aware of the background to this passage. David is in mortal danger as a refugee from a malevolent king who is seeking to use every power in his hand to find and kill the man he views as the greatest threat to the ongoing success of his dynasty. There is, of course, a profound irony here: Saul is himself his own ‘worst enemy’. It is his refusal to live in obedience to the LORD that has brought about the threat of the demise of his rule…. However, that is not the main focus of the present section which is devoted, rather, to showing how the LORD helps and encourages David through his dangerous flight. And what was true for David, we can be sure is true for us too. What becomes very apparent in these stories is that Saul’s spy network was effective (as every sovereign would wish). Despite David’s deliverance of Keilah (1-6), there were those ready to pass on the news of his whereabouts to Saul (7). Similarly, the Ziphites revealed his location (19). By 26a the effect is such that we expect ‘squelch’ and the end of the story of David! This is not, of course, what happens. David is delivered, ironically, by the Philistines (26b-29)! So we note that: 1) when were are living in God’s will, he will deliver us in the most unanticipated ways and by the most unexpected people. Our hopelessness and helplessness is not the end of his purposes.  But, if the LORD delivered David by what was an apparently remarkable piece of timing, it is not the only way he cared for him in this section. Note, therefore: 2) When Saul was confident ‘God’ had delivered David into his hand (7,8), David was, once again, guided by the LORD (9-13a) and Saul was left to rue the opportunity (13b). When we are walking in God’s will, he will guide us and protect us. Again, the means may be different (we do not have an ephod) but the certainty remains. 3) When David found himself in the wilderness (and his own personal wilderness) the LORD provided friends to support him and encourage him (15-18). That Jonathan found his way when Saul did not is remarkable. But the LORD knew David’s need and supplied it. When we are walking in God’s will, he will provide us the comfort we need. 4) Even more so, Jonathan’s presence was accompanied by his reassuring David of the truth of the LORD’s word. In trial we can forget it… but even Saul knew the truth! Friends are great… but those who remind us of the certainties of the word of God are better! When we are walking in God’s will, his word can be trusted. Thus, try as he might ‘antichrist’ Saul was as powerless… as the dragon in Revelation 12.  If we walk in the will of the LORD we can be confident of the one who is our LORD and God… as David’s greater Son discovered! 24:1-25:1 David may have been spared the immediate prospect of liquidation by the intervention of the Philistines: but it was a mere moment before, appraised once more by his MI5 of David’s whereabouts, Saul is back: this time with his crack troops (1,2). But there are some needs that are common to kings and refugees: and a ‘bathroom’ is one (3a): and Saul’s need apparently turned the tables: he is now defenceless (perhaps literally ‘with his trousers down’) in the presence of David and his armed men (3b). SO much for the background… The rest of the chapter is almost all conversation…. and highly applicable conversation, too. The response of David’s band of ‘merry men’ is understandable; they know God’s promise and here is a heaven-sent opportunity to bring it to fulfilment (4a). Surely David must realise ‘This is the Day’ when the enemy is overthrown and God’s purposes fulfilled (Davis suggests that you can almost hear them singing the chorus!) Or is it? David’s first response seems to be to agree (to cut off part of the royal robe is to claim royal status) but then he is mortified by what he has done (4b,5). With strong words (the Hebrew for ‘persuaded’ 7, is VERY strong!) David sets the apparent providence, even the promises of God, alongside the recognition that Saul has a sacred role (6). And herein lies a profound lesson for us. Reading the signs is not as easy as we sometimes imagine; sometimes it requires reflection that itself gives a discernment of what is taking place and how we should act. Attentiveness to God in his word… a Commentary 2011-01-11T11:02:37+00:00 http://ferndalechurches.org.uk/resources/detail/the_word_of_the_lord_to_a_corrupt_world/ http://ferndalechurches.org.uk/resources/detail/the_word_of_the_lord_to_a_corrupt_world/#When:09:14:47Z Study Outlines to the Books of Jonah and Nahum: the two preachers to Nineveh Commentary 2009-07-21T09:14:47+00:00 http://ferndalechurches.org.uk/resources/detail/the_busy_persons_guide_to_ezekiel1/ http://ferndalechurches.org.uk/resources/detail/the_busy_persons_guide_to_ezekiel1/#When:22:19:01Z Fourteen studies that provide a survey of the remarkable book of Ezekiel, one of the most interesting of God’s spokespersons.The Busy Person’s Guide to Ezekiel: A Survey of the Message of Ezekiel in 14 studies Introducing Ezekiel Date: 1:1,2 help us. Jehoiachin was taken into exile in 597/8 together with the ‘upper classes’ of Judah (including, it would appear, the twenty-five-year-old, Ezekiel (compare 2 Kings 24:10-17) and young Daniel and his friends. This puts his birth @ 622/3: a year after Josiah’s reformation commenced. His early life included the brief reformation and the rapid decline to the end of the kingdom of Judah. Home: Some exiles were treated humanely and given towns to live in. This was apparently true for Ezekiel who lived in Tel-Abib (3:15) near Babylon. It seems he may have been one of the community leaders (see 33:21 where he is directly approached by a messenger from Jerusalem). Occupation: Ezekiel (like Jeremiah) was from a priestly family (1:3:40:46;44:15). He was married and, early, widowed (24:15-18). Ministry: His ministry as a prophet began in 592/3, aged 30 (when a priest commenced his ministry). He was still prophesying 22 years later (29:17). We have no knowledge how longer he lived. It appears from this, however, that all of his ministry was undertaken in exile. It appears that his home may have become a centre for those seeking spiritual help (8:1;14:1;20:1).  Call: His call is recorded in chapter 1. As with other prophets, his experience coloured the specifics of his ministry… as we shall see. Spiritual Experience: The ‘hand of the Lord’ (1:3) is a semi-technical phrase for an unusual state of mind in which he was sometimes affected bodily: falling on his face (1:28;3:23;9:8;11;13;43:7;44:4), shaking (12:17ff) and groaning (21:6). He appears to have had some sort of ‘telepathic’ abilities (8:5-16;12:22,27;18:2;33:10). As such, he appears to have ‘functioned’ at one extreme of the prophetic experience. Testimony: The summary of his experience is found in 1:28: he saw ‘the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the LORD’. We might say that he glimpsed a reflection of an illustration of the reality of God….’ It left him gobsmacked! But this shaped his whole ministry. Specifically, he saw the LORD as majestic (1:26), awesome (1:22), beautiful as precious stones (1:4;16;26), pure (1:4,13,14,22, compare Isaiah 6:1-7), powerful (1:4,14,24),‘human’ (1:26), constantly and watchfully on the move (esp. 1:12,14,17) and surrounded by a rainbow (1:26). How do you think this experience would have helped Ezekiel? How might it help us? Ezekiel : His Call (Chapters 2:1-3:21). None of us are called to be prophets and, perhaps, few of us, evangelists but, as we explore these two chapters, we will discover a number of lessons that apply directly to each one of us! * We note then that the first thing that occurred to Ezekiel after his first encounter with God was that God started to speak to him…(2:1,2) indeed for many years this continued to be the case. Words (certainly at their best) are the means to and characteristic of intimacy. The God who banished human beings from his face and fellowship in Genesis 3 now resumes his conversation with his prophet. The fruit of our own very individual encounters with God in Jesus have for us, too, opened up the channels of intimacy to us too! How is this true for us?...and why was the word bittersweet (3:3)? * Right from the first conversation Ezekiel has with God, he is given a task to undertake (2:3). He is to be the prophet/evangelist par excellence to the Israelites in exile (2:3). What has God called me to do? * Reading through these two chapters one is immediately struck by the fact that Ezekiel’s call is both impossible and thankless. Small wonder his response (2:15 and compare the previous verse!). Words like ‘rebellious’, obstinate’ and ‘stubborn’ (2:3,4) recur throughout the passage. The potential problems to effective communication will not exist (3:5,6) and the problem does not lie with the effectiveness of the messenger, nor the clarity of the message (2:5) but, rather, with the human heart (3:7,11), and its problem with God (3:7): the people will hear, sure enough, but (few at most) will listen! He is doomed to failure from the start! What might we learn from this in our witness as a Church? What might we learn from this as we face God’s call on our lives? Since Ezekiel is sent to Israel (2:3; 3:1), how might we prove to be like the members of the Old Testament ‘church’? * Yet, for all its difficulty, the LORD both promises Ezekiel resources commensurate with the difficulty of the task and calls him to faithfulness not ‘success’. The latter is in God’s hands, the former is our responsibility. Thus Ezekiel is warned that he must fulfil his difficult call or ‘be it on your own head’ (2:8; 3:16ff). At the same time he is encouraged (2:6; 3:9), guided (3:12-15) and equipped (3:8,9) even though the task is not congenial (3:14). What then might we learn from Ezekiel’s experience or, rather, what might we learn here about his God? The Book of Ezekiel: Study 3 Ezekiel 3:21-7:27 Surveying the Passage: What a peculiar passage! • Ezekiel is bound and struck dumb in his own house, except when God speaks to him (3:21-27); • he then plays soldiers in the mud, building up a model of Jerusalem under seige (4:1-3); • this is followed by demonstrating the effects of living under seige (4:4-17); • further, he shaves his head and burns, hacks and throws up in the air all but a small amount that he tucks in the folds of his clothes (5:1-4). By this time everyone doubtless regarded him as mad: dumb and quite obviously out of his mind! Some prophet!!! Ezekiel himself is given an explanation (4:3; 16f;5:4-17). Not until chapter 6, however, is Ezekiel given words to speak to the people; and then….!!! . Simply, he explains: • The LORD is going to reveal himself in the almost total destruction of his apostate people (6:1-7, 11-14); • A remnant, however, will be exiled and, there, be awakened to repentance (6:8-10); • The end is coming (7:1-9) and has now arrived (7:10-27). ‘Israel’ has ceased to exist! • Then they will know that ‘I am the LORD’ (7:27 and parallels, e.g. 7:4,9). Questions: • Why do you think Ezekiel was struck dumb? • Why was Ezekiel required to do so much peculiar ‘play acting’? • How should his actions and words apply to us… who are not Israel? • What then are the lessons we can take away from this passage?       The Book of Ezekiel, Study 4. Chapter 8 A Backward Glance In the early chapters of the prophecy (1-7), Ezekiel has encountered God, been given his call and then (by means largely of symbolic actions) given the responsibility to declare the imminent judgement of God on Jerusalem and Judah. The following chapters (8-24) may be viewed as the prophet’s justification of his message. A Renewed Experience of God Exactly fourteen months after his first vision (8:1, compare 1:2) Ezekiel receives another trance-like vision in which he is conducted to the north gate of the Jerusalem temple (8:3). A People Under Judgment • There he is faced with two strikingly contradictory scenes. Firstly, the glory of God was present as in his former vision and as one would expect of God’s earthly dwelling place (8:4). Secondly, however, he sees an ‘idol that provokes to jealousy’ (8:3), i.e. something that was an insult to God and inevitably doomed to arouse his righteous anger (8:5,6). As to what it was is bnot made explicit. While it is clearly a picture of compromise and syncretism could the altar be something that (like the Golden Calf) was thought to be a representation of the LORD? • But worse was to follow! Through a ‘hole in the wall’ and like a ‘fly on the wall’ Ezekiel is given a picture of the senior figure in the executive and the entire (?)  religious and social heirarchy of Judah engaged in worship (8:11) but in a context which is a) directed to the creation rather than the creator (and is determined by the practices of Egypt, Canaan and Babylon, 8:10) and b) self-determined (8:12). Such is, of course , possible where the revealed picture of God is ignored (8:12b). • Again worse was to follow (8:13)! The failure of the leadership is reflected in the practice of the people. Tammuz was a popular Sumerian god of vegetation, fertility and the underworld. The rejection of God’s self-revelation has made it ‘open day’ for the infiltration and popular adoption of a world-view totally opposed to the truth. • But there was one final and notorious cause celebre that the LORD wished Ezekiel to see (8:14,15). Within the very heart of the temple (8:16) the priestly assembly had turned their backs on the holiest place and were engaged in sun worship in what could only be viewed as a ‘two finger sign’ to the LORD (8:17). In such a context, no amount of aggressive actions towoard God were going ot affect his decision to act againstthem (8:18). Questions • Can we apply this passage to our contemporary situation and, if so, how? • What detailed applications and observations can be made about the different pictures Ezekiel depicts?   Ezekiel, Study 5: chapters 9-11 Recap After his initial vision and call (chapters 1,2), Ezekiel is called to fulfil a number of (largely mute but symbolical) actions that are intended to declare Judah/Jerusalem is under imminent threat of extinction under the LORD’s judgement (chapters 3-7). Then, some time later, as if to justify the severity of the threat, Ezekiel receives a second visionary experience that exposes the spiritual corruption that lay at the very heart of Judean life and had extended throughout society and, above all, characterised the spiritual elite. This sets the context for the present passage. Explanation Ezekiel’s vision continues as, in response to the situation described in chapter 8, executioners are called to prepare for action (9:1-2). Meanwhile two significant events are recorded: 1) the ‘glory’ of God rises from its place at the sanctuary and (temporarily) rests at the outer door of the Temple (3a); 2) a scribe is sent to mark the righteous (3b-4). Once this has occurred the carnage can start and extend indiscriminately to both genders and every age group (5-7,11) with the sole exception of those marked. In response, Ezekiel asks whether this is the end of God’s people (8). At this stage no reply is given except to re-iterate the point that the practical atheism of the people has brought this judgement upon themselves (9). The consequence is, therefore, inevitable: the one deemed uninterested will show that he is anything but (10). The following detailed scene (chapter 10) is reminiscent of chapter 1. Central to the reappearance of the cherubim is the fact that they act as guardians of the LORD’s departing glory. From inner court, to threshold, to the east gate, the ‘glory’ moves out of the Temple (compare 4,18). Where the presence of the LORD is withdrawn from his people, the consequences are inevitable. Meanwhile a very different scenario is played out at the east gate (1): the elite of the nation are gathered, as certain of protection as meat in a strong iron pot (2,3). The reality is, however, at odds with their optimism (4).These leaders are guilty of the (coming) destruction of their people (5,6) and will, themselves, encounter their worst fears (8-10): all ‘meat’ indeed for devouring (7)! Thus, the city will fail to afford the hoped-for security as the people are led out of the land into exile for their failure to obey the LORD (11,12). As a token of this judgement to come the ringleader drops dead (13) and prompts the prophet’s repeated question as to whether this is the end of his people (13). This time he is given an answer! The very people whom the erstwhile residents had considered under the LORD’s judgement, the current exiles among whom Ezekiel lived, have been removed from the scene to protect them from the destruction (14-16) and will, in time return to the land (17), scour it clean (18) and experience the LORD’s renewing work (19) that will render possible their obedience (20): but obedience will remain the ground of their blessing (21). After such an answer we are unsurprised that the ‘glory’ removed further… and to the east where the exiles lived (22,23) and to whom Ezekiel proclaims his experience (24,25).  Application Ezekiel’s vision centres around the movement of the LORD’s glory. What lessons might we learn from this? How might ‘practical atheism’ characterise our lives? How can we ‘presume’ on God? What lessons are to be derived from these chapters for those who seek to remain faithful to the LORD? What warnings might leaders derive from these chapters? Ezekiel Study 6 (12:1-14:11) Chapters 12-19 continue the theme of the coming judgement of Judah but the emphasis is slightly different. Whereas 4-7 constitute a prediction of that judgement and 8-11 offer the reasons, 12-19 focus more specifically (but not exclusively) on the certainty of the coming judgement. In chapter 12 two further symbolic actions, here accompanied by commentaries, are given (12:1-16; 17-20). The reason for such a technique is apparently offered (1,2): the inability of mere words to prompt listening and the opening of the ‘inward eye’. As a result, Ezekiel is called (first of all) to act the part of a city’s inhabitant who, by day, is seen packing his few remaining possessions together so that, under darkness, flight is effected through a breach in the city’s defences. Yet flight is ineffectual and the fugitive, deprived of sight (6,12,13), is taken into captivity; a fate that actually befell king Zedekiah in 586 (see 2 Kings 25:7). The second symbolic action is to eat a meal, quaking and trembling as if this might be the last meal.  The threat is real and immediate. By way of contrast, however, are the description of the spiritual (chapter 13) and political (14:1-11) leadership. In Judah it was not the case that no voice claiming the LORD’s authority was present! There were voices (plural) to be heard: but they uttered the words of the self-deceived who, having never heard the authentic voice of God, genuinely confused their own inner-musings with his revelation and offered a message unable to meet the needs of their hearers (13:1-7). Specifically, they do a ‘whitewash job’, offering cheap and illusory peace (13:8-16) and are become ministers who confusedly reassure those who are under judgement while condemning those who genuinely need an oracle of peace (13:17-23). Such ministries will be proven false by the exposure of their lies in judgement. If the religious leaders have failed, so have the political leadership. They may seek spiritual authentication for their actions (14:1,2) but, at heart, they are utterly corrupt. Ezekiel’s language is graphic employing words that refer to the seat of a person’s personality (the ‘heart’) and the ‘deepest’ word for sin (‘iniquity’); their problem lies at the very core of who they are (14:1-5). Without repentance (6) they, too, must face the consequences (7,8) and suffer the same fate as the spiritual charlatan (9-10) so that (and, at last a word of hope) the spiritual well-being of those who are, genuinely, the LORD’s people is effected (11). The immediately ensuing months revealed who was speaking on the LORD’s behalf! Points to Ponder: • At what point do parallels exist today with Ezekiel’s time: specifically, who are the persons who stand in the ‘place’ of those Ezekiel condemns? • Given such parallels, what are the modern equivalents to those evils that Ezekiel condemns? • What actions should we take in the light of this? • Ezekiel Study 7 (14:12-16:63)   Recap: Ezekiel has, thus far, been dominated by the coming judgement of Judah. Whereas 4-7 predicted Judah’s fall, 8-11 offered the divine rationale. 12-19, by way of contrast, focus more specitically upon the certainty of this judgement and 12:1-14:11 have depicted this inevitabilty in the face of the failures of both religious and political authorities who had failed to live and speak for the LORD. The present passage emphasises that, as a consequence, the coming sword, famine, wild beasts and plague cannot be averted: not even by the intervention of the most righteous and best of intercessors (14:12-21). Indeed, Ezekiel’s word will be confirmed and vindicated by the wicked lifestyles of those who arrive before the prophet in his place of exile (14:22,23). Ezekiel here responds to an implied objection: ‘But is not Jerusalem the spiritual heart of Judah and the indestructible vine planted by the LORD?’ His reply is to re-interpret the image. Vine indeed, but wild, fruitless, useless as timber and, if plucked from the fire (as in 587) only good enough to be chucked back into the fire and finally consumed (15:1-8). Another objection might be, ‘Is not Judah the chosen bride of God and covenanted to him?’ In response the LORD tells Ezekiel, Jerusalem had been an unnattractive foundling (16:1-4) upon whom the LORD had lavished every attention, beautified and loved (16:5-8). Within the covenant of marriage every privilege had been given (16:9-14) but these very privileges had become the means of her downfall (16:15-19). Tragically, spiritual prostitution followed: any and every religious practice (‘justified’ perhaps by the need for political alliances) was preferable to faithfulness: thus the religions of Canaan and its neighbours (16:20-22) and the various practices of those from south (Egypt), west (Philistines), north (Assyrians) and east (Babylon) had been insatiably pursued (16:23-29)… without even bothering to take a fee (16:30-34)! Such can only be afforded the punishment of an adulterous wife (16:35-43) and (ironically) the ‘lovers’ will prove the agents of such punishment. Indeed, such has been Judah’s sin that she has revealed her ancestry, but exceeded the complacent prosperity and pride of ‘sister’ Sodom and the religious abominations of ‘sister’ Samaria (16:44-53). The following verses (16:53-59) with their promise of restoration are not easy to interpret but lead to a promise that beyond judgement will be lasting forgiveness and a new covenant grounded in an act of divinely undertaken atonement accompanied by enduring shame and humiliation for past sins (16:60-63) The story of the whole Bible is the story of the triumph of God in relation to those whom he created and redeemed from their rebellion. What do we learn from this section of Ezekiel that contributes to our understanding of God and his actions towards us? Ezekiel Study 8 (17:1-19:14) Recap: this is the third and final section of that part of Ezeliel’s message (chapters 12-19) that are largely devoted to setting out the inevitability of the LORD’s coming judgement against Judah (and Jerusalem as its centre). Given, probably about 590, the LORD’s allegory given to ‘Israel’ (17:1,2) dominates the chapter. A knowledge of the historical context does not make it difficult to interpret. Thus, the first great eagle is Nebuchadrezzar who invades the region, takes away its nobility, removes them to Babylon. Meanwhile, Zedekiah is placed upon the throne of Judah but in a subservient role (17:1-6). The second eagle is Egypt to whom Zedekiah turns (17:7,8) but with no prospect of florishing (17:9,10). Explanation follows (17:11-21). Such an action by Zedekiah is seen as doomed (17:11-15), Egypt will prove no saviour and Zedekiah, himself, will be taken away to Babylon to die there (17:16-18): indeed, the LORD will be the avenger of Zedekiah’s broken oath to Nebuchadrezzar (17:19-21). And yet…. Nebuchadrezzar’s action will be eclipsed by the LORD (17:22-24, compare 3b with 22). He, too, will ‘act the gardener’ and guarantees (17:24) the ongoing Davidic dynasty and its influence will increase as that of others wanes. Several of the chapters in the present section seem to reflect objections raised by Ezekiel’s opponents. This is explicitly so here (18:1-32, especially, 1,2). The people are, apparently, blaming their predecessors for the mess in which they find themselves. Such a conclusion implies the LORD is not just and there were certainly those ready to make this point (18:25). Ezekiel’s reply is to emphasise personal responsibility (18:3,4) and he makes his point with three illustrations: apparently referrring to three generations of the same family (could it be Hezekiah, Manasseh and Josiah?). First, then, a righteous man is described by his religious fidelity and his moral rectitude (18:5,6 and 7-9). Secondly, there is the wicked son of a righteous father, similarly described (18:10-13) and, finally, the righteous son of a wicked father (18:14-18). In each case the individual is treated on their own merits (see, especially, 18:9,13, 18). The point is then, righteousness is no more inherited than iniquity: each is individually responsible (18:19-20). Consequently, the LORD’s threats can be averted since he delights in repentance rather than judgement (18:21-32). These verses offer an explanatory key to the otherwise unendingly black picture!It must not be missed. The section ends with a dirge (19:1-14). It is not difficult to identify the persons referred to: Jehoahaz, taken captive to Egypt in 609BC (4), Jehoiachin, son of Jehoiakim, exiled to Babylon in 597BC (9) and Zedekiah (14). The last section is probably prediction and nothing could more effectively depict the sorry and inevitabel end of the nation in the light of its ongoing refusal to listen to the LORD and repent. Questions: • If chapter 18:19-20 is correct, how do we explain the present condition of the Church in Southend? • If Zedekiah was tempted to look elsewhere than the LORD for support, where might we be looking? • What comfort can we draw from these chapters? • Ezekiel Study 9: Chapters 20-22 After the account of the Prophet’s call (chapters 1-3), Ezekiel’s ministry, declaring the judgement to come on Judah/Jerusalem has followed: the initial prediction (4-7) followed by the successive emphases upon the reasons for (8-11) and the certainty of (12-19) judgement. Chapters 20-24 reach a climax in stressing both the rightness and describing (in a somewhat peculiar way!) the fact of judgement: by the end of this section there can be no question that Ezekiel is the LORD’s spokesperson (24:27). For the third time (compare 8:1;14:1) the nation’s leaders-in-exile visit Ezekiel but while they keep coming they do not change and, consequently, there can be no fellowship but only a message of judgement (20:1-4) as the culmination of three periods of Israel’s history: the sojourn in Egypt (5-9), the wilderness wanderings (10-27) and the occupation of Canaan (28-32). Sadly the repeated lessons (like Ezekiel’s sermons) had gone unheeded. Self-generated religion (8,28) and disregard for the LORD’s will (13,21,24: its companion, 16,24), were as characteristic of the present as the past and the consequence as inevitable (30-32). This judgement would also mark a new beginning of the LORD’s kingly rule (33-47): an era in which all those in the nation who had failed to live by the stipulations of his covenant with them would be purged (especially 37-39) before the people’s restoration to the land. Yet, even now, there was none willing to listen (48f). Small wonder, then, the sustained picture (and painful message) of a warrior’s vengeance against idolatry (21:1-5), the leaders of the nation and all those who rally to their cause (6-17) and, finally, against the land itself (18-32). Perhaps we are intended to detect the irony in the fact that Judah/Jerusalem will even reject the voices of idolatrous practices when the voice is one of judgement (23)! A final expose of the perverse society that Jerusalem had become follows (chapter 22): with the intent of demonstrating the propriety of the LORD’s judgement. Simply, defiling violence and idolatry was rampant (1-5). More specifically, Ezekiel highlights the misuse of power (6), the breakdown of authority (in the home, 7), the absence of compassion for the marginalised and vulnerable (the migrant, orphan and widow, 7), the pursuit of profit (8), ‘spin’ in a power-hungry disregard for the truth (9) and unbridled licentiousness (10-11) among those whose ruthless exploitation emulates the conduct of the Mafia (12). Put at its baldest ‘you have forgotten me’ (12). Such a society will be ‘hoist on its own petard’ (13-16). If the pursuit of money drive such a society, the nation will be melted like precious metals and be treated as the mere dross from the refining process (17-22). Even the ‘Church’ had been caught up in (sanctioning and/or perpetrating) predatory, finance-driven, behaviour and in a wholesale disregard of God’s word and by means of self-motivated ‘prophetic’ words and actions (23-28). Inevitably, with such examples in leadership, the people, as a whole, have (to a ‘man’) become corrupt and liable to judgement (29-31). 1. These chapters depict a society ripe for judgement yet either refusing to listen to the ‘bad news’ from God or their own oracles or preferring the more popular version of future events? Where might we detect parallels in our own world? 2. The marks of a society ‘gone to seed’ may, possibly be viewed as exemplary. What might Ezekiel have highlighted in our own society… and church?   Ezekiel Study 10: Chapters 23-24 After the account of the Prophet’s call (chapters 1-3), Ezekiel’s ministry, declaring the judgement to come on Judah/Jerusalem has followed: the initial prediction (4-7) followed by the successive emphases upon the reasons for (8-11) and the certainty of (12-19) judgement. Chapters 20-24 reach a climax in stressing both the rightness and describing (in a somewhat peculiar way!) the fact of judgement: by the end of this section there can be no question that Ezekiel is the LORD’s spokesperson (24:27). Chapter 20-22 exposed the unrepentant attitude of Judah’s leaders to the corruption that characterised the whole of the nation and made judgment inevitable. The present two chapters re-enforce the same message by an appeal to Judah’s history within the wider history of God’s people (chapter 23) and the ‘double-whammy’ of God’s revelation to Ezekiel, on the very day his wife died of the fact that the siege against Jerusalem had commenced with only one possible outcome (chapter 24). Judah is now at and end. Chapter 23 is an allegory of two sisters (representing Israel and Judah). Their two names hint at their purpose (to be devoted to the LORD); but despite their ‘union’ with the LORD they had proved irredeemably promiscuous from their earliest days as God’s people (23:1-4). The older sister eventually suffered the full consequences of her unfaithfulness: her lovers proving to be there merely to use, abuse and dispose of her (23:5-10). The younger sister proved still worse. In full-knowledge of he sister’s fate she sought the very lovers who had destroyed her sister (11-13). The language that follows (14-21) is deliberately and shockingly crude (e.g. 23:20) to foreground the extent of her apostacy: her ‘one track’ mind, despite the disgust she had for some of those who ‘bedded’ her (23:17). Her disgust, however, is little compared with her ‘husband’ (23:18) and the like consequence to that of her sister inevitable (22-35): the lovers she despised will prove her nemesis. The final verses (36-49) recapitulate the story, presumably for emphasis and for its conclusion: disregard for the LORD will have its end, but in judgement, for then they will know he is the sovereign one (23:49). But all such warnings are now too late, as the following chapter (24) notes. Thus, Ezekiel receives a vision on the day that marked the beginning of the end for Jerusalem (15th January 588BC, 24:1,2). It may be that Ezekiel uses a popular piece of doggerel (like ‘Polly, put the kettle on’) but turns it against Jerusalem. The allegory (24:3-5) needs little explanation: Jerusalem is ‘doomed’ like meat in a cauldron. The following verses (24:6-14) pick up the picture to make two points: the contents of the cauldron will be consumed and disposed of (23:6-8) and such will be the heat of the fire that the cauldron itself will melt (23:9-14): neither people nor city has any current ground for hope since the corruption is so deep-seated. The final paragraph of this long section of the prophecy (chapters 4-24) is full of pathos. On the evening of the day in which Ezekiel declares the previous words, his beloved wife suddenly dies but he is commanded not to grieve for her (24:15-18). His strange conduct will be matched by the people when news of the fall of Jerusalem arrives whose pain will be deep but necessarily mute in the land of the victor (24:19-24). But then, when the news arrives… proved to be the LORD’s spokesperson, Ezekiel will be given a ministry to the Exiles (24:25-27). 1. The problem that led to judgement in these chapters is an insatiable corruption that corroded everything to the core.  What are the characteristic marks of the downward spiral to inevitable judgement that are described here? How may we avoid them ourselves? 2. How, in the light of these chapters, might Ezekiel’s mute suffering in the face of his wife’s death reveal the attitude of the LORD to our own unfaithfulness? The Book of Ezekiel Study 11 (Chapters 25-32) The call of Ezekiel (chapters 1-3) is followed by a description of the first stage of his ministry: to declare the judgement of the LORD on Judah and its capital Jerusalem (chapters 4-24). By the time that chapter 24 is concluded, the LORD has revealed to Ezekiel that the final destruction of Jerusalem has commenced and has indicated to him that when the news arrives his own ministry will be vindicated and a new stage of his work will commence. However, before the messenger arrives, eight chapters of messages that Ezekiel gave at different times are gathered together: oracles addressed to seven nations surrounding Judah: the more traditional ‘sparring partners’ of Ammon, Moab, Edom and Philistia (chapter 25) and the more distant and, generally, more powerful, Tyre (chapters 27-28:19), Sidon (28:20-24) and Egypt (chapters 29-32). Clearly these chapters heighten the expectation of the awaited news (even though, in actual fact, the dating of them indicates they were given later). However, the key to understanding why Ezekiel or his editor included them here is found in 28:25-26: ‘the house of Israel’ can only live in peace if its enemies are overthrown and the glory of the LORD can only be manifested when he has demonstrated his sovereign right to judge the nations in righteousness. The message of hope, touched on here and expanded in the chapters that follow require, logically, that such righteous acts of judgement precede. Without going into detail here all these judgements did come to pass in the succeeding years and sovereignty lost to every one in the immediately succeeding years. The fundamental charges raised against the various nations may be identified as pride, delight at the misfortunes of others and the taking advantage of them rather than expressing sympathy and solidarity. In several cases pride is accompanied by an insular attitude: ‘we are all right, it won’t happen to us’ rather than express moral outrage.  So much for the basic message. But why seven nations and why the highly poetic language of this section (especially in the oracles against Tyre and Egypt? The most likely answer is that ‘seven’ were the number of nations that Israel had to drive out to settle in Canaan (Deuteronomy 7:1) and seven is often a ‘perfect’ number in the Bible and here may symbolise the ‘fullness of the Gentiles’. Linked with this, is the recognition in the Bible that earlier events anticipate the later and greater. Without, therefore, being explicit, these chapters anticipate the greater and final actions of God to establish his reign of peace that will be expanded it later chapters. What are we to learn here about the relationship between the LORD blessing his people and glorifying himself and judgement? How and where might we recognise in our world the presence of the attitudes the LORD makes the basis of his judgement here: and can we recognise them in ourselves? Jesus, shall reign, where’er the sun does his successive journeys run’: so said Isaac Watts. What does this passage teach us about our own hope? The Book of Ezekiel, Study 12: Chapters 33-34   The first 32 chapters of Ezekiel are largely devoted to the threat of judgement against Judah. In 24:1 Ezekiel has been advised by the LORD that the final siege against Jerusalem has commenced… but no news has yet been received of the city’s fall and, to heighten tension and to prepare for the message to follow, chapters 25-32 have been devoted to a collection of oracles against the seven surrounding enemies of the LORD’s people. Now that news is received (33:21f) and what follows is a marked change in Ezekiel’s ministry. Thus, as we shall see, the remainder of the book records the prophet’s messages of the resurrection (chapters 33-39) and consequent new life (chapter 40-48) of the LORD’s people. But, first, we are provided with a prologue (33:1-20). The prophet is reminded of his God-given responsibility to speak faithfully on the latter’s behalf (33:1-9) and to do so among a people who are ready to place the blame on other than themselves (33:10-20). In the face of such claims the LORD declares through Ezekiel his reluctance to judge and his desire to witness repentance so that they might escape his judgment. The news that Jerusalem has fallen follows (33:21,22) and, even before the arrival of the minister, Ezekiel is freed from his dumbness to be the minister of the new start. However, first he must deal with two remaining problems. Firstly, he addresses the last few embers of false hope among those few who, yet left in Palestine, appeal on the mere ground of their descent from Abraham that their future is secure. Such are called to face reality in the face: persistence in moral and religious apostasy and self-reliance is no ground for confidence, whatever their spiritual heritage: they are still doomed (33:23-29). Secondly, there is the reaction of his fellow exiles: they may enjoy his preaching as ‘first-class religious entertainment’ but that was all (33:30-33). They, too, must awake to reality before they can be offered a lasting and secure hope! So hope there is (as the following chapters will demonstrate) but such demands a new and utterly gracious work of God. Specifically, the LORD will shepherd his people through the person of ‘my servant David’: gathering, feeding and healing the scattered and broken and providing them with justice, security and peace (34:11-34): in marked contrast to the contemporary leadership of those whom the LORD abhorred (3:9,10) and were characterised by being self-serving (34:2,3), power-driven (34:4) and disinterested in the fate of their ‘flock’ (34:5,6) who, as a consequence, were prey to the evil forces at work in their world (34:7,8). Further, this ‘David’ (and his flock) will be heirs of a new covenant and new land. Here the land will be what it was always intended to be: desolate and barren land will no longer be the habitation of wild beasts (34:25,26) but enjoy conditions that will produce seasonable fruitfulness (34:26,27). The inhabitants will be freed from those threats (and even the anxiety) that render such possible and will enjoy true ‘shalom’ with ‘Immanuel’ (God ‘with them’). Heaven on earth will have arrived! Questions: * Have these promises been fulfilled yet? If not, to what do they apply? * Consider the analysis of false leadership offered here: in what ways might it apply to or be seen in the Church today? The Book of Ezekiel, Study 13: Chapters 35-39 The gloomy chapters recounting the threat of the LORD’s judgement against Judah have come to end end. Jerusalem now lies in ruins (33:21) just as had been threatened. Now Ezekiel’s ministry is one that is re-directed to give hope of resurrection (33-39) and new life (40-48). Already, Ezekiel has promised a new covenant, a new land and a new king…. This is now expanded. Previously, David had brought peace to the people of God through the subjection of his enemies. A similar fate awaits God’s enemies now (35:1-36:7): among whom Edom is singled out as a typical example of those who had harboured hostility against the LORD (35:13) and his people (35:5) and delighted in its judgement (35:15; 36:5). Enemies overcome, the land will be permanently re-occupied (36:8-15). Yet this is no mere return to the past and all its failures (36:16-21). Rather, for the sake of his own name (36:22f) and out of sheer grace (36:29-32) the LORD purposes himself to deal with the past (and provide atonement and cleansing (36:24f)) and to secure the future (through that inner work of the Spirit that will produce conformity to the LORD’s will, 36:26f). Then, and only then, Eden will be restored, fellowship with the LORD established and his glory manifested (36:33-38). Then, nothing short of resurrrection will be experienced by his people (37:1-14), the divided people will be re-united (37:15-23). Thus, under new Davidic leadership, enjoying the full possession of the LORD’s people, they will live under a ‘new’ covenant, enjoy lasting peace and, above all, the divine presence (37:24-28). Two very strange chapters follow (38,39). In symbolic language a great battle is described. All the enemies of the LORD and his people gather to seek to overthrow them (38:1-17) but will be vanquished before the LORD’s awesome intervention (38:18-23). The utter overthrow of the enemy and its leaders will follow (39:1-8) and the entire land/earth be purged of all that might pollute it (39:9-16), the people of God will enjoy the fruits of the LORD’s victory (39:17-20). Thus, the victory of God that is celebrated when the sufferings of the LORD’s people will be seen to be occasioned by their sin (39:21-24) and their restoration due to his compassion 39:25). Then, knowing such mercy, his people will forget their shame and delight in his presence through the empowering Spirit (39:26-29). For reflection: The universal scope of these chapters (surely) have their fulfilment in nothing else that the ‘new covenant’ inaugurated (and to be completed) by Jesus. Here is one of the greatest passages in the Old Testament that speak of him and his work.  What are the specific lessons that we might learn here about what he has and will yet do in us?   The Book of Ezekiel, Study 14: Chapters 40-48 After the fall of Jerusalem (33:21),  Ezekiel’s ministry is re-directed to give hope. Specifically, he offers hope of resurrection to the people of God (33-39) and, now, offers a description of the new life that will follow (40-48). The language is, again, highly symbolic and looks far beyond the mere restoration of the people to Palestine. This vision is given some years later and is of the new Jerusalem (40:1,2), that the prophet is told to describe in loving detail and for the benefit of his hearers (40:3f). Thus, what immediately follows is something like a guided tour of the new temple area by an angelic being (40-42): the details best envisaged in the accompanying diagram. Such scrupulous attention might seem tedious, but it echoes the latter chapters in Exodus where, as here, where proper worship is established, the presence of the LORD is, once again, enjoyed (43:1-12, compare, by way of contrast, 8:1-11:25). The ongoing enjoyment of the LORD’s presence is then secured by the proper adminstration of the temple, its services and functionaries and festivals (43:13-46:18), centred on the archetypal prince (44:3 compare 45:7f) and expressed in proper ethical conduct (45:9-12). At 46:19 the tour resumes. Ezekiel sees the stream issuing from the altar and explores where it goes (46:20-47:12)! Ever growing it brings life to desert and even to the Dead Sea and its waters are universally therapeutic. The remainder of the book (47:13-48:35) describes the reallocation of the land to the 12 ‘tribes of Israel’ with emphasis prominence being given to the portion of the priests and the prince (48:9-22) and to the fact that every tribe had ‘equal’ access to the city (48:30-35). Thus, Ezekiel describes a city and land/earth centred around the abiding presence of the LORD and from which flows the resources that bring life to the world. There, too, true worship is offered to him, with the prince the mediator of the free access to God, uniformly offered to all his people. Reflection: As with our previous stody (and bearing in mind the symbolic and ‘impossible’ language of the vision) this passage cannot but have its ultimate fulfuilment in the New Covenant… but how? Commentary 2008-09-07T22:19:01+00:00