APRIL
2
This is just a
word of encouragement to keep up in reading your one-year Bible. It is only
April in the States and we are already into the dog-days of summer. It's hot
and the air is full of pollen; my scale is being very peevish and making things
up. I feel like I missed winter, skipped spring and now I'm in summer.
Thankfully the Lord remains the same and in spite of how I feel, I feel better
when I am sitting quietly with Him, reading His Word and praying every day.
Don't worry about the Reading Notes. They are not the Word. And, they will be
online until the web is shut down and they are for you to use, or not use, as
you please. Keeping up with God in His Word is your life and health as a
disciple every day.
Deuteronomy 21-22
Some of the
laws given from here on seem random and unconnected. They are interesting as
they stand, especially when you think that God thought them up. The laws show
something about Him and they make you think of what the point was behind these
laws. Even if the laws were only binding for Israel, and then, only for Israel
as they were ruled by God (for example, under Roman law the Jews couldn't kill
people for adultery or not keeping the Sabbath), there was still a lesson
involved in God thinking up that particular law. With some of these laws it
could also be there is something going on culturally that we don't get because
we weren't there.
One thing you
notice is that every now and then, there is a purpose statement given which
explains the reason behind the law, or maybe it is a block summary for many
laws that have been given to that point. In our reading today, the end of Deuteronomy
21:23 is one of those purpose statements. This is why v. 23 was chosen as a
good place for a chapter division. These laws gave order and a sense of
respectability and propriety to the customs of the people so that they wouldn't
defile the land. (If God were making a nation today; for example, I don't think
He would allow people to leave their shopping carts out in the middle of the
parking lot, that being a sign of the decay of Western civilization.) They
emphasize the reality that the nation is set apart wholly and holy for God.
There might be
a connection between the order of these laws and it's fun to try to find it,
but even that can be overdone. We'll just have to ask God in heaven why they
were given like this. I have a feeling that when we get to heaven we won't care
anymore. It is important to remember that these laws were not meant to answer
every question and contingency, but rather to give a general rule or judgment
from which other rules and judgments could be made for situations not
mentioned.
Deuteronomy 21
Vs. 1-9 This
was in the days before "CSI" and "Bones." Notice v. 9. The
issue of innocent blood was/is no
small thing with God. Notice that the priest was involved in this, and since he
had the Urim and Thummim, the issue probably could have been solved. We have no
proof that this was ever done in Israel. Once we are in Judges we'll see why.
Vs. 10-14 This
was definitely a different time and a different culture. Note that this was
future oriented, because none of the women in Canaan would have qualified for
this. This woman did not have to be a virgin. The occasion would have been
after the conquest of Canaan. Some nation would have picked a fight with
Israel, been defeated by Israel on the field, and then Israel would have
pursued them to their land and taken their cities.
Even though
this might seem kind of barbaric to our cultured sensitivities, there was order
here. There was no raping and pillaging. This event was totally legislated.
They had to be married, man and wife, before anything could happen. The act of
the woman having to shave her head and trim her nails sounds similar to the
Levites having to cut their hair almost as if to enter their new life/service
as newborns. In a way, this was also a "cooling" down period for the
man. It could be in those 30 days he decided it was a bad idea. Notice also,
there was no sexual relationship until the month had passed. The man went into
her as her husband, meaning the social customs had been acknowledged and
fulfilled and they were legally married.
There is a
sense, too, in which there is mercy in this custom. Worse things could happen
to a person, and actually, this could be a very good thing. Becoming a part of
Israel worked out pretty good for Ruth. But Ruth wasn't taken in war. She came
with Naomi. However, there is another example of a foreign woman who was taken
in war and married one of the soldiers, Rahab, from Jericho. It turned out
pretty good for Rahab. Her husband Salmon was from a leading family of Judah,
and some think Salmon might have been one of the spies who went into Jericho.
Rahab gets some good press in Hebrews and in James, but her biggest claim to
fame, along with Ruth, is in Matthew 1:5. Rahab shouldn't have been saved
because she was a Canaanite, but in God's mercy she was not only saved and not
only married a cool dude, but she became the great29th power
grandmother of Jesus.
Vs. 15-17 It is
interesting here that God never commanded that a man should only have one wife.
God could have nipped it in the bud right here. The model of creation is one
man and one woman, and the best marriages you find in the Bible are just one
man and one woman. When God says, "the two become one flesh," it's
apparent that that is His model. Why He even allowed polygamy to exist is
beyond me. He not only allowed it, but when David messed up, God implied that
He would have given David more wives (2 Sam. 12:8). It's clear that monogamy
was the rule and having more than one wife was the exception. By Roman times
the Jews were totally monogamous, and Christianity never made a provision for
more than one wife.
V. 17 It is
also interesting that God says the firstborn son is the firstfruits of his (the man's) strength.
Even though God
chose to go around this with Esau and Jacob and with Manasseh and Ephraim, for
society, this rule kept things fair and in order.
Vs. 18-21 The
Swedes (no spankings) would have freaked out about this one. Obviously this is
referring to an older teen. The main issue was his rebelliousness, which
probably would have shown up in his gluttony and drunkenness. Also, this was
done in court; therefore, the elders and the gates of the city are mentioned. It
was a very public matter. This wasn't shooting him behind the barn.
So what about
the rebellious daughter? Probably the same held true.
Notice the
purpose statement at the end of v. 21. Later we will see what happens when
there is no punishment or enforcement for these violations. The people became
disheartened by the lawlessness and gave up following God's order. A case in
point is in 1 Samuel 2:22-36. Because Eli didn't have his sons put to death, as
they deserved, people gave up on worshiping or following God.
Vs. 22-23 Death
by hanging was usually for public warning. Joshua will do this to the kings of
Canaan, to alert the other kings in Canaan and to encourage Israel that God is
with them. Also, David will do this to allay a curse brought on Israel for King
Saul's extermination of the Gibeonites. In that case the bodies were a public
demonstration of payment and restitution for violating a covenant. The most
notable case of hanging is referred to by Paul in Galatians 3:13, where he is
talking about Jesus being cursed by God for us. God hung His own son as a
testimony that payment for sin was made for mankind.
Deuteronomy 22
Vs. 1-4 This is
not for the animal; it is for the neighbor. I did this today walking. This huge
dog ran up to me. Thankfully I was wearing so many layers that the dog couldn't
smell the fear that I'm sure was pouring out of me. But it was just a big
fierce looking, slobbery, shedding, loving dog. Yet it kept following me, so I
was in a pickle. If I had kept walking, it would have followed me over a busy
road. And besides, Rover didn't look intelligent enough to find its way home.
So there I stood, until about five minutes later someone missed him. A woman,
about half the size of the dog, walked out on the sidewalk, down the block, in
her pjs. The last I saw, the dog ran down to her, (picked her up in his mouth
and took her into the house, for breakfast, I think. JUST KIDDING!!!!!) Anyway,
I guess I fulfilled this command today. How funny.
V. 5 This is
not Halloween. This is real cross-dressing. God doesn't think it's funny. He
considers it to be perverted sexuality.
Vs. 6-7 I guess
you could call this a law of propriety or forced wisdom. For the sake of
preserving God's blessing, the people were to curb their desires, act wisely,
and to think of the future of the land. Again, from a little case like this,
you could probably apply the principle to many other situations where similar
wisdom and self control were necessary.
V. 8 Even
accidental death because of carelessness was to be avoided by acting wisely.
I'm sure this was applied to a lot of other situations, like open wells, for
example.
Vs. 9-11 Now
these might have had some tie to the culture and to superstition. Even if this
was just something that had to do with order and keeping things separate, it
would have created a mindset for doing things orderly.
Notice v. 10.
Paul quotes this in 2 Corinthians 6:14, Do
not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness
with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness?
V. 12 refers to
the tassels God commanded to be sown on all of their garments in Numbers
15:37-41. The reason was to make them remember always to obey the Lord. How
could you forget what those conspicuous little, dangly things meant? They weren't
jewelry. They also would have started some conversations with foreigners.
Vs. 13-21 Note
that this law is to keep a man from unjustly getting rid of his wife by
insisting she was sexually impure before they were married. This law is a
protection for the woman. That is the focus. If the husband was dishonest, he
was trying to get back the 50 shekels of silver he gave for the bride price.
Premarital
sexual purity was to have been the expected norm. Parents were to testify to
their daughter's virginity, and a man expected to marry a virgin. The proof the
parents were to bring was the sheet from the wedding night that showed that as
the girl had intercourse for the first time, she bled.
On the other
hand, if the girl had been a prostitute or the girl and her parents had used
prostitution to increase the family income, or if she/they had been involved in
Baal worship, these would have all had serious consequences.
The only way
the father could have gotten 50 shekels of silver for his daughter in marriage was
that she was a virgin. I'm sure the finances of this tempted people to lie. I'm
sure there were allowances and the appropriate disclosures for accidents or
even rape. The important thing is that the father couldn't say she was a virgin
if she wasn't.
Looking at the
punishment for the man or the woman, this law would have made premarital sex a
very serious and dangerous event. In v. 28, rape meant forced marriage without
provision for divorce. In Exodus 22:16 there is a variation of this for
seduction, where the girl's father could refuse to have his daughter marry that
man. The end result was that premarital sex was not acceptable.
Vs. 22-29 From
all of these laws you understand that adultery was punishable by death. An
engaged woman was legally married, just not yet married.
V. 24 Note that
a woman had to cry for help. The guy couldn't say, "If you yell, I'll kill
you," because if she didn't yell she'd die anyway.
All of these
laws set a standard by which other situations could be evaluated. In our day, you
know that if adultery meant death, fewer people would be willing to do it and
it wouldn't be glamorized on TV. And if premarital sex meant a forced marriage,
I wonder if people wouldn't take things more seriously. We understand what is
allowed in society, and we know that God forgives and gives grace and love; but
still, here we see what God's opinion on all this stuff is. And actually, it
comes out of His love for us, wanting the best for us.
V. 30 God is
simply saying that a son shouldn't marry his stepmother, even if his father
dies. That is not only propriety, but it is God's command. Interestingly
enough, Paul mentions that someone in Corinth was doing this very thing and that
the church approved of it. O Weh!
Luke 9:51-10:12
Luke 9:51-62
Vs. 51-56 This
wasn't Jesus' final trip to Jerusalem, but the reality of His death and the
rejection of His offer to the Jews added more definition to His training of the
Twelve and to His agenda. Actually, Jesus was going up to the Feast of the
Tabernacles in John 7; in fact, John 7:2-10 would come right before this.
Before, Jesus
had been willing to spend time with the Samaritans. Now, He was given direction
via the Spirit, to get to Jerusalem for this very important showdown.
V. 54 It
appears that only this Samaritan village reacted this way. This is one time we
see James and John earning the nickname Jesus gave them, The Sons of Thunder. There were probably lots of other examples.
Notice that when Jesus rebuked them, He turned from them. Jesus did this with
Peter also. The next village responded better.
Vs. 57-62 How
do you categorize these three men? Try to put these objections in your own
words.
Vs. 57-58 This
was a scribe, a Pharisee who was well studied in the law. These were usually
rich, well-to-do people. Apparently the lack of security and proper
accommodations were too much for him.
Vs. 59-60
Notice that Jesus initiated this. He must have noticed one disciple who had
potential and had gone up to him and told him to follow Him. Particularly in
this case where Jesus selected the man, the man's love for father and family
won the day. Jesus said that a person had to "hate father and mother"
to follow Him. Notice too that Jesus wasn't put off by this man's objection, but
commanded him to go and proclaim the
kingdom of God.
Vs. 61-62 This
guy declared his willingness but wasn't ready. So why did he say this? For
others? To be recognized by Jesus? Interestingly, Jesus says that the person
would not be fit. In the Greek that
word actually can mean, "to fit" to something. This kind of
commitment doesn't fit to the life and call of a disciple in the harvest.
(Just for your
information, you can insert John 7-10:21 here.)
Luke 10:1-12
After the
massive rejection Jesus received in John 7-10:21, He was stepping up His
discipleship training and also preparing His itinerary for visiting towns on
the east side of the Sea of Galilee. If they found towns that were open, Jesus
would visit the town, if not, too bad. Much of this looks similar to sending
out the Twelve. Jesus still had a lot of disciples. One interesting thought is
that the guy who took Judas' place, to fill up the "twelve" in Acts,
must have been part of the 70.
Psalm 74
The family of
Asaph were singers in the temple from the reign of David to the restoration of
the temple after the exile under Ezra and Nehemiah. It looks like this writer
wrote after the people returned to Israel following the Babylonian exile.
Vs. 1-3 You
notice the appeal for God to remember His promises. Even after Israel returned
under Zerubbabel, the people experienced great opposition in rebuilding the
temple. It seems that the psalmist is lamenting this.
Vs. 4-8 It
seems that the writer is asking God to look at the wanton devastation and to
remember their acts of violence.
Vs. 9-11 This
is interesting that they are asking for God to reveal His hand by giving them a
prophet. God would send both Haggai and Zechariah to motivate the people to
continue building the temple. I wonder if this is the outpouring of heart,
repeated and sung in their worship that motivated God to send those two men.
Vs. 12-17 This
declaration of God as creator is the source of their faith and strength. They
might not see God's hand in what was happening in Jerusalem, but in all of the
created world they could still draw strength from the fact that God was both
there, and able to help them.
Vs. 18-21 God
is asked to remember Israel, the dove. And He is asked to remember the covenant
with Abraham and the poor and needy.
Vs. 22-23 What
cause should God defend? I would think it might be more than Israel. His cause
is the redemption of mankind.
Proverbs 12:11
What if works his land simply meant
"worthwhile, God-honoring pursuits?" What would happen here if bread meant "nourishment for your
spiritual life as a disciple?" Since most people are not farmers, some
thinking about the sense of the proverb helps. Also, we know from Deuteronomy
that man does not live by bread alone, but by every word which proceeds from the
mouth of God. The abundance of our hearts as followers of Christ comes from our
diligence in working the soil of our hearts with His Word.
If you’re reading along
and don’t have a One Year Bible, click on this link http://www.esvbible.org/devotions/every-day-in-the-word/. If that doesn't work, go to http://www.esvbible.org/devotions/ and click on “Every Day in the Word.”
I'm writing these
comments to and for those who are following a One Year Bible and interested in
growing deeper as a disciple, following Jesus in the harvest. My hope is to see
the growth of a discipleship culture in the church. Groups of 3-4 disciples, meeting
weekly, encouraging each other to follow Christ and work to reach out and make
disciples who make disciples. The Bible itself is the most universal manual we
have and key to our growth and service in Christ. Nothing keeps us more focused
on why we are here or what we are to be doing. My comments are only meant to
provide some explanation of the events or to show the flow of God's plan of
redemption. My comments are in no way exhaustive, but are designed to keep us
focused on Christ and our role in His harvest. My hope is that the people in
these groups will grow in Christ and be willing, after a year, to find 3 others
to meet with and encourage in their growth as disciples, disciples making
disciples in the harvest.
If you would like a
complete description of this model of being and making disciples you can find
it in my book: Simply Disciples*Making Disciples.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B011WJIDQA?*Version*=1&*entries*=0
If you would like a more
descriptive commentary that is still readable and concise, I'd recommend the
Bible Knowledge Commentary. It's keyed to the NIV, so the result is the
commentators are constantly telling you what the Greek or Hebrew is. That never
hurts.
I am not endorsing any
particular One Year Bible; in fact, I read something you don't, die revidierte
Lutherbibel 1984.
Anyone reading along with
us is welcome to do so and is encouraged to take their own notes and make their
own observations. If the comments made do not agree with your particular
tradition or understanding, that's OK. Nothing I've written is meant to
criticize any point of view, but only to express the truth of what God has
written to us, as I understand it. Send comments or feedback to dgkachikis@gmail.com.
If you would like
documents containing an entire month of the Reading Notes, go to https://sites.google.com/site/dlkachikis/reading-notes. You can download these to use on your computer or to
print.
No comments:
Post a Comment