Hello, this will be a bit shorter today since I have a test soon!
So two thoughts from this chapter for today:
The focus of this chapter summarised by v. 1
A possible chiastic structure??
For thought one, I believe that this chapter can be summarised in one verse.
1 Therefore, having this ministry by the mercy of God, we do not lose heart.
2 Cor 4:1
Let’s go through Paul’s thoughts:
In the original section from the verse from v. 1 to v. 1-2; Paul states that despite people refusing to turn to Christ, they (Paul’s group) refuse to convince people through trickery.
In v. 7-12, Paul expands on trials and sufferings they’ve gone through for the sake of Christ
In v. 16-18, Paul once again repeats the statement to not lose heart. And provides further encouragement about the eventual return and transformation ( 1 Cor 15:50-53)
In summary of this passage, Paul says despite his difficulties with ministry, he does not lose heart, why? Because of the Spirit that He has provided us (v. 13).
Moving on to the second point. In the previous part of this post, I mentioned the way that Paul repeats the statement “we do not lose heart” from verses 1 and 16. So I tried googling it but didn’t find much luck except this.
I haven’t really read through it in depth but the author claims the center of the chiasm to be verses 13a and 13b.
13 Since we have the same spirit of faith according to what has been written, “I believed, and so I spoke,” we also believe, and so we also speak
2 Corinthians 4:13
If that is so, then how does the chapter follow?
Paul, as a minister of the Gospel, has faced many difficulties and trials
But, because of the Spirit of God that he has been provided, he does not lose heart
(This is part 2 because a 2 Cor 2 post already exists)
Hello guys. After sharing with a friend the post I wrote yesterday, I was reminded of why I decided to start this blog in the first place. Partly because I enjoy sharing the things I’ve been learning but also because it helps a bit as a spiritual discipline.
So although these short posts are not quite as exciting as my 1500 word ones on why I think lament is an important missed part of Christianity, I might try to do them a bit more.
I also mentioned a couple of months ago some other writing projects I had been working on which I had forgotten to share in my last post. But what I did was I worked on a series of posts with P2C-students going through 1 John very similarly to the stuff I’ve done on here before. You can check them out here!
Now, let’s move on to my observations from 2 Corinthians 3 for the day.
My first set of observations come from 2 Cor 3:5-6:
5 Not that we are sufficient in ourselves to claim anything as coming from us, but our sufficiency is from God, 6 who has made us sufficient to be ministers of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit. For the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.
2 Corinthians 3:5-7
There are two kind-of takeaways from this short passage.
The first is that God makes us sufficient (v. 5).
The second is that God makes us sufficient to be ministers (v.6).
And yes, I know that the ‘we’ that Paul uses in the text is probably referring to Paul’s group, but isn’t it true for us as well? Later in 2 Corinthians, Paul says to the church of Corinth:
8 And God is able to make all grace abound to you, so that having all sufficiency in all things at all times, you may abound in every good work.
2 Corinthians 9:8
Paul says that through God’s grace, you (the Corinthian church) can have sufficiency in every good work. Similarly, in 2 Timothy, Paul says that through scripture, the servant of God can be equipped for every good work.
16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.
2 Timothy 3:16-17
I think that is a very comforting thing to lean on. Even in our insecurities and our shortcomings and everything in between, we are sufficient for every good work. Not because of anything we have done or anything we can do but through the grace of God. So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God’s mercy.
As I read through my last post on 2 Cor 3, I realized that I talked a bit about this from last time but I believe it’s something worth revisiting. And that is the glory of the ministry of the Spirit. Paul first reiterates the glory of the first ministry—the ministry of death.
What does Paul have to say about it?
It was so great that the Israelites could not gaze at Moses’ face because of its glory (v. 7)
It was a ministry of condemnation (v. 9)
It was a glory that was temporary (v. 11)
Paul compares this to the second ministry, which:
Is a ministry of righteousness (v. 9)
Is a ministry that is permanent (v. 11)
Has a glory so great that the previous glory (of the ministry of death) will appear to have no glory at all! (v. 10)
But for this to make any sense at all, we must have knowledge in the glory of the first ministry. How can we do that? The only way is to read the very narrative that tells of this glory. We have to recall the way that God rescued his people and provided salvation. We have to review the stories where God teaches us not only what is good and true but also how to live. We have to re-read the stories where God proclaims that ‘man does not live on bread alone, but from every word that comes from the mouth of God.’
And once we have all those things in mind, then we can really appreciate the ministry of the spirit—which Paul deems to be even greater.
Someone told me I should stick with my old closing.
Hello, sorry for the long wait and not having written in a while. I actually was not planning to write today and almost convinced myself out of it considering the daunting backlog of possible topics and verses I have down in another draft but lo and behold, here I am.
There are two fun things that I would like to look at within 2 Corinthians 2 today.
The first is 2 Cor 2:5-11.
5 If anyone has caused grief, he has not so much grieved me as he has grieved all of you to some extent—not to put it too severely. 6 The punishment inflicted on him by the majority is sufficient. 7 Now instead, you ought to forgive and comfort him, so that he will not be overwhelmed by excessive sorrow. 8 I urge you, therefore, to reaffirm your love for him. 9 Another reason I wrote you was to see if you would stand the test and be obedient in everything. 10 Anyone you forgive, I also forgive. And what I have forgiven—if there was anything to forgive—I have forgiven in the sight of Christ for your sake, 11 in order that Satan might not outwit us. For we are not unaware of his schemes.
2 Corinthians 2:5-11 NIV
I think it’s easy to get to a section of scripture and have our first reaction be: what does this say about God? What does this say about me? What does this say about…
But as I read these couple of verses, my first thought that comes to mind is a class on Paul which I took last semester. And in it, one of my professors suggested that some people believe the person written in these verses is the same person who shows up in 1 Cor 5.
What strikes me about that is that the person who was written about here in 2 Corinthians 2 and the other person in 1 Corinthians 5, whether or not they’re the same person, is that they were real people. Paul was a real person and he wrote to other real people that they needed to find forgiveness in their hearts for whatever wrongs this person may have done. This is clearly something they struggled with and it’s unsurprisingly something we struggle with as well.
You don’t have to look deeply into this passage for what Paul is trying to teach. I’m sure you could spend hours dissecting the Greek and having a word study and you could find all sorts of theological truth but if we remember that Paul was a real person who wrote to other real people, his message is clear and simple. Forgiveness is hard and love is hard but you (the people of Corinth) can do it!
The second couple of verses that stood out to me were 2 Cor 2:14-16
14 But thanks be to God, who always leads us as captives in Christ’s triumphal procession and uses us to spread the aroma of the knowledge of him everywhere. 15 For we are to God the pleasing aroma of Christ among those who are being saved and those who are perishing. 16 To the one we are an aroma that brings death; to the other, an aroma that brings life. And who is equal to such a task?
2 Corinthians 2:14-16 NIV
I’ve included verses 14 and 16 simply for some additional context but the key phrase that has grabbed my attention is verse 15.
While I was doing some readings for my Dead Sea Scrolls class the other day, one thing stood out to me. This was the belief that the Qumran community saw themselves as an offering to God. They believed that righteous living was a sacrifice to God and justified this belief using Ezekiel 20:41:
41 I will accept you as fragrant incense when I bring you out from the nations and gather you from the countries where you have been scattered, and I will be proved holy through you in the sight of the nations.
Ezekiel 20:41 NIV
41 As a pleasing aroma I will accept you, when I bring you out from the peoples and gather you out of the countries where you have been scattered. And I will manifest my holiness among you in the sight of the nations.
Ezekiel 20:41 ESV
(I’ve included both versions to show I am not just manipulating the translations)
This seems pretty similar to the language that Paul uses in 2 Corinthians 2 when he says that we (I’m not completely sure if the we is believers or Paul’s group) are to God the pleasing aroma of Christ. So I just wonder if Paul is saying that he (we?) are sacrifices to God through the way we “spread the aroma of knowledge of him everywhere” (v. 14).
If you are not sure what ‘aroma’ has to with the sacrifices, read: Gen 8:21, Exodus 29:18, or you can just take a look over here.
I have not posted in a while, and did not really intend to post today either but I was inspired so I have no choice but to write.
A quick update on why I haven’t been posting:
Pretty busy with summer school
Have been working on some other writing projects (dunno if I’ll share them here but if you are interested, let me know!)
Have been struggling a bit keeping on track with devotions
Putting those aside, I’m going to move on to the real reason I have come here today: to talk about Romans 5:20.
I think most of us have heard this verse before:
Now the law came in to increase the trespass, but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more
Romans 5:20
It’s usually a verse we warn people to be wary of because it’s easily used out of context (although I’ve never actually heard it sincerely used out of context), so it’s usually quoted alongside Romans 6:1-2
What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound? By no means! How can we who died to sin still live in it?
Romans 6:1-2
But today, I want to look at Romans 5:20.
As I was reflecting on some of my own sins today, two thoughts came to mind (and I’ll explain their relationship a bit later):
A picture or post or something on Facebook a couple days ago I saw that talked about how people shouldn’t be leaving their church on Sunday mornings feeling good about themselves but rather, feeling bad about their depravity (something along those lines)
Romans 5:20
So the first thing that that sort of came up in this reflection time was this random thing on Facebook that I saw a couple of days ago. I didn’t put much thought into it at the time.
And although I was not strongly agreeing or disagreeing with such a statement at the time, further reflection has changed that. It’s easy to look at those kinds of things and think: yeah, for sure. Makes sense. Why? Because it’s counter-cultural. Because it challenges the status quo. Because We’ve been taught that the solution to a liberal and uncaring culture of ‘pop-culture Christianity’ is to go so far in the other direction that the focus of our faith no longer becomes about the glory of God but the depravity of man.
Is man depraved and full of sin? Are we selfish, greedy, and do we often look only to our own desires? Yes, yes, and yes. It doesn’t take long for someone who’s reading the Bible for the first time to realize that. We have an entire set of 39 (or more, depending on who you ask) books before Jesus’s arrival. And what is it full of? Imperfect people, sin, betrayal, and a complete departure from God’s intended world, aside from a few noteworthy individuals. We flip to the new testament, 27 more books, and what do we get? A pretty similar picture: imperfect people, sin, betrayal, and a departure from God’s intended world, aside from a few noteworthy individuals.
But if that’s all we take away from the text, then we’ve completely missed the story. Most people reading this will probably think: well duh, you didn’t mention anything about Jesus! But, isn’t that the same thing when we tell ourselves that it’s better to walk out of church feeling guilty for our sins rather than basking in the glory of God’s forgiveness and hope?
I really do hope that as we walk into church and hear our pastors preach, we get an understanding of our sin – that we acknowledge it, and we recognize our powerlessness to it. But if that’s all we take away, then we’ve missed the point. The message of the gospel isn’t that we are depraved: that’s only a half of it. The full message is that despite that, God has chosen to make us his people.
They have made me jealous with what is no god; they have provoked me to anger with their idols. So I will make them jealous with those who are no people; I will provoke them to anger with a foolish nation.
Deuteronomy 32:21
Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be like the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured or numbered. And in the place where it was said to them, “You are not my people,” it shall be said to them, “Children of the living God.”
Hosea 1:10
The beauty of the gospel is that he has made us, ‘those who are no people,’ into ‘children of the living God.’ And that should drive us into joy and celebration as we leave the church (on Sunday morning) – we who once had no inheritance, are now given the opportunity to have a memorial and name better than sons and daughters of Israel (Isaiah 56:5). The last thing we should be feeling is guilty and a sense of failure – if that’s the case, we’re only telling half the story.
So drawing all of this back, how does this all relate to Romans 5:20? Let’s read it again: ‘Now the law came in to increase the trespass, but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more’ (Romans 5:20).
How amazing is that to read? No matter how many times we sin, fail, fall short or even betray God, grace abounds more. And once we look past the technicality that yes, it does not mean we sin more, or sin freely, or even endorse sin, it does mean that we can appreciate the beauty that where sin increases, grace abounds all the more.
And what does that mean for us? It means that when we do fall short, when we do fail, when we do sin, we should repent. But what else does it also mean? It means that in those moments of failure, we also celebrate the mercy, the forgiveness, the love, and the glory of God – that despite our sin, God not only promises to take us in, make us his children, and transform us to be vessels of his glory, but even through that sin, God will be glorified. Because where sin increases, grace abounds all the more.
And as I finish off writing this post, it becomes a very testament to the beauty of Romans 5:20. Because as I write this, I acknowledge that I am a sinner. I’ve fallen short, I’ve betrayed God, I’ve traded eternal rewards for temporal ones many times over, and despite this, God will continue to use me, in all of my brokenness, for his glory.
It’s been quite a while since I put anything up. A while ago I was reading through Revelation and through the last couple chapters (21-22), I saw some extraordinary connections between the images used in these last two chapters and a lot of stuff that goes on in the old testament. Hope its of interest and shows the whole ‘one story’ aspect of the Bible!
God’s dwelling place (21:3)
They will be his people and YHWH will be their God (21:3)
No more tears (21:4)
Three tribes on each of the gates (21:12-13)
Pure gold (21:18, 21)
12 Precious stones (21:19-20)
Tree and river of life (22:2)
Conclusion
Questions
As I’m going through these, I’ve probably missed some, so if you know any more or know the answers to some of the questions I have at the end, please let me know!!!!
The first thing I wanted to take a look at was the phrase in Rev 21:3:
And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Behold, the dwelling place of God is with man. He will dwell with them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them as their God…”
Revelation 21:3
Although there’s two parts of this verse I want to take a look at, first I want to focus on the ‘dwelling’ aspect. It’s a pretty big one.
Now, there are a LOT of instances of God dwelling among his people. And this is really significant, because it reveals to us the final fulfillment of God dwelling with man in the image of Revelation. It’s the climax of what it means for God to dwell with man.
FIRST, we have the dwelling which occurs in Exodus. Where God dwells in the tabernacle:
And let them make me a sanctuary, that I may dwell in their midst.
Exodus 25:8
I will dwell among the people of Israel and will be their God
Exodus 29:45
Even MORE interestingly, is the tie between God dwelling with his people and him being their God (which also shows up in the Rev 21:3 verse). Something else to also take note of to is the imagery we will see in all of these passages where it is always God coming DOWN to dwell with us (and that should be in our minds as we also read Revelation that it is God and this new city of Jerusalem that comes DOWN).
I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s more instances throughout the prophets and Deuteronomistic history BUT I’m not too familiar with those instances so I’m going to skip straight to Jesus. Which lo and behold is another instance of God coming down to dwell with his people:
And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.
John 1:14
And if we keep going and read into the Pauline Epistles, we see the same pattern. God (as the Holy Spirit) comes to dwell with/in his people.
Do you not know that you are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit dwells in you?
1 Corinthians 3:16
If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit who dwells in you.
Romans 8:11
And so, keeping in mind this imagery and language used, there is an understanding that God has always dwelt and will always dwell with his people. And yet, at the same time, there is an even greater and more marvelous dwelling that is to come.
Continuing on, there is the phrase “they will be his people, and God himself will be with them as their God” (Rev 21:3). Because I’ve already gone over that phrase before here (and there’s a quite a lot of stuff there), I’m not going go through all of it again but as we read those words, we recognize them as God’s fulfillment of the restoration of his people.
And again, part of that is fulfilled in Christ and the Holy Spirit. But again, similar to the imagery of God dwelling with his people, not only is there a previous and partial fulfillment(s) but also a final and complete fulfillment to come: which is what we witness in Revelation 21.
I think I’ve also covered this one. I only mentioned it briefly so I’ll state it again here but Revelation 21:4 is basically a reference back to Isaiah 25:8 where God promises to one day wipe away death and tears.
He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away.”
Revelation 21:4
He will swallow up death forever; and the Lord God will wipe away tears from all faces, and the reproach of his people he will take away from all the earth, for the Lord has spoken.
Isaiah 25:8
Again, another ‘final fulfillment’ which takes place in Revelation 21.
It had a great, high wall, with twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels, and on the gates the names of the twelve tribes of the sons of Israel were inscribed—on the east three gates, on the north three gates, on the south three gates, and on the west three gates.
Revelation 21:12-13
3 names in each of the cardinal directions. Seems kind of random, right? Well, no. it’s a direct drawback to numbers 2, where God tells the Israelites how he wants the camp to be organized…(and I said in my post that there was ‘nothing profound’ in Numbers 2: WRONG).
Because I cannot post the entirety of chapter 2 here, I’m going to take the pictures I put in my previous post and just provide a link to Numbers 2 (the relevant verses are 1-31 so you should just read the entire chapter).
Okay, so Revelation has this city of New Jerusalem mirroring the setup that God wanted for some tents in Numbers. What’s the big deal?
Let me continue…
Another seemingly insignificant detail of Revelation: the ‘pure gold’ which shows up in verses 18 and 21. Some people might hear this and correlate the gold with money or value, stating how this gold shows how heaven is super valuable or whatever. There’s probably some aspect of gold that relates to prosperity, but what if I told you there was a a way more interesting and meaningful meaning behind this ‘pure gold.’ And where do we find it? You guessed it: OLD TESTAMENT. Particularly Exodus. If you have the time of two seconds to click this link, you’ll see that this phrase ‘pure gold’ shows up 42 times in Exodus (according to the ESV), and what is a majority of it regarding?
The items in the tabernacle. The lamp stand, table, the ark, the altar…all of them overlaid with pure gold.
They shall make an ark of acacia wood. Two cubits and a half shall be its length, a cubit and a half its breadth, and a cubit and a half its height. You shall overlay it with pure gold, inside and outside shall you overlay it, and you shall make on it a molding of gold around it.
Exodus 25:10-11
You shall make a table of acacia wood. Two cubits shall be its length, a cubit its breadth, and a cubit and a half its height. You shall overlay it with pure gold and make a molding of gold around it.
Exodus 25:23-24
You shall make a lampstand of pure gold. The lampstand shall be made of hammered work: its base, its stem, its cups, its calyxes, and its flowers shall be of one piece with it.
Exodus 25:31
You shall make an altar on which to burn incense; you shall make it of acacia wood. A cubit shall be its length, and a cubit its breadth. It shall be square, and two cubits shall be its height. Its horns shall be of one piece with it. You shall overlay it with pure gold, its top and around its sides and its horns. And you shall make a molding of gold around it.
Exodus 30:1-3
So the New City draws back to tabernacle and the setup in numbers, what’s the big deal? Another book that actually helps complete our understanding is Hebrews. A book that refers to all the stuff that happens in Torah: the sacrifices, the priests, the tent, etc. It actually answers it for us:
Thus it was necessary for the copies of the heavenly things to be purified with these rites, but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf.
Hebrews 9:23-24
Why is there so many similarities between this image we see in the wilderness? Because that image of the tents and the tabernacle is a ‘copy’ of what’s in heaven. So when we look at Revelation and see all these connections and similarities, it’s not a coincidence. In the Revelation 21 image, it’s again the idea of the ‘final fulfillment.’ We had the previous tabernacle, made by human hands. But that was a simply a shadow of the things to come, because on the day that God comes down with this new city, He will be bringing down the REAL tabernacle, one not made by human hands, and it will be the final fulfillment of what the tabernacle was meant to symbolize those 40 years in the desert.
The next thing to look at is the list of jewels that are listed in verses 19-20. Again, some people might mention this as a sign of prosperity or value. WRONG. These are not random gemstones but the gems that show up in Exodus on the priestly garments. They are representations of the twelve tribes.
The foundations of the wall of the city were adorned with every kind of jewel. The first was jasper, the second sapphire, the third agate, the fourth emerald, the fifth onyx, the sixth carnelian, the seventh chrysolite, the eighth beryl, the ninth topaz, the tenth chrysoprase, the eleventh jacinth, the twelfth amethyst.
Revelation 21:19-21
You shall set in it four rows of stones. A row of sardius, topaz, and carbuncle shall be the first row; and the second row an emerald, a sapphire, and a diamond; and the third row a jacinth, an agate, and an amethyst; and the fourth row a beryl, an onyx, and a jasper. They shall be set in gold filigree. There shall be twelve stones with their names according to the names of the sons of Israel. They shall be like signets, each engraved with its name, for the twelve tribes.
Exodus 28:17-21
(If you actually look through it, you’ll notice that a few are different. This Wikipedia article offers some explanation, but even just taking my word for it, the relative similarity and the fact that it’s another connection to Exodus should ring some alarm bells)
This is a pretty important detail because all throughout the prophets, we see prophecies of the restoration of Israel and its people. How God will draw them back into the land of Israel (i.e. Ezekiel 37:11-14). Well, there was a partial fulfillment in Jesus (Matthew 27:51-53) BUT there is also a final fulfillment. And where does it take place? (I’m hoping you’ve figured out the theme by now).
The last thing I wanted to mention was the beginning of Revelation 22. Where we have the ‘river of the water of life’ (v. 2) and the ‘tree of life’ (v. 3). We’ve gone through Jesus, the prophets, and the Exodus. Now we are going full circle, because these lines about the new city go straight to back to Genesis.
Eden has both these two things:
A river flowed out of Eden to water the garden, and there it divided and became four rivers.
Genesis 2
And out of the ground the Lord God made to spring up every tree that is pleasant to the sight and good for food. The tree of life was in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
Genesis 2:9
So this imagery that is provided in Revelation 21—not only is it the fulfillment of all the things we’ve just seen. But it’s also the final fulfillment of the redemption of the fall. He’s going back all the way to the beginning and he’s going to redeem even that first act of rebellion that started it all, and he is making a new Eden. It adds yet another layer of imagery on what it means for God to dwell with man: Eden.
One interesting theory that has been brought up is that the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and the tree of life is the same tree. Maybe it’s true, maybe it isn’t. But let’s entertain the idea for a second. Let’s assume it is and that the tree of life was the tree that brought sin and evil into the world. That would make these verses in Revelation 22 even MORE significant. Why? Read this:
through the middle of the street of the city; also, on either side of the river, the tree of life with its twelve kinds of fruit, yielding its fruit each month. The leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.
Revelation 22:2
Because it would mean that same tree that ended up cursing humanity—it’s the same tree in Revelation that will bring ‘healing of the nations.’ God redeems even the tree that started it all.
So in conclusion: what does this image of New Jerusalem in Revelation 21 represent?
It is both the final fulfillment and redemption of all that God has done and promised.
Some questions I had while reading that I have yet to figure out:
Why is there such an emphasis on Jasper throughout the description of Revelation 21? It shows up way more times than the other gemstones and is the material of the walls (v. 18)
Why twelves pearls on the twelve gates? (v.21), is PEARLS a hyperlink?
Why is there a temple that is described in Ezekiel’s vision (Ezekiel 40-41) but Revelation states there is no temple because God and Jesus are the temple?
Again, if you’ve figured out these questions OR have any other observations that I’ve missed, please let me know!!!!
I hope you’ve enjoyed reading this as much as I’ve enjoyed writing this.
Thanks for sticking around, and I hope you all stay cool
Disclaimer: this is 6.1 because I accidentally set the last one as 6 before changing it to 5 so the URL says 6 and so I’m making this 6.1 so URL links don’t get messed up as I have no idea what happens when you make two posts with the same title!!!!
Hi guys, it’s been a while since I have posted but just have been really busy with school and other projects. Not going to be wordy so just going to head straight into it:
Spiritual and religious, relationship and worship
Six woes of Isaiah (Isaiah 5) and six woes of Pharisees (Matthew 23)
Matthew 12:43-45
Isaiah 25:8
Isaiah 29:18-19
Wrestling with God
First thing I wanted to talk about was part of some thoughts I had when I watched a video by Dr. Brandt Pitre titled “Spiritual but not Religious,” in which he does a quick study on James 1, specifically regarding these couple verses:
If anyone thinks he is religious and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his heart, this person’s religion is worthless. Religion that is pure and undefiled before God the Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world.
James 1:26-27
Now, at the time of me writing this post, it’s been a couple weeks since I’ve watched the video so my recollections are probably not picture perfect but he talks about the idea of spiritual and religious. Relationship and worship. Because, as he (might’ve?) pointed out in the video, people get stuck on the extremes. Either you are a ritualistic follower who performs the necessary sacraments (spiritual) with no interest in justice or you are a person who does takes care of the orphan, alien, and widow (religious) but is lacking in regards to sacraments. And protestants have something similar, but instead of calling it spiritual and religious, they like to call it relationship and religion. Where they define relationship as ‘a personal devotion to God,’ and religion as ‘thetasks you’re supposed to do.’
And I think the question is “Doesn’t God desire both?” Does God not desire people to worship him both through the sacraments and through justice? Does doing one mean neglecting the other? Now look at relationship and worship: does God desire his people to simply stay in the comfort of their homes and praying to him? Or does he desire more? Would it not please God more pray from our homes and go out and do all the tasks he sets us out to do?
This was a teaching I heard a while ago on BEMA and although I’ve struggled to find any external sources on it but I guess I’ll share it anyway because I enjoyed it.
Basically it involves two passages: Isaiah 5:8-22 and Matthew 23:1-29, in which we have the ‘six woes’ to Israel and the ‘seven woes’ to the Pharisees. Because I do not think it makes any sense to quote entire chapters of books, I will simply attach the links to the Bible Gateway pages for those chapters and let you look it up yourself.
(tip: using ctrl + F helps a lot)
So what Marty Solomon teaches is this: the fact that Isaiah has six woes and Matthew has seven woes is not by chance, those numbers (and the succession of woes) have relevance. I’ve actually looked it up, and if I didn’t mess up, the only other place where we have such a long string of ‘woes’ is Habakkuk (where we count five) towards the Chaledeans.
The entire idea rests on the Jewish idea of seven. If you’re familiar with the creation story, you’ll know that it says that God finished creating the word on the seventh day and thus, seven symbolizes completion. And so, when Jesus accuses the Pharisees of seven woes…it’s not just a number that he randomly picked but a reference to ‘completion’ – that whatever transgressions their fathers had done (as referenced in the seventh woe; Matthew 23:30-32), they had ‘completed and perfected it.’
EDIT: this was not part of the original thought but as I’m writing, the parable of the tenants come up (Matthew 21:33-46) which connects to this thought. Because in the same way that the fathers shed the blood of the prophets (Matthew 23:30-31), they complete and ‘fill up…the measure of [their] fathers.’ (Matthew 23:32) How? by doing the same to the son of the master of the house.
I remember reading this passage but not really getting it until recently:
“When the unclean spirit has gone out of a person, it passes through waterless places seeking rest, but finds none. Then it says, ‘I will return to my house from which I came.’ And when it comes, it finds the house empty, swept, and put in order. Then it goes and brings with it seven other spirits more evil than itself, and they enter and dwell there, and the last state of that person is worse than the first. So also will it be with this evil generation.”
Matthew 12:43-45
I read it and wondered, ‘how is this helpful?’ It tells us that a spirit was in a person, left, and then returned but it doesn’t tell us how to stop that spirit from staying gone?
I think the answer lies in verse 44 which says that the spirit came back, where he found it ‘empty, swept, and put in order.’ There’s a connotation that this person is ‘vacant,’ and therefore free real estate. How can we prevent the return of the spirit???
We must prevent the vacancy!!! How can we do that? By replacing this unclean spirit with another spirit (the Holy Spirit, if this needed clarification) which will occupy the space and keep such spirits out!
So while I was reading Isaiah, I stumbled upon this interesting verse:
He will swallow up death forever; and the Lord God will wipe away tears from all faces, and the reproach of his people he will take away from all the earth, for the Lord has spoken.
Isaiah 25:8
Why is it interesting? Because it parallels this verse in Revelation 21 pretty explicitly:
He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away.”
Revelation 21:4
And so when we read Revelation 21 and have in mind that there’s an allusion to Isaiah 25, by understanding the story that is being told in Isaiah, we’re able to form a fuller picture of what God is will do in that day of ‘a new heaven and earth.’
This one I actually read today as I was going through my devotions:
In that day the deaf shall hear the words of a book, and out of their gloom and darkness the eyes of the blind shall see. The meek shall obtain fresh joy in the Lord, and the poor among mankind shall exult in the Holy One of Israel.
Isaiah 29:18-19
If you’ve read through the gospels, these ‘events’ (the deaf hear, the blind see, the poor ‘exult in the Holy One of Israel’ ) show up when John the Baptist’s disciples ask Jesus if he is ‘the one to come.’ His response:
And Jesus answered them, “Go and tell John what you hear and see: the blind receive their sight and the lame walk, lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear, and the dead are raised up, and the poor have good news preached to them. And blessed is the one who is not offended by me.”
Matthew 11:4-6
And so when Jesus tells John’s disciples these things, it’s not just a random list of miracles that he’s done but a reference to scripture…And what happens prior to verses 18-19?
And the Lord said: “Because this people draw near with their mouth and honor me with their lips, while their hearts are far from me, and their fear of me is a commandment taught by men, therefore, behold, I will again do wonderful things with this people, with wonder upon wonder; and the wisdom of their wise men shall perish, and the discernment of their discerning men shall be hidden.”
Isaiah 29:13-14
Seem relevant to the time/people that Jesus was speaking to?
People that draw near to God and honor him with their lips while their hearts are far from him ✔️
Fear of God is a commandment taught by men ✔️
Doing a wonderful things with this people again ✔️
Wonder upon wonder ✔️
Wisdom of their wise men shall perish and the discerning men shall be hidden ✔️
The last thing I wanted to talk about today is a reference to a Desiring God article I read about a year ago. It’s probably one of my favorite articles on there just because of how much truth it speaks. I think it’s similar to the lament one where it feels like there’s so much misconceptions regarding how we ought to be before God. I’ve probably already talked about it before on here or in real life so you’ll probably hear some repeat ideas but it’s something I think is really important.
Similar to my post on lament, there seems to be the idea that we should just be content. We should just content with all the answers that God gives us and just be content in every situation. And although I agree to some extent that we should be grateful and learn to be content in all things, I think the overemphasis on being content without the acknowledgement of wrestling does not accurately portray the people in the text.
Even just the examples from the article:
Moses: wrestled with God on that mountain in Exodus 33-34 when he asked God to relent his judgement
Jacob: (literally) wrestled with God and he was blessed by him (Genesis 32: 24-29)
David: wrestled with God when he did so in fasting and prayer when his child with Bathsheba was ill (2 Samuel 12:16-20)
Paul: even when he is content with weakness, it’s not without wrestling, he says he pleaded three times (2 Cor 12:8-10)
And interestingly enough, sometimes God answers those pleads and prayers, and sometimes he doesn’t. But nowhere do we see people who are content without struggling, wrestling, and pleading. I believe these stories are here for a reason; it’s possible for someone to both be ‘a man after God’s own heart’ and still plead in sadness and frustration before God. Don’t believe me? Read the Psalms.
The very nation of Israel is named after Jacob’s wrestling in Genesis 32. The name literally means “to wrestle with God,” and so we see that reflected in the Bible; Israel, as both a nation, and as individuals are in constant wrestling with God.
This wrestling, just as much as being content, draws us equally close to God. It is just as considerable as worship, because as the person in the article writes…”When we wrestle, we believe that our cries and prayers matter. We have hope that our situation will change. We are fully engaged.”
(If I have the time, maybe I’ll do a full post on this)
Haven’t had a chance to write in a while, super busy with summer school! But here is a post on one of the most confusing events in Jesus’ ministry: his baptism.
If you’re like me, you’ve probably read it wondering, “why does Jesus need to be baptized?” or “what does it mean that ‘it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness.'” (Matthew 3:15). It’s been something that has eluded me but pretty recently, I stumbled upon a couple of videos by Dr. Brant Pitre: here, here, and here which explain its significance. He does this by diving into old testament, and giving us an image of what Jesus’ baptism is meant to symbolize.
If you have 20 minutes to watch them, I’d definitely recommend you do so! I’ll touch on most of his work in this post but obviously, my rephrasing of his content won’t nearly be as clear as his.
First, I think it’d be valuable to look into what baptism is. Although there is the baptism of John in the first few chapters of each of the gospels, it isn’t particularly helpful because it’s actually the first time baptism shows up (specifically in Matthew).
Despite this, a cleansing by water was nothing new in Judaism. Jews, prior to entering the temple would sometimes go through a ritualistic cleansing through a special bath called a mikveh. It was also done for converts, required full immersion, and could only be done using ‘living water,’ water that came from a natural water source. So while ‘baptism’ as we know it was a new concept to the early Jewish believers, cleansing by immersion through water was not.
John’s baptism is somewhat similar to these Mikveh cleansings, Acts refers to it as a ‘baptism of repentance’ (Acts 19:4). It’s essentially a cleansing that would allow for one to be right with God. And although its not the baptism that we face (source: Acts 19), it still doesn’t answer the question of why Jesus had to be baptized if he had nothing to repent or ‘change his mind’ about. Following the words of Marty Solomon, “it’s (probably) in the text.”
I stand by the belief that the best way to understand the gospels is not to read Paul, but Torah. So today, we will be looking into Torah (and a bit beyond), to show that Jesus’ baptism was not done simply ‘as an example’ but that in the perspective of a first century Jew, there were very significant things that Jesus’ baptism would have communicated. And no, I will not be looking into the intricacies into the significance of baptism and how it should be done, despite what these last 2-3 paragraphs may have suggested!
There are a couple important points that Dr. Brant Pitre points out in Jesus’ baptism:
The geography of the baptism
The significance of the imagery of the Holy Spirit as a dove
Jesus being ‘anointed with the Holy Spirit’
Jesus as the New Isaac
The first thing that Dr. Pitre points out is the significance of the location of the baptism. It’s something that’s easy to overlook because we are accustomed to skipping over the finer details in favor of the larger story arc but it’s through those very intricate details that the gospel writers often use to tell a larger story.
The most significant allusion to a river shows up in the Exodus – not the book but the event. Although we often recall the escape from Egypt, the crossing of the red sea, and the 40 years in the wilderness, we may forget the events that happen right after: the entry in the promised land and the ‘end’ of the Exodus. If you are familiar with the book of Joshua, you’ll recall in Joshua 3 that the Israelites separate the waters of a certain river, cross over that river, and finally ‘enter’ the promised land, signalling the ‘end’ of the Exodus.
A second pretty significant event also happens with a river that is absurdly similar to this prior story, it is with Elijah, after he anoints Elisha to be his successor, prior to his ascent in 2 Kings 2, he also goes to a certain river, separates its waters and crosses it, and ascends to heaven by means of a chariot of fire.
If we are familiar with all of these stories we’ll realize that it’s not just any river that all of these events happen but one and the same: the River Jordan. Thus, when we read that Jesus’ baptism took place not just at any other river but the Jordan, it should draw our minds to these two events. It tells us that Jesus’ baptism is supposed to allude to some sort of New Exodus. Recall the exodus of the Israelites; they were free from Egypt, but still stuck in the wilderness. They were stuck in the wilderness, but still awaited the final salvation to come: the promised land of Canaan. Are we not in the same way? Free from the powers of the present world, of sin and evil, but still stuck in the wilderness, still awaiting a final salvation and promised land to come?
And so Dr. Pitre says that on one hand, we have the allusion to Joshua 3 as signalling a New Exodus, but it doesn’t end there. We also have the allusion to Elijah in 2 Kings 2, showing us where exactly this New Exodus is supposed to take us:
And as they still went on and talked, behold, chariots of fire and horses of fire separated the two of them. And Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven.
2 Kings 2:11
The second thing that he points out is all the allusions that are drawn from the Holy Spirit—you may have wondered at some point: why does Matthew 3:16 describe the Holy Spirit as ‘like a dove.’ And if you haven’t, I hope you’ve started! Because again, it is one of those minor details that we probably remember, but overlook. If you are familiar with Torah, it doesn’t take much to remember where a dove first shows up: in the story of Noah. The dove is the second bird that Noah sends out, it’s the one who finds an olive leaf and signals to Noah that the flood is finally subsiding. The parallels are endless: the flood cleansing the world of wickedness and Jesus doing the same, the ark as the salvation from God’s judgement and Jesus doing the same, the dove as the symbol for a New Creation and the Holy Spirit doing the same. Dr. Pitre points out these parallels: how in the same way that the olive tree emerges from the waters of death, Jesus emerges from the waters of baptism, both with a dove descending and both signalling the beginning of a New Creation. But this time, instead of a flood cleansing the world, it will be through the baptism of Jesus, “not through the waters of baptism in the River Jordan primarily, [but] through his baptism in blood on the cross at Calvary.“
And yet another image of the Holy Spirit hovering over a body of water and alluding to a New Creation shows up also in Genesis 1 (which I found in the comments to his video, LOL):
The earth was without form and void, and darkness was over the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters
Genesis 1:2
What happens in Genesis 1? Creation, what happens in the baptism of Jesus? a New Creation.
Additionally, another image that the Holy Spirit descending on Jesus alludes to is the anointing of David. Acts 10:38 ties Jesus’ baptism and anointing together:
You know what has happened throughout the province of Judea, beginning in Galilee after the baptism that John preached—how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and power, and how he went around doing good and healing all who were under the power of the devil, because God was with him.
Acts 10:38
So Samuel took the horn of oil and anointed him in the presence of his brothers, and from that day on the Spirit of the Lord came powerfully upon David. Samuel then went to Ramah.
1 Samuel 16:13 NIV
But instead of Jesus being anointed with oil like David, Jesus is anointed with the Holy Spirit. It fulfills Jesus’ role as the Messiah/Christ/the anointed one and puts him as the king over Israel.
Lastly, Dr. Pitre points out the allusion as Jesus as the ‘new Isaac.’ The parallels are fairly obvious that we don’t even need to look at the language that the gospel of Matthew attempts to use but Dr. Pitre points them out anyway, pointing out the phrase of a ‘beloved son’ in Matthew 3:17, which would likely draw first-century Jews to the original ‘beloved son’:
After these things God tested Abraham and said to him, “Abraham!” And he said, “Here I am.” He said, “Take your son, your only son Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains of which I shall tell you.
Genesis 22:1-2
and now to the story of Isaac, specifically the one that happens in Genesis 22: God asks Abraham to sacrifice his son, Abraham obliges, but God stops him before he does and fulfills Abraham’s words: “God will provide for himself the lamb for a burnt offering” (Genesis 22:8).
Jesus acts as both Isaac and the ram—he is both the beloved son that the father is willing to sacrifice and the offering that God provides.
So to answer the question, “why does Jesus need to be baptized?”
Hey friends!! Motivation has been basically non-existent but I haven’t posted in a while so I’m just going to make a short post on 1 John 2 :).
Today:
Whoever says “I know him” but does not keep his commandments is a liar (1 John 2:3-6)
Whoever hates his brother is in the darkness (1 John 2:9-11)
Who was not of us? (1 John 2:18-19)
No one should teach us? (1 John 2:27)
So one thing I really liked as I was going through 1 John was just how direct John is throughout the letter. Unlike Paul, who goes through endless amounts of theology and rhetoric to get a point across (which I do enjoy, all love for my brother Paul), John is straight to the point: this is what you have to do, this is how you are supposed to live.
And this is how we are supposed to live:
And by this we know that we have come to know him, if we keep his commandments. Whoever says “I know him” but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him, but whoever keeps his word, in him truly the love of God is perfected. By this we may know that we are in him: whoever says he abides in him ought to walk in the same way in which he walked.
1 John 2:3-6
By following his commandments and walking the way he walked. And no, this has nothing to do with’works or whatever but this is how John says authentic faith looks like. If you asked him what a person who ‘knows God’ looked like – this is it. It’s that simple!!!!!! (of course it’s not really that simple because now we have to figure out what his commandments were and all that jazz. Sigh)
Lately, I’ve heard a lot about unity in the church. It seems like a pretty important. Paul talks a about it quite a bit, (but mostly in riddles, so who can understand that guy?)
Well John takes it and makes it an ever bigger deal. He says that whoever hates his brother is still in darkness.
Whoever says he is in the light and hates his brother is still in darkness. Whoever loves his brother abides in the light, and in him there is no cause for stumbling. But whoever hates his brother is in the darkness and walks in the darkness, and does not know where he is going, because the darkness has blinded his eyes.
1 John 2:9-11
I don’t know about you but that sounds pretty bad to me. Verse 11 uses a metaphor – someone who hates his brother is blind and does not know where he is going. That doesn’t seem great.
“If the fruit you produce leads to contempt for your brother, then you clearly haven’t seen the light, you are still in darkness.”
On one hand, there is the call to examine ourselves – are we that person? Yet on the other hand, its stresses the importance of unity to these early church leaders. If you happen to read through the first two epistles of John, you’ll see how often he’ll say he’s ‘repeating this old commandment’ and it’s the exact same commandment every time – love one another.
(As I read this, maybe I stretched on the unity aspect and it’s more about love than unity, and I guess that’s a fair criticism so if you want, you may replace all my ‘unity’s with ‘love’ and I hope it still gives off the same vibe)
So this verse is pretty interesting:
Children, it is the last hour, and as you have heard that antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come. Therefore we know that it is the last hour. They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out, that it might become plain that they all are not of us.
1 John 2:18-19
Why is it interesting? Well, it’s often used as a verse to say that people who leave the faith were never of us in the first place used in support of the idea of ‘perseverance of the saints.’
And well, although I’m not quite interested in expanding on that topic today, I thought it’d be quite interesting to look at the context of the passage. Two things stick out
There are multiple ‘antichrists’
The people who went out is not EVERY person who leaves but the ‘antichrists’
And to be fair, I guess you could totally make a point that antichrist is anyone who leaves the faith and make sense of the passage that way. But I also wonder if that at the time of this writing, John has certain people he has in mind as the ‘antichrists’ that he could be referring to. I think the passage is quite vague that it’s difficult to use this as a blanket statement that all people who leave the faith were simply ‘not of us.’
The second thing that is quite interesting is that it kind of refutes the idea of the ‘singular antichrist’ at the end of the world (at least in the way John uses it) because John seems to use the word as a group or a type of people that apostatize. Which is a bit different than sometimes advertised (although, I’m not sure if this is used as a proof text for that). I don’t know about eschatology to have any strong sway either way. Was just a thought.
That’s all for this section.
As I end off this post, I just wanted to look at this verse:
But the anointing that you received from him abides in you, and you have no need that anyone should teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about everything, and is true, and is no lie—just as it has taught you, abide in him.
1 John 2:27
Now this is pretty crazy. Apparently his anointing is sufficient and teaches us everything such that should ‘have no need that anyone should teach [us]’. First off, it’s pretty obvious he’s talking about the anointing us through the Holy Spirit (okay, maybe not that obvious). The anointing is pretty significant though – who else gets anointed??? Priests when they are ordained:
And you shall set the turban on his head and put the holy crown on the turban. You shall take the anointing oil and pour it on his head and anoint him. Then you shall bring his sons and put coats on them, and you shall gird Aaron and his sons with sashes and bind caps on them. And the priesthood shall be theirs by a statute forever. Thus you shall ordain Aaron and his sons.
Exodus 29:6-9
I’m not gonna post the 1 Peter 2 reference about us being a kingdom of priests because you can look that up on your own, so back to the not having a need for people to teach us. It’s kind of ironic though if you think about it because his teaching is literally not needing others to teach. HEy, wait a second…Maybe there’s more to it? :O
I read an article or two that as we read it, we must remember the context of the false teachers/antichrists that go back from v. 18 onward. He even states in v. 26 that he writes ‘these things to you about those who are trying to deceive you.’ So there seems to be a likelihood that he is not saying we will know absolutely everything through the Holy Spirit, but that we will be able to discern these teachings of false prophets and be able to see truth.
I’m tired and it seems reasonable to me (or at least me when I’m tired) so I’m going to end it here!
Hello friends, as I was trying to figure out content for my next ‘Some Thoughts’ post, I realized I actually had enough content from 2 Corinthians just to make another 2 Corinthians post!! (this lets me have more posts which aren’t just me ranting so it’s great).
Here is my agenda for the day:
An eternal home, not made by heavenly hands (2 Cor 5:1)
They shall be my people and I shall be their God (2 Cor 6:16)
Godly Grief – ‘conviction?’ (2 Cor 7:9-11)
‘Whoever gathered much had nothing left over, and whoever gathered little had no lack’ (2 Cor 8:15)
So the first passage I want to look at is 2 Corinthians 5:1.
For we know that if the tent that is our earthly home is destroyed, we have a building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.
2 Corinthians 5:1
As I read this verse, I am unable to recognize any super insightful theological implications or amazingly hidden old testament references.
Yet at the same time, it’s a passage I find super encouraging and relevant to us today.
A verse of assurance that tells us no matter what happens in this present earthly realm, we need not be discouraged. Why? Because even if the tents of our mortal bodies wither away from pestilence or are destroyed by human hands, there is something greater we can look forward to; a house not made with human hands nor susceptible to be shaken by the things of this world.
We are part of a kingdom that cannot be shaken (Hebrews 12:28).
Therefore let us look further, not to what we see but to things unseen;
as we look not to the things that are seen but to the things that are unseen. For the things that are seen are transient, but the things that are unseen are eternal.
2 Corinthians 4:18
and be encouraged by the hope he gives us!
So in 2 Corinthians 6:16-18, Paul quotes a couple of books from the Hebrew Bible. I’m not going to look through all of them but I’m particularly interested in the verses that shows up in 6:16
What agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God; as God said,
I will make my dwelling among them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
2 Corinthians 6:16
Specifically the phrase, ‘I will be their God, and they shall be my people.’ The reference that Paul makes specifically is from Ezekiel 37:27 but shows up previously in Jeremiah and Leviticus:
And I will walk among you and will be your God, and you shall be my people.
Leviticus 26:12
And they shall be my people, and I will be their God.
Jeremiah 32:38
The same phrase also shows up in Revelation:
And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Behold, the dwelling place of God is with man. He will dwell with them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them as their God.
Revelation 21:3
But what exactly does this phrase mean? What does it mean for YHWH to be our God and us to be his people? What does it look like?
It helps a lot if we look at the context of the three passages (Ezekiel 37, Jeremiah 32, Leviticus 26). I don’t want to post entire chapters or large chunks of chapters here so I’m just going to talk about what I saw when I read them.
The first is in Leviticus 26. There’s two parts to this chapter: the consequences of obedience and the consequences of disobedience (and similar to Deut. 28, the part on obedience is waaay shorter than the part on disobedience, it’s basically a 3:1 ratio in terms of consequences for disobedience:consequences for obedience). It’s important to note though, that the phrase we are analyzing shows up in the obedient part (which is hardly surprising), it’s the ‘conclusion’ to the consequences for obedience – if you obey me and do my commands and follow me, then I will be your God and you will be my people.
Next, let’s take a look at Jeremiah 32. Not all of it is relevant but verses 36 onward are helpful to look at. Remembering the context that Jerusalem is under siege and punishment from God is important because in these passages, God talks about a restoration to come in v. 37-44, where he will do a couple key things: He will gather his people back to the land (37), He will give them one heart and one way (39), and He will make an everlasting covenant with them (40). And in the midst of all these things, He says that “they shall be my people, and I will be their God (38). What’s the takeaway? One day I will restore my people, and they shall once again be my people, and I will be their God.
Lastly, let’s take a look at Ezekiel 37. This is the chapter with the valley of the dry bones (which I will not be looking at). But in the second half of chapter 37 (verse 15 onward), he once again talks about a restoration of his people: He will bring them back into the land undivided (21-22), He will cleanse them from their transgression (23), they will walk in his statues (24), He will make an everlasting covenant with them (26), and that the nations will know he is the Lord (28). The phrase we are looking for shows up twice: in 23 and 27. But once again, he says, I will restore my people and they shall once again be my people and I their God.
And although Revelation is much past this 2 Corinthians, it pretty much has that scene that’s described in those last three chapters: people obey, have a changed heart, are freed from transgressions, are in an everlasting covenant with the Lord – and thus the phrase is used there once again.
And although the ‘full restoration’ is up for debate (as we have not seen Israel return to the land undivided) , Paul says that part of it already has been fulfilled in Jesus. He calls us the ‘temple of the living God’ – God’s spirit dwells in us and thus all those things are fulfilled where YHWH has become our God and we become his people; we obey, have one heart, are freed from transgressions, and are in an everlasting covenant with him.
“I will be their God and they shall be my people” is a reference to God’s restoration – and Paul says that it has been fulfilled (‘in on sense’ for the technical people out there) in us.
In 2 Corinthians 9:7-11, Paul uses a funny term, ‘Godly grief,’ and I thought it was funny because I’d never heard of it before;
As it is, I rejoice, not because you were grieved, but because you were grieved into repenting. For you felt a godly grief, so that you suffered no loss through us.For godly grief produces a repentance that leads to salvation without regret, whereas worldly grief produces death. For see what earnestness this godly grief has produced in you, but also what eagerness to clear yourselves, what indignation, what fear, what longing, what zeal, what punishment! At every point you have proved yourselves innocent in the matter.
2 Corinthians 7:9-11
It sounds a lot like like what we would call ‘conviction.’ Which is funny because the word convict/conviction doesn’t actually show up that many times in the Bible but we use it pretty regularly.
I have nothing interesting to say about this topic, I just thought godly grief was a fun term and wanted to point out conviction in the way we use, i.e. God ‘convicted’ me of this, doesn’t really show up that often in the Bible. It’s more often translated as rebuke or reprove and is used among believers rather than God.
The last thing I wanted to look at is Paul’s use of 2 Corinthians 8:15, in which he quotes Torah saying:
As it is written, “Whoever gathered much had nothing left over, and whoever gathered little had no lack.”
2 Corinthians 8:15
So 2 Corinthians 8 has Paul telling the church in Corinth to give generously to the impoverished church in Jerusalem (other places you can look up about this collection is in 1 Corinthians 16:1-4, Galatians 2:10, 2 Corinthians , and Romans 15 – so despite the fact that you should give generously to your church and that God loves a cheerful giver and that he who sows sparingly will reap sparingly, the section of 2 Corinthians 9 has nothing to do with tithing).
(the source on this is my RLG324 class on Paul but you can also look at this link I just googled)
And as Paul says this to the Corinthian church, there seems to be a double meaning. Obviously, there’s the direct one that Paul is saying that those have more (Corinth) should give those who have less (the saints in Jerusalem) but if you are familiar with the story, these words should also ring in your ears;
And he humbled you and let you hunger and fed you with manna, which you did not know, nor did your fathers know, that he might make you know that man does not live by bread alone, but man lives by every word that comes from the mouth of the Lord.
Deuteronomy 8:3
And although this passage is technically not from Exodus, it does summarize what the manna is supposed to teach – man does not live on bread alone but the provision that comes from God. It is Paul telling the Corinthians to give generously but it is also a call to trust God with their finances, because who provided the manna? who provides your finances? Is it not one and the same?
Okay, this post took way too long to write but I’m done for today,
EDIT: Apparently this is #5 and I didn’t realize until after I posted it
Hey guys, I don’t have much to do today so I’ve decided to write this BLOG POST.
Thank you all my supporters for attending my 5th* edition of my ‘Some Thoughts’ series.
quick note: hahaha, I was gonna finally get to the 1 Peter 2 post but as I was looking through the stuff I had, I realized I have no idea for what I wanted to accomplish with it but I don’t want to scrap it either so I’m just going to put all I had so far as a subsection of this post
Here is my agenda for the day:
Being a ‘child of God’
‘Go in peace’ (2 Kings 5:19)
Is watching a sermon sufficient for ‘going to church?’
The boy Jesus (Luke 2:41-52)
1 Peter 2 – all the OT references I could find
So the other day, I saw one of those posts where it was a picture of a pastor with a caption saying something about how we should be like children who wake their parents up at 3 AM towards God or something.
And I was just thinking to myself, as I read the Bible – yes, there is a call to come before the Lord in our desperation and know that we are in need of his grace. But there doesn’t seem to be the attitude that we should come before God as childish.
Yes, we are his children – but that doesn’t imply we are childish before him.
Paul’s letters speak quite the opposite – he tells us to be mature and to leave behind the elementary teachings (Hebrews 6:1), not to be tossed to and fro by every wind of doctrine (Ephesians 4:14).
And so I wondered to myself: ‘I wonder if we are missing something.’
“I wonder if our perception of what ‘child/children’ means skews our understanding of what it means to be a ‘child of God’ – there seems to be an implication that to be a ‘child’ of God means we are ‘childish’ before him but to say you are someone’s child doesn’t imply you are childish before them. This is not to say that ‘child’ is a bad translation – it’s probably the best one but our understanding of it is hindered by our preconceptions of what we think of when we hear the word ‘child.'”
“Then some people use Matthew 18:3 to say we should be ‘child-like’ and have ‘childish’ qualities (such as waking your parents at 3 AM) but Matthew 18:4 clearly explains to ‘be like little children’ is concerning humility – not being childish. This is not to say we shouldn’t be in ‘awe of God like a child’ or ‘wake up at 3 AM to get a glass of water’ but maybe we are misunderstanding the child aspect.”
In summary: Just because you are your father’s child, that doesn’t mean you are childish – you can be an adult and still be someone’s child. But, when we hear the word ‘child,’ we immediately think someone of young age.
And so, I’m not one to make claims without backing them up and so I proceeded to search up the Greek usages of ‘child’ through Blue Letter Bible.
Lo and behold:
“And as I’ve expected, the ‘children of God’ that Paul uses (teknon) refers more closely to being one’s offspring while the ‘little child’ in Matthew 18 (paidion) refers to someone who is a young boy/girl – aka our typical understanding of what we think when we hear child.”
In conclusion: being a child of God does not equate to being childish before God.
Next, I would like to talk about the story in 2 Kings 5.
I’m not going to recount the whole story but there’s one part of it that sticks out to me: it’s the verse I pointed out in the agenda – when Elisha says to Naaman
“Go in peace.” (2 Kings 5:19).
After Elisha heals Naaman, a gentile general, Namaan would like to worship the God of Israel but he asks if this one exception can be made for him:
Then he returned to the man of God, he and all his company, and he came and stood before him. And he said, “Behold, I know that there is no God in all the earth but in Israel; so accept now a present from your servant.” But he said, “As the Lord lives, before whom I stand, I will receive none.” And he urged him to take it, but he refused. Then Naaman said, “If not, please let there be given to your servant two mule loads of earth, for from now on your servant will not offer burnt offering or sacrifice to any god but the Lord. In this matter may the Lord pardon your servant: when my master goes into the house of Rimmon to worship there, leaning on my arm, and I bow myself in the house of Rimmon, when I bow myself in the house of Rimmon, the Lord pardon your servant in this matter.”
2 Kings 5:15-18
And upon his request, we get Elisha’s famous words:
He said to him, “Go in peace.”
2 Kings 5:19
And I think there’s something to be learned from this story.
It’s reminiscent of the Acts 15, where the apostles say ‘we should not trouble those of the Gentiles who turn to God’ (Acts 15:19).
And this is not to say we should intentionally abhor truth and it’s importance – this does not mean that today it’s okay for me to start worshiping idols with my boss – but that maybe in all these different times, and places, and contexts; maybe instead of holding others to the standards we have for ourselves in our time, place, and context, we should recognize that not everyone has the ability to worship God in the way we do. Yes, I’m able to study the scriptures daily – and thus I should be expected to do so. But what about the rest of the word that’s illiterate and has no access to scripture yet wants to worship God as Naaman does? Are those people disqualified?
Because for Elisha, the knowledge of God and recognizing that “there is no God in all of the earth but in Israel” seemed to be enough for him to say ‘go in peace.’
And isn’t there an aspect of trust there as well – in God’s ability to sustain Naaman? That despite Naaman having nothing but this knowledge and some dirt, Elisha is willing to let him walk away – there’s no intensive crash course on the Torah, no mention of creation, no law, no Sinai – nothing but a ‘go in peace.’
I was having a conversation with my friend as I ranted about some post I saw about ‘going back to the pulpit and preaching the word of God’ or whatever.
And I thought that was kind of sad – how the focus of what gathering for church has come to; it’s more about coming together and listening to someone preach for 30 minutes than the community.
And I’m not saying we shouldn’t have pastors or we shouldn’t have preaching or we shouldn’t have a pulpit – I think those things are good, they have their place.
But when we take a look at the scenes in Acts 2 & 4, it wasn’t just a ‘weekly gathering’ where they spent 30 minutes listening to some teaching and then going home for the day, it was an active spending every day together in community:
And they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers. And awe came upon every soul, and many wonders and signs were being done through the apostles. And all who believed were together and had all things in common. And they were selling their possessions and belongings and distributing the proceeds to all, as any had need. And day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they received their food with glad and generous hearts, praising God and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added to their number day by day those who were being saved.
Acts 2:42-47
And I think this pandemic has revealed more than ever how we have our focuses misaligned; since when did watching a broadcast of someone preaching become a sufficient alternative to gathering for church?
And this is not to say every church succumbs to this, but many do.
But if I told people that a couple of months ago that all I did for my Sunday church was go online and watch a live stream, I would get destroyed. Yet today, that is considered the norm and is considered a ‘suitable replacement.’
Somehow this image of a pastor preaching on a pulpit has become the very definition of what it means to ‘gather for church.’ So back to the question in the agenda, “is watching a sermon sufficient for ‘going to church?'”
quick disclaimer: I’m not saying we should gather IN-PERSON, but there are so many alternatives and opportunities you can gather online just to spend time with each other, study the Bible together, and break bread together.
So the other day, as I was randomly thinking, I thought to myself,
“hey, isn’t the story of Jesus in the temple as a boy in Luke 2 just a really obscure story?”
Like guys, if there is a story as random of this, there HAS to be something beyond it. There’s no way it’s a coincidence. And so I went on an adventure trying to figure out if it was an old testament illusion.
I made a list of old testament characters that seemed to be children – and the one that seemed to stand out the most was Samuel. He had that ‘house of the Lord’ vibe and so I went on google searching for answers.
And so I found this website which gave me all the answers (disclaimer as usual; I don’t necessarily condone all their ideas but I’ll post the ones I like here).
Some similarities:
Song of praise by the mother of the son (1 Samuel 2:1-10 and Luke 1:46-56)
Both miraculously conceived (Mary was a virgin, Samuel’s birth was from a barren woman and came as an answered prayer)
And if you think I’m reaching, read these two verses:
And Jesus increased in wisdom and in stature and in favor with God and man
Luke 2:52
Now the boy Samuel continued to grow both in stature and in favor with the Lord and also with man
1 Samuel 2:26
Hey, wait a second. That’s exactly the same. Like there’s no way that’s a coincidence.
I also stumbled upon this video; Luke seems to be suggesting that Jesus is ‘the new Samuel’ – like Samuel, he will be a priest and prophet completely devoted to the Lord.
(yes, the video is CATHOLIC, get over it).
This last section, I’m just going to paste all I had in my 1 Peter 2 post with all the references I could possibly find from OT. Some are directly quoted, some are more subtle.
![Sunglasses Emoji [Free Download Cool Emoji] | Emoji Island](https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/1061/1924/products/Emoji_Icon_-_Sunglasses_cool_emoji_large.png?v=1571606093){kind=icon}
Jason Reads the Bible 