Recircumcised?

2 At that time the Lord said to Joshua, “Make flint knives for yourself, and circumcise the sons of Israel again the second time.” 3 So Joshua made flint knives for himself, and circumcised the sons of Israel at the hill of the foreskins.(Joshua 5:2-3)

God commanded Joshua to see that this was done to all males under 40. These were sons of the generation who died in the wilderness, survivors (cf. vv. 6, 7) from the new generation God spared in Num. 13, 14. This surgical sign of a faith commitment to the Abrahamic Covenant (see Gen. 17:9–14) had been ignored during the wilderness trek. Now God wanted it reinstated, so the Israelites would start out right in the Land they were possessing.

This was not a re-circumcision of individuals (which would be impossible), but the second occasion of doing this as a nation. This implies that as a nation it had been done before leaving Egypt (Josh. 5:4), but those born in the wilderness were uncircumcised ( Josh. 5:5). This also implies that there were many ways that the law was not kept during the wilderness wanderings.

This circumcision was necessary because the generation that came out of Egypt had fallen under God’s judgment. In His grace God was raising up a new generation for Himself (v. 7). Physical circumcision had its spiritual counterpart in circumcised hearts (Deut. 10:16; 30:6)

When God reaffirmed his covenant with Abraham, promising him the land of Canaan, he warned him that anyone who was not circumcised would be violating the covenant (Gen 17:7–14). Consequently, Israel could not claim the covenant land until the sign of the covenant had been restored. Here is another parallel between Moses and Joshua: When called to lead the covenant people out of Egypt, Moses had to restore the the covenant of circumcision in his own family (Exod 4:24–26). In the instructions God gave Moses for the Passover meal, no uncircumcised males were allowed to participate (cf. Exod 12:48–49). Circumcision may have been a puberty rite in some nations, but for Israel it marked one’s entrance into the covenant community. In Hebrew this verse is redundant; it says, “Circumcise the Israelites again, a second time.” There is no record that Joshua conducted any mass circumcision prior to this, nor was anyone to be circumcised over again. Joshua was reinstituting circumcision after it had been neglected during the forty years in the desert.

It is interesting that not even Joshua had circumcised his children while in the desert:
7 Then Joshua circumcised their sons whom He raised up in their place; for they were uncircumcised, because they had not been circumcised on the way. (Joshua 5:7)

This was a reproach to him in God's eyes:
9 Then the Lord said to Joshua, “This day I have rolled away the reproach of Egypt from you.” Therefore the name of the place is called Gilgal to this day. (Joshua 5:9)

That reproach was removed by the act of circumcision that renewed the Abrahamic Covenant and affirmed God's commitment and faithfulness to His people and Joshua's place in His plan.

This is borne out by the reaffirmation made at the end of the chapter by the appearance of the Angel of the Lord:

13 And it came to pass, when Joshua was by Jericho, that he lifted his eyes and looked, and behold, a Man stood opposite him with His sword drawn in His hand. And Joshua went to Him and said to Him, “ Are You for us or for our adversaries?” (Joshua 5:13)

This man proved to be one of the Persons of the Trinity who was personally leading Israel from Egypt. From all outward appearances Joshua thought He was a man. He stood like a man, looked like a man, held a sword like a man, spoke with an audible voice like a man, and Joshua approached Him like a man.

Five proofs that He was God, not a man: 

1. He claimed to be Captain of the host of the Lord. Joshua knew God was the Captain of Israel. He had promised to go before them and lead them into Canaan, and had done so for forty years ( Ex. 3:8 , 12 , 17-22 ; 6:1-8 ; 10:2-6 ; 23:20-33 ; 33:1-3 ; Josh. 1:2-9 ; 3:7-8 ; Acts 7:31-37 ).
2. Joshua worshipped Him, and such reverence belongs only to God. If He had been only a messenger of God, He would not have permitted worship (cp. Rev. 19:9-10 ; 22:8-10 ).
3. Joshua called Him "Lord" (Hebrew: 'Adon (H136 h136 ) sovereign; lord; master; owner).
4. Joshua recognized himself as His servant.
5. The same thing was said to Joshua that was said to Moses. Only God could make such a demand (cp. Josh. 5:15 with Ex. 3:1-8 ).

Eliphaz & Presuppositions

17 “Behold, happy is the man whom God corrects;
Therefore do not despise the chastening of the Almighty.
18 For He bruises, but He binds up;
He wounds, but His hands make whole.
19 He shall deliver you in six troubles,
Yes, in seven no evil shall touch you. (Job 5:17-19)

It is not so much the content of Eliphaz's advice that is the problem for us. But rather, it is the perspective, the "worldview" from which it is offered that is defective. From his point of view, man is on a give and take relationship with God. He must earn his keep. All that man does God watches and either He rewards or chastens, given the merit of those actions. I'm sure that Eliphaz saw some room in Gods scheme for mercy and grace, but his basic perception of God's interaction with man was one of give and take, one on a "works" basis.

This is an all together natural perception for men. Since the fall, and the effects that the fall wrought in man, our twisted thinking has caused us to have a faulty perception of how we are to interact with God. In our pride , our arrogance, we believe that we can seize authority from Him and do things ourselves. That even extends past salvation into the Christian life. We see ourselves on a "do" or "not do" basis with God. If we "do", then we get blessed. If we "fail to do", then at best we simply fail to be blessed; & at worst we receive God's chastening & judgment.

This is not just a minor thinking issue. This is a fundamental perception issue that affects and forms all of Eliphaz's thinking and understanding. It causes him to be wrong and how he see's Job's interaction with the affairs that are going on in his life. It causes him to charge Job with evil that he didn't not commit. It causes him to draw conclusions that are untrue and forced those conclusions upon poor innocent Job. It causes him not only to fail to minister to Job, but to do the opposite in his responsibility to minister, to drive Job down and have a negative impact on him and his great time of need.

All of this because of presuppositions that he was unwilling to shake. You and I must take great care to examine our own presuppositions. We must examine them in light of what the Scripture has to say. Fortunately for us we hold the Bible in our hands. That is a privilege neither Job nor Eliphaz had.

It is a blessing and privilege that you and I must take advantage of because it is a privilege that God did not give us for no reason. We do not have the Scripture simply to hold, or to read, or for our information. It is here to mold and to shape our lives and to change our thinking and the our perception of what is real what is true. We do not approach the structure knowing what is true ahead of time. We approach the scripture seeking truth allowing it to teach us what is true.

Eliphaz, of course, was a great disadvantage as he did not hold the Word of God in his hand as you and I do. Let's see to it that you and I don't make the same mistakes that he did.

Ten Blessings in Romans 5

1. Justification ( Rom. 5:1 , 9 )
2. Peace with God ( Rom. 5:1 )
3. Access by faith into grace ( Rom. 5:2 )
4. Standing in grace ( Rom. 5:2 )
5. Joy in God ( Rom. 5:2-3 , 11 )
6. Grace in tribulations ( Rom. 5:3-5 )
7. Love of God in the heart ( Rom. 5:5 )
8. The Holy Spirit ( Rom. 5:5 )
9. Salvation from wrath ( Rom. 5:9-10 )
10. Reconciliation by blood ( Rom. 5:10-11 )

Enoch & Heaven

The Hebrew word means "initiated" or "dedicated." Enoch was the only one mentioned as being godly in Seth's line except Noah (cp. Gen. 6:9 ; 7:1 ).

• He was a prophet ( Jude 1 ), and was translated by faith ( Rom. 10:17 ; Heb. 11:5 ).
• His experience parallels that of Elijah ( 2Ki. 2 ).

Both were taken to heaven bodily without dying; both were prophets of judgment; both fought idolatry and apostasy; both knew the time and purpose of their "translation" (transporting) ( 2 ; Heb. 11:5 ).

• Couldn't they fulfill Zech. 4:11-14 ; Mal. 4:4-6 ; and Rev. 11:3-11 ?
• Heaven is a material place with food and Mal. 4:4-6 ; and Rev. 11:3-11 ?

Heaven is a material place with food and inhabited cities ( Ex. 24:11 ; Ps. 78:25 ; Lk. 22:16 , 18 , 30 ; Heb. 11:10 , 13-16 ; 13:14 ; Jn. 6:31 ; 14:1-3 ; Rev. 2:7 , 17 ; 4:4-6 ; 5:3-13 ; 7:17 ; 12:12 ; 13:6 ; 18:20 ; 19:1-10 ; 22:2 ).

• Couldn't two prophets live in heaven all these millennia?
• Paul and John went to heaven ( 2Cor. 12:1-7 ; Rev. 4:1 ).
• All resurrected saints will eventually live there until they return with Christ to set up His kingdom ( 1Th. 4:14-17 ; 1Cor. 15:51-58 ; Rev. 7:9-17 ; 19 ).

What Did Matthew Mean By "Blessed" in Matthew 5?

     “Makarios”, Translated "blessed" here in Matthew 5:1–10, in Greek means “fortunate” or “happy” and is derived from the root "mak", which means “lengthy.” Perhaps the Greeks saw blessedness as related to the idea of “length of life”—a long life was a blessed one.
Makarios was frequently used in Greek literature, the Septuagint (a Greek translation of the Old Testament), and the New Testament to describe the kind of happiness that comes from receiving divine favor. Consequently, the word can also be rendered “favored.” In the New Testament it is usually a divine passive; this means that people are blessed by God. The Lord God is the One who is blessing or favoring the person.
     The most well-known “blessings” are described in the Beatitudes, wherein we see the various kinds of blessings God gives to those who are worthy of these graces. The Beatitudes are written in two different forms: one in Matthew 5:3–12 and the other in Luke 6:20–23. The pronouncement of the blessings in Luke is done immediately after the selection of the twelve disciples (Luke 6:12–16). Yet, the sermon is addressed to the crowd generally and speaks of the advent of God’s kingdom. Luke balances four blessings with four woes—changing from the present tense to the future tense—to heighten the contrast of the impending reversal of social conditions.
     In Matthew’s account, the kingdom has already begun, indicated by the use of the present tense. These Beatitudes are addressed to the disciples particularly and are not a general proclamation. They are more concerned with the interior life of the disciple—to activate here and now the kind of life Jesus communicates in those who follow Him. The eight Beatitudes reflect on the traits of those who belong to that kingdom and who therefore reflect Christ’s own life. Read, for example, this passage in Matthew 5:1-10...
     The people and situations described may seem bad by our human standards. Yet, because of God’s presence in our lives, we are actually blessed by God through these trying situations.

From the Holman Treasury of Key Bible Words

Firm Opinions

3 Surely you have instructed many, And you have strengthened weak hands. 4 Your words have upheld him who was stumbling, And you have strengthened the feeble knees; 5 But now it comes upon you, and you are weary; It touches you, and you are troubled.(Job 4:3-5)

A common modern concept is that in order for one to be reasonable one must not hold any opinion firmly. All three of Job's counselors take this opinion and have this perspective in one form or another. The idea that is fundamental, that forms the bedrock of their opinion of Job, is that one who has done well will be rewarded by God. Similarly, if there is "punishment" in your life, that is, if evil exists in your life, it is there because God is punishing you for some reason or another. They see Job's assertion that he is innocent, and that he has done nothing to deserve the evil that is present in his life, as a failure to confess that evil. The problem that they pursued with Job is not so much that he had done evil and deserved chastening, (they, as all men, recognized that everyone commits sin; at times very grievous sin) but that he refused to confess that sin before God. What they were talking him to task for was what they saw as a continual hardness and refusal to repent and admit his sin in light of what they believed was a continual and obvious call for repentance from God.

But throughout the book, Job holds firmly to his conviction that no wickedness on his part prompted the suffering that he underwent. Of course, being privy to the conversations in heaven between Satan and God, we know this to be so. In fact, we know that the exact opposite is the case! The suffering that Job bore, he bore, not because he was wicked or because of any ungodliness; but rather precise because he was a godly man and God wish to hold him up as an example for all to see and consider! Job's failing was that he held this conviction too tenaciously. He held it to the point of charging God with evil, exalting himself over his Maker. And so we see, at the end of the book, God call him to account for that failing but none other.

This refusal to take sure stand is a common failing in many men; but particularly, it seems, in modern man. The Scripture says that we are, at root level, pleasers of other men. We desire to be at peace with them, rather than in conflict with them. Surely there are those around that and enjoy the "Art of war", liking conflict and basking in the glory of overcoming others. But by and large, men simply want to get along with other men and they will get what's needful to accomplish that end.

In the modern church, modern theologians seem to think that it is an evil thing to hold firm opinions. Sadly, this position seems to apply to doctrine as well. It has come to be that we are not allowed to believe anything for certain anymore either. The flip side of this is that anyone is allowed to believe anything and everything has become acceptable within the context of the church these days. Anyone can believe anything these days and still be a Christian. It is astonishing simply to flip the TV channels around these days and hear what the different preachers are saying about who Jesus is, where (and when!) He came from, and what he paid (or did not pay) for on the cross.

Whatever our position, we're not allowed to hold it firmly, we must allow for other positions. The only position were allowed to hold firmly and grasp with all our might is that no one is allowed to have any position for sure.

The root problem here is a disrespect for the Word of God coupled with too high a respect for the reasoning capability of the mind of man and his ability to interpret that which goes on around him.

As has been man's problem all along, our pride has seized control of how we think of ourselves and now, sadly, of how we think of our ability to interact with our God. At the fall man lost his ability to understand and communicate with his Maker. Man has labored under that disability from that point onward. The problem has been that he has had an increasing denial on that inability ever since.

Matthew 4:3-4 - Christ's Temptation

  

3 Now when the tempter came to Him, he said, “If You are the Son of God, command that these stones become bread.”. 4 But He answered and said, “ It is written, ‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God. ’” (Matthew 4:3-4)

It is always been interesting to me that Satan sought to to tempt the very Son of God. It could not have been because he did not know Who Christ was, or because he did not understand our Lords nature. It could not have been because he did not understand that divinity was, by definition, sinless, obviously was well aware, having been cast from Heaven because of his own sin. No, I think were forced to conclude that Satan came and tempted Christ for two reasons:

First, he came because it is his nature can come and to seek to deceive, tempt, and to destroy. He is "the adversary", and as such, he can do nothing but but seek to oppose that which God is working to accomplish. That is what we see him doing here.

Secondly, we see his attack on the Lord Jesus as an example for those who would follow in faith. As is many times the case in the Scripture, God allows undesirable, even futile things to occur in order to use them as an example for those who would follow. As our Lord was Divine, as fully God as the heavenly Father was, there was no chance that He would submit to Satan's temptation. It is completely unreasonable to think that Satan was unaware of that as he approached there on the mountain. Evening ego as arrogant as Satan is not quite that foolish. We might think that he was desiring to insult our Lord, yes we could go for that! But the fact that he had any hope of tearing our Lord down into sin?, No we find that difficult to believe.

One further question though, does the fact that our Lord had a Divine nature and thus, was "unable to sin", mean that the temptation was not real temptation? Adam was perfect in the garden before the fall and yet his temptation was real and he fell. But we must remember that Adam, though he was perfect in every way before the fall, was not Divine. God was holy, separate from him, and he was not.

In like fashion, when Christ came to earth, He took on the form of man. He was like man in every fashion. And even though He "laid aside His Deity, He did not fully give it up in that He ceased to be God. He merely ceased any visible demonstration or expression of that Godhood. Thus, when Satan came to tempt Him, that Deity was still in full force insofar as his person went. Yes, it was wrapped in a mortal, flimsy shell of humanity; but it was Deity nevertheless.

It speaks reams about the arrogance and malignity of the enemy of our souls that he went and stood before his Lord and Maker, seeking to tempt Him to sin, not once, but three times. The scene grows greatly in drama when we think of it in these terms. Moreover, it speaks of the great mercy and forbearance of our Lord, as He tolerated that awful presence not once but three times as Satan spoke his lies spewed his awful venom. Rather than cast him aside or bar him, He allowed him to come, not because there was any benefit to Himself but that the event might be recorded for your benefit and for mine! How marvelous and mercy of God and how wondrous His Grace. If only we have eyes to see!

Isaiah 2:10-21 - Twelve Predictions Unfulfilled!

  

10 Enter into the rock, and hide in the dust, From the terror of the Lord And the glory of His majesty. 11 The lofty looks of man shall be humbled, The haughtiness of men shall be bowed down, And the Lord alone shall be exalted in that day. 12 For the day of the Lord of hosts Shall come upon everything proud and lofty, Upon everything lifted up — And it shall be brought low—13 Upon all the cedars of Lebanon that are high and lifted up, And upon all the oaks of Bashan; 14 Upon all the high mountains, And upon all the hills that are lifted up; 15 Upon every high tower, And upon every fortified wall; 16 Upon all the ships of Tarshish, And upon all the beautiful sloops. 17 The loftiness of man shall be bowed down, And the haughtiness of men shall be brought low; The Lord alone will be exalted in that day, 18 But the idols He shall utterly abolish. 19 They shall go into the holes of the rocks, And into the caves of the earth, From the terror of the Lord And the glory of His majesty, When He arises to shake the earth mightily. 20 In that day a man will cast away his idols of silver And his idols of gold, Which they made, each for himself to worship, To the moles and bats, 21 To go into the clefts of the rocks, And into the crags of the rugged rocks, From the terror of the Lord And the glory of His majesty, When He arises to shake the earth mightily. (Isaiah 2:10-21)

Isaiah is known for what he has to say concerning the coming of the Lord's Messiah. The issue is that some of those prophecies regard the first coming of the Lord and some of them regard the second coming; and in addition, some are very general and take both in view. What we must be careful to sort out as we read these prophecies is the difference between the three. If it is general, then we must leave it as such and not seek to assign it specifically and exclusively to either one or the other. With regard to the other two, we must take care to be sure to which the particular passage is speaking.

Here in Isaiah 2 we see the first opportunity to make a distinction between the two. In verse 10 we see the beginning of a set of verses that speak, not to the first coming but to the second coming. We know that because it offers a number of prophecies that were not (and are not) fulfilled at the time of the first coming.

1. People will enter into caves and dens of the earth for fear of God when Christ comes with power and glory to set up His kingdom ( Isa. 2:10 , 19 , 21 ; Mt. 24:29-31 ). This is not the same as the sixth seal of Rev. 6:12-17 , which will be fulfilled several years earlier than the second coming of Christ.
2. The pride of man will be humbled ( Isa. 2:11 , 17 ).
3. Jehovah alone will be exalted.
4. The day of the Lord will be upon all who are proud and haughty; and they will be brought low ( Isa. 2:12 ).
5. Judgment will fall upon the cedars of Lebanon and the oaks of Bashan ( Isa. 2:13 ).
6. Judgment will fall upon the mountains and hills ( Isa. 2:14 ).
7. High towers and fenced walls will be judged ( Isa. 2:15 ).
8. Ships of the sea will be destroyed ( Isa. 2:16 ).
9. Pleasant (desirable) pictures will be destroyed.
10. Idols will be utterly destroyed ( Isa. 2:18 ).
11. The Lord will personally come and shake the whole earth ( Isa. 2:19-21 Rev. 16:17-21 18:1-24 ).
12. Men will be so fearful that they will cast away their idols and objects of worship to the moles and bats ( Isa. 2:20-21 ).

None of these prophecies were fulfilled at the time of the first coming of Christ - leaving us with the inescapable conclusion that they apply to the second coming of the Lord.

Eastward in Eden

  
8 The Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden, and there He put the man whom He had formed. (Genesis 2:8)

I've always wondered what I looked at Genesis 2:8... "Eastward of what?". The garden seems to have been located in the east of Eden, which was evidently a large district. But we are not even really sure where "Eden" was. There is no sure definition for us in the Scripture where exactly "Eden" was located. We have some hints and some things that we could use for guidelines, but there is nothing definitive. That leads us to believe that it is utterly unimportant for us to know!
Two of the rivers had well-known names--Euphrates and Tigris (called Hiddekel in Gen. 2:14 ). The other two aren't so easily identified. Gihon went through Ethiopia and may refer to the Nile. Pison compassed Arabia. There is no known spot where physical features exactly match the description here. The garden was destroyed and the surface of the earth has changed. It seems clear from Gen. 10:25 and 1Chr. 1:19 that there was one solid land mass until the time of Peleg, when the earth was divided into continents and islands. Hence, it is impossible to locate all these rivers or the garden of Eden.

We are told that even greater changes will take place at the second coming of Christ (Isa. 11:15-16 ; 34:1-- Isa. 35:10 ; Zech. 14:4-10 ; Rev. 16:10-21), and when the earth is made new again (Rev. 21:1-2 , 9-10).

Scholars have speculated about Eden's location, suggesting places as various as the third heaven to the lowest part of earth, from the north to the south poles. They've named China, India, Ceylon (now Sri Lanka), Armenia, Africa, Mesopotamia, Syria, Persia, Arabia, Babylon, Assyria, Palestine, and Egypt, as well as Missouri and Utah in America. As always...it would be wise for all to read and be content with Dt. 29:29:

“The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but the things that are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law.

There are actually four Gardens named in the the Scripture:

1. Lucifer's garden of Eden before Adam, where sin originated among the angels ( Ezek. 28:11-17 ; Jer. 4:23-26).
2. Adam's garden of Eden where sin originated with Adam ( Gen. 2:8--Gen. 3:24 ).
3. The garden of Gethsemane where Satan was defeated and the cross assured ( Mt. 26:36 ; Jn. 18:1 ).
4. The garden of resurrection where Christ triumphed over sin, death, hell and the grave ( Jn. 19:38-42 ; Rev. 1:18 ).
   

The Flight Into Egypt

  
13 Now when they had departed, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream, saying, “Arise, take the young Child and His mother, flee to Egypt, and stay there until I bring you word; for Herod will seek the young Child to destroy Him.”
14 When he arose, he took the young Child and His mother by night and departed for Egypt, 15 and was there until the death of Herod, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying, “Out of Egypt I called My Son.” (Matthew 2:13-15)

The flight into Egypt serves two purposes as we read it in Matthew chapter 2. First, of course, it serves to protect the baby Jesus and his mother Mary from the aggression of King Herod. But second, and more significantly, we read at the end of the passage that it served as a fulfillment of prophecy. Hosea 11:1 records the profit saying that he had delivered his people, the nation of Israel, "out of Egypt".

This is, of course, a reference to the national deliverance of Israel from out of slavery to Egypt in the time of Moses. It is very clear that that was the intention of Hosea in Hosea 11. Yet it is just as clear in Matthew two that it is the intention of God's Spirit to apply that passage, which doesn't be referred to physical bondage on the part of gods people in Egypt, and use it to speak of the return of his Messiah from Egypt in heritage day.

Egypt, throughout the Scripture, was a symbol of bondage; slavery and the hardness that terrible institution represents. Got used His people Israel frequently to illustrate the horror of slavery and to paint a picture of what a glorious deliverance was coming for them. This was the chief reason why He tolerated the presence of slavery in the Old Testament. It wasn't because He approved of the institution, not by a long shot!

Just as he called the nation of Israel out of Egypt, and thereby painted a wonderful picture of the freedom that was coming when Their Messiah, the Lord Jesus Christ finally came to deliver them; so also, once Christ was finally on the scene, God symbolically took him into Egypt and then returned him from out of Egypt to fulfill that picture. The matter of "safety from Herod" was really almost incidental. What safety did Egypt provide that the hand of the almighty God could not provide?

The Sanctification of Job’s Children

  
5 So it was, when the days of feasting had run their course, that Job would send and sanctify them, and he would rise early in the morning and offer burnt offerings according to the number of them all. For Job said, “It may be that my sons have sinned and cursed God in their hearts.” Thus Job did regularly. (Job 1:5)

As far as biblical history is concerned this is the second reference to sanctification, inasmuch as Job is no doubt the oldest book of the Bible and it’s records took place before the law of Moses was given.

The first reference to sanctification concerns setting apart a day for God to rest (Gen. 2:1-4). Here in Job it means that a father simply went through religious ceremonies before God in the hope that He would have mercy on his children. He set them apart in his own mind and religious acts; but this did not save them or protect them even from physical death. There is no hint of their being cleansed from sin; the idea is that of dedicating them to God, which is all any parent can do. The actual salvation of children happens when they meet God's requirements for salvation. 

We have a completely insufficient amount of information to conclude what the requirement for salvation was – other than that God is merciful and gracious and that He desires men to be saved and none to be lost.  We must be sure NOT to cast NT ideas back toward Job, and even not to cast Mosaic ideas back.  What we CAN do is to trust to those truths that we KNOW are universal because the Bible says they are universal.

Note the mention of burnt offerings That mention here shows that sacrifices had continued from Abel's time (Gen. 4) until now. It seems that they were practiced through all the ages up to the time of Christ.

The Gospel Is God’s Power

  
16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes, for the Jew first and also for the Greek. (Romans 1:16)

”power” - Greek: dunamis, inherent power; the ability to produce a desired effect…

The Scripture that God’s mighty power is able to do all that He has promised to do:

1. To produce the new birth ( 1Pet. 1:23 ).
2. To give salvation ( Rom. 1:16 ; Eph. 1:13 ).
3. To impart grace ( Acts 20:24 ).
4. To establish people in the faith ( Rom. 16:25 ).
5. To generate faith ( Rom. 10:17 ).
6. To set free ( Jn. 8:31-36 ).
7. To nourish spiritual life ( 1Pet. 2:2 ).
8. To cleanse the church ( Eph. 5:26 ).
9. To search the life ( Heb. 4:12 ).
10. To make partakers of Christ ( Eph. 3:6 ).
11. To impart immortality ( 2Tim. 1:10 ).
12. To bring peace ( Rom. 10:15 ).
13. To give protection ( Eph. 6:17 ).
14. To give fullness of blessings ( Rom. 15:29 ).

The Four-Fold Character of Job

 
He Was Perfect.
The Hebrew word is “tam” and can be translated “perfect” ( Job 1:1, 8; 2:3; 8:20; 9:20-22; Ps. 37:37; 64:4); plain (Gen. 25:27); upright (Prov. 29:10); and undefiled (Song 5:2 ; 6:9).

Tam is derived from “tamam”, to complete; make full; be entire; to finish. It denotes that in which there is no part lacking to complete the whole, as, in our modern day, the complete parts of a watch or piece of machinery in which no part is missing. Job was not only upright as a chief among his people, but pious toward God. He was not only kind to his family, but he was just to his neighbors and benevolent to the poor.

The word “perfect” used to describe him refers to his utter simplicity and sincerity, to he being free from guile and evil intention toward anyone; having no part and lacking in outward life, conduct, and religion. It does not mean sinless perfection or being without any tendencies to evil, for Job was a human with the usual traits and shortcomings that show up under pressure, as can be seen from the Two Great Mistakes of Job.

He Was Upright
Job is also referred to as “upright”. This is the Hebrew word “yashar” meaning “to be straight”. It is, in fact, translated “upright” in numerous places (Job 1:1, 8; 2:3; 8:6; 17:8; 1Sam. 29:6 ; Ex. 15:26 ; Dt. 6:18; 12:8). But is also translated “righteous” ( Job 4:7 ; 23:7 ); “meet” ( 2Ki. 10:3 ; Jer. 26:14 ); “just” ( Pr. 29:10 ); “straight” ( Jer. 31:9 ; Ezek. 1:7 , 23 ); “convenient” (Jer. 40:4-5); and “equity” ( Mic. 3:9 ).

Job Feared God
The Hebrew word here is “yare” meaning “to revere; be afraid of; or to have deep respect for” ( Job 1:1 ; Ex. 9:20 ; 1Ki. 18:3 ; 2Ki. 17:32-34 , 41). True religion in Scripture is often represented as the fear of God (Prov. 1:7 , 29 ; 2:5 ; 8:13 ; 14:26-27 ; Isa. 11:2 ; Acts 9:31).

Fourthly, we’re told that Job “eschewed” or avoided evil The original here is “cuwr” meaning to turn off; to decline; depart from; lay away; leave undone; be past; pluck away; put down; rebel against; remove; be sour against; withdraw ( Job 1:1 , 8 ; 2:3 ; cp. 1Pet. 3:11 ).

Apart from the Lord Jesus, if ever there was a man to emulated – Job was he!

153 or the Lord?

9 Then, as soon as they had come to land, they saw a fire of coals there, and fish laid on it, and bread. (John 21:9)

     The disciples had going fishing, they were of course fisherman before they had become disciples of the Lord. While waiting for the Lord they had gone back to their earlier profession.

     The text indicates that they were in a small boat, and that made quite a haul, 153 fish. For such a small boat that is quite a large net full of fish, and indeed, they couldn't pull it into the boat as the text indicates that they had to pull along behind them.

     What is interesting is that what they got back to the shore, they found Jesus already having prepared a meal of fish for them, ready to serve them once they arrived. They did not need to go back to they're prior profession for Christ demonstrated to them that He was fully capable of providing for their every need.

     How marvelous thing to know, as we face an uncertain life!

Men Are Hardwired…

Are you so foolish? Having begun in the Spirit, are you now being made perfect by the flesh? (Galatians 3:3)

... Between the Jews of Paul's day and the Galatians we have the two mistakes that modern men make. First, the Jews sought to find a way to justify themselves before God, seeking a righteousness that would commend them to the God of all men. A foolish pursuit to say the least. Then, concerning the Galatians, they sought that same "legal" means of justification to commend them to God after their salvation. It was likewise no less of a foolish pursuit as Paul unhesitatingly says to them here in Galatians chapter 3.

It seems that men have, hardwired into our beings, the desire, nay, the compulsion, to be righteous in and of ourselves. It is this compulsion that believers must strictly guard against, for it is this compulsion that is, perhaps, one of the most dangerous things in our lives.

It is this drive that stands ready to cause us to cause Our precious Father and our dear Lord great grief.

Dt. 25:17-19–Destroy the Amalekites!

17 “Remember what Amalek did to you on the way as you were coming out of Egypt, 18 how he met you on the way and attacked your rear ranks, all the stragglers at your rear, when you were tired and weary; and he did not fear God. 19 Therefore it shall be, when the Lord your God has given you rest from your enemies all around, in the land which the Lord your God is giving you to possess as an inheritance, that you will blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven. You shall not forget...

...This is, not to say of course, that individual Amalekites could not come to faith . There is always the problem of Old Testament versus New Testament back in that era; but the idea of salvation by grace alone through faith alone is one that is consistent throughout the entire Bible. It is not an idea that popped up in the New Testament and was foreign to the Old Testament.

     What God is speaking up here is the Amalekites as a nation. He is speaking of that nation as a group contrasted with the Israelites as a group. They were cursed and were to be treated in such a fashion compared with Israel who were blessed.

     Such a decision, admittedly is a "huge and momentous decision". But we must remember that that is not our decision! It is God's decision and it was made on what he considered to be a firm in adequate basis. You and I don't get to second guess that basis, no one does. He is God, the Ruler of all men, He gets to choose and to dispose of His creation as He sees fit and that is all there is to it. It doesn't have to be okay with anyone else.

Punishment for Gleaners?

You shall not muzzle an ox while it treads out the grain... (Dt. 25:4)

     It is interesting that this passage follows immediately after an extended passage about beating on brother with 40 stripes and no more. The fact of the matter is that it comes after Chapter 39, which speaks of someone gleaning from the field, grapes and wheat and such.

     Remember, that there were no chapter divisions originally. Thus, we see the command to allow such gleaning; as well as the constraint against someone going into another's fields and stealing from them.

     It makes perfect sense, then, for chapter 40 to begin with a just punishment for someone who wanted, indeed, steal from a landowner.

     It is, however, interesting to see that the Scripture is not entirely on the land owners side! (This is contrary to what most modern liberals would thank) because the thought that we are left with is that the landowner must allow the poor opportunity to go and feed themselves. Though the rich do indeed have recourse and can indeed punish those who steal from them, it is the poor who have the last thought of God's mind.

Who were the Hittites?

² “Moses My servant is dead. Now therefore, arise, go over this Jordan, you and all this people, to the land which I am giving to them—the children of Israel. ³ Every place that the sole of your foot will tread upon I have given you, as I said to Moses. ⁴ From the wilderness and this Lebanon as far as the great river, the River Euphrates, all the land of the Hittites, and to the Great Sea toward the going down of the sun, shall be your territory. (Joshua 1:2–4)

The Hittites were a great warlike people that occupied the mountain countries of south Canaan. The name may be used here of all the nations of Canaan, like the Amorites in other places. To be promised all their land must have encouraged the Israelites.

The Hittites in the Bible.
     When Sarah died, Abraham purchased the field of Machpelah with a burial cave from Ephron the Hittite (Gen. 23:10–20). This incident between a patriarch and a Hittite was followed later by Esau’s act of taking two Hittite women as wives (Gen. 26:34).

     Hittites were included among the peoples dwelling from the river of Egypt to the River Euphrates—the region promised to Abraham. Hittites also occupied the land of Canaan while the Israelites were in Egypt. They were among the people who had to be driven out when Israel conquered Canaan under Joshua (Ex. 3:8, 17; Deut. 7:1; Judg. 3:5).

     After the dissolution of the Hittite empire, remnants of the Hittites were particularly visible in Palestine during the reign of David. Ahimelech the Hittite was among the close associates and trusted companions of David during his flight from Saul (1 Sam. 26:6). The most famous of these later Hittites was Uriah, Bathsheba’s husband, whom David sent to his death to conceal his adultery with Uriah’s wife (2 Sam. 11:15). The northern border of Israel during David’s time was extended to the River Euphrates (2 Sam. 8:3) to include Syrian city-states. It is highly possible that “Hittites” of the Syrian region served in David’s administration (2 Sam. 8:17; 1 Kin. 4:3).

     Solomon had a Hittite wife (1 Kin. 11:1), apparently from a royal marriage to seal an alliance with a foreign power. After Solomon’s time, the “kings of the Hittites” were powerful rulers in Syria during the time when Judah and Israel existed as separate kingdoms (2 Kin. 7:6; 2 Chr. 1:17).

The Hittite Religion.
     The Hittites themselves described their array of pagan gods as “the thousand gods.” Among this diversity of deities, there were many names that were Hattic, Hurrian, Sumerian, and Canaanite in origin. The names of many gods occur in treaties of the Hittite people as guardian deities over the parties bound by treaty commitments. Each god was worshiped in its own native language. A storm god was the chief male god, and a solar goddess was his mistress.

     The Hittites may have been one of the pagan influences that pulled the nation of Israel away from worship of the one true God during its long history. Students of the Old Testament point out that the Hittites formed treaties with other countries long before the Hebrew people developed the consciousness of being a nation governed directly by God. Some scholars believe these treaties were used as a model for the covenant that God established with the Hebrews at Mt. Sinai

What is That to You?

20 Then Peter, turning around, saw the disciple whom Jesus loved following, who also had leaned on His breast at the supper, and said, “Lord, who is the one who betrays You?” 21 Peter, seeing him, said to Jesus, “But Lord, what about this man?”  22 Jesus said to him, “ If I will that he remain till I come, what is that to you? You follow Me.” (John 21:20-22)

     It is interesting that the disciples did not know that it had been Judas who betrayed Jesus. They knew that he had come in and that had been accompanied by the soldiers in the garden and had kissed Christ to identify Him, but they apparently did not realize that it had been he who had turned Him over, and had given him up.

     What seems obvious to us apparently was not obvious to them. Of course we have the benefit of having things written out for us in plain form, and we cannot understate the benefit of that! Also, they were not privy to his conversations with the Scribes and Pharisees, nor did they know that he had gone out and hung himself as a result of his private despair. It is interesting what man can "not see" given the proper circumstances.

     Jesus' reply to Peter and verse 22 is very interesting: He tells him that the way He deals with the betrayer is not Peter's business! The only thing that is Peter's concern is that Peter follow after him!

     I think that that's a bit of advice that we can all do to follow. Not that we should never be concerned with looking around us and seeing if there are those who are dangerous to the cause of Christ. But I think we could all do with a little bit more of seeing to it that we are walking with the word and a little bit less of putting our nose in other peoples business.