Faith of the Fathers

The three Patriarchs of the people of Israel were amazing examples of faith. Yet, it’s difficult to beat the example of Abraham offering Isaac in obedience to the One promising him children. This event is recorded in detail in Genesis 22. God tested Abraham. In the Hebrew, this word for “test” can refer to temptations as well as qualitative tests.

The word used in the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures (Septuagint) is also used by the writer of Hebrews in 11:17 for “test”. It refers to testing to determine quality, and sometimes originates from ill will (temptation). God does this sort of thing with us, but we are not to do such things with Him (Luke 4:12, quoting Deuteronomy 6:16). The Pharisees did this sort of testing of Jesus constantly.

So, here’s the way the writer of Hebrews uses it:

By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises was offering up his only begotten son; it was he to whom it was said, “IN ISAAC YOUR DESCENDANTS SHALL BE CALLED.” He considered that God is able to raise people even from the dead, from which he also received him back as a type.

Hebrews 11:17-19 NASB

Think through this test for a second. In Genesis 21, God has had Abraham send away Hagar and Abraham’s son Ishmael, telling Abraham that Isaac would be the “child of promise”. Now, “some time later”, this same Yahweh calls on Abraham to kill Isaac, specifically calling out both Isaac, and the special relationship between he and Abraham. Think about that for a second. It should give you chills. It should give you some pause for a moment, possibly even doubt. Because behind this story is the reader’s reaction of “what might my Savior ask of me?” And that’s a very good question.

The test of Abraham is of his quality of belief. God had promised that He would fulfill Abraham’s promise through Isaac. So, Abraham had to decide whether he would believe this God even when He seemed capricious. Did Abraham believe that this God would make good on a promise even when He seemed to be reneging? Do you?

When things aren’t going well, do you still believe in the goodness of our Savior? When it’s no longer “fun”, when it’s taking too long, when you are actually being persecuted and suffering, will you persist in your belief of the goodness of your Creator? Is Jesus still on His throne interceding for you? Is the Father still caring for you? Is the Spirit of the Living God still residing within you? Do you still believe, even when it’s not convenient, popular, fun, or even safe? What if persisting in belief and being obedient actually costs you something precious?

It’s easy to answer “yes” in the abstract imagination of “what might be”. I suspect that I have a limit to my faith. I don’t know where it is, exactly, but I suspect it wouldn’t be very difficult to find. I have spent time doubting my Savior. I have spent time behaving as if He was’t real, His promises weren’t sure, and as if He didn’t truly love me. For some peculiar reason, He still forgives me. I can’t answer the above questions with absolute confidence because I haven’t been tested to the extremes of my faith, not yet, but my day is coming.

How about you?

Advertisement

Being Unsettled

Have you ever heard someone say that the best commentary on Scripture is Scripture? What they mean, typically, is that the meaning of a passage is best found by what the other writers of Scripture thought it meant. That isn’t always easy, and not every passage of Scripture is referred to by other writers. But when it happens, it’s very convenient.

Scripture is “God-breathed”, and therefore has our Creator as its author even though there were many writers. Precisely how He worked through human agents is still hotly debated, and were not going to continue that debate here. In any case, when a writer of Scripture refers to another passage of Scripture, it’s pretty safe to say they are right about it.

The writer of Hebrews refers to a lot of old Hebrew Scripture, and here he interprets the life of Abraham and the other Patriarchs.

All these died in faith, without receiving the promises, but having seen them and having welcomed them from a distance, and having confessed that they were strangers and exiles on the earth. For those who say such things make it clear that they are seeking a country of their own. And indeed if they had been thinking of that country from which they went out, they would have had opportunity to return. But as it is, they desire a better country, that is, a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God; for He has prepared a city for them.

Hebrews 11:13-16 (NASB)

As I read about Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, it never occurred to me that these guys were looking for a city. They never seemed to be interested in living anywhere other than their tents. But the life of Jacob and his sons brings out the “sojourner” belief about themselves. And Abraham was very clear about not returning to his home country. In fact, something he says about Isaac makes it clear that the life in tents wasn’t all that easy on them.

The servant said to him, “Suppose the woman is not willing to follow me to this land; should I take your son back to the land from where you came?” Then Abraham said to him, “Beware that you do not take my son back there! The LORD, the God of heaven, who took me from my father’s house and from the land of my birth, and who spoke to me and who swore to me, saying, ‘To your descendants I will give this land,’ He will send His angel before you, and you will take a wife for my son from there. But if the woman is not willing to follow you, then you will be free from this my oath; only do not take my son back there.” So the servant placed his hand under the thigh of Abraham his master, and swore to him concerning this matter.

Genesis 24:5-9 (NASB)

Now, this is not a clear assertion by Abraham. And it can mean that Isaac didn’t like the life, but not necessarily. Yet, as I read it, I wonder if Abraham was aware of the choice he made that Isaac never really was able to make. Haran had people like them in customs and speech. Yet they were shepherds living in a city not in tents. Isaac may not have even thought that was an option. Lot did, and moves his family into Sodom. Abraham couldn’t let that happen to Isaac.

Not that those among whom they lived, the Canaanites, didn’t tend flocks and live in cities, but they weren’t Arameans, they were Canaanites. They weren’t from Mesopotamia, their religion was different, their language was different, their customs and practices were different. And while the Canaanites were drifting away from El Elyon (God Most High), Abraham and his descendants were drawing closer to Him. It was critical that Isaac remain in the Land of Promise, and yet not become lost among the people of Canaan (Gen. 34:18-24). That required a life in tents.

Perhaps, you feel unsettled. You may feel like everything is temporary, and find it difficult to gain a sense of fulfillment or satisfaction, like you’re done. Good! If that’s you, it’s supposed to be what life as a disciple of Jesus is like. We aren’t home, we’re not “done”, we’re all “strangers in a strange land”. In fact, if you fell settled, like everything is set, and you’re fulfilled and satisfied, then you are done, just not in a good way. This place cannot be our home. The whole point of the writer of Hebrews here is that we should be looking forward in faith to the city to come.

This time of “lockdowns”, “quarantines”, and “pandemics” we can feel afraid of the uncertainties. Don’t fear them. Don’t fear what you cannot see, because what we have to look forward to is just beyond all this chaos. Take courage, in fact, be an example of courage. Be unafraid to love, to care, to encourage, and be respectful of others. What will distinguish disciples of Jesus from those who are perishing should be most evident in times like this. We should not fear what they fear. We will be able to love in the face of cold hard apathy, we will be able to care and encourage in the face of discouragement.

Who can you think of that you can encourage today? Do it! Let the Spirit of Jesus guide you to His work in the lives of those around you.

That’s my view through the knothole this morning.

Scripture quotations taken from the NASB. Copyright by The Lockman Foundation

The Faithful Example of Abraham

The “Role Call of Faith” continues in Hebrews 11. After the “antediluvian” examples, we reach Abraham. He is such an important example, there are four instances listed where he shows great faith. We’re going to look at three of them:

By faith Abraham, when he was called, obeyed by going out to a place which he was to receive for an inheritance; and he went out, not knowing where he was going. By faith he lived as an alien in the land of promise, as in a foreign land, dwelling in tents with Isaac and Jacob, fellow heirs of the same promise; for he was looking for the city which has foundations, whose architect and builder is God. By faith even Sarah herself received ability to conceive, even beyond the proper time of life, since she considered Him faithful who had promised. Therefore there was born even of one man, and him as good as dead at that, as many descendants AS THE STARS OF HEAVEN IN NUMBER, AND INNUMERABLE AS THE SAND WHICH IS BY THE SEASHORE.

Hebrews 11:8-12 NASB

The first is the call. Abraham responds when Yahweh calls him to leave Haran and head to Canaan (Gen. 12:1-4). He responds by obeying, and this meant leaving the comfortable and known and going to the uncomfortable and unknown. There was a promise involved, so, obedience was to be rewarded. But there had to be belief involved, trust in the One making the promises. You and I are called. And there are promises involved. Will we obey, leave the known for the unknown, the comfortable for the uncomfortable? Will we trust the One making the promises?

And then we have the demonstration of faith in Abraham living as a sojourner in the land promised to him. Here the other patriarchs are mentioned, along with a reason for living this way. They were “looking for the city which has foundations, whose architect and builder are God.” Really? Is that why they lived in tents in Canaan? Reading the Genesis account of these men may not leave you with that impression, but what does become clear is that they lived in tents in a land they believed was theirs.

Living in a land believed to be theirs, meant living among cities of stone, and those who lived in them. It meant pasturing flocks around tilled fields of others in a land you knew was yours. It was an act of faith that waited for the timing of the One making the promise rather than taking matters into your own hands (except possibly for Simeon and Levi at Shechem).

How willing are we to faithfully persevere in obedience, even not seeing the promise? How long will we wait for the promise, while being obedient? Abraham sometimes waited more than a decade before another recorded conversation with the One making these promises. How long will we live in tents, temporary houses, waiting on the promise of real permanent mansions? The writer of Hebrews is pushing his audience to persevere to the very end.

And Abraham is used again, along with Sarah, in faithfully conceiving Isaac. Think about that, though. How much faith did that take? We tend to skip by the uncomfortable consideration of intimacy between spouses here. But, really, is it surprising they conceived? Abraham had been promised, and specifically promised that one from Sarah would be his heir, not Ishmael. He laughed, as did Sarah, but the “mechanics” of the process hadn’t changed. It’s just that this time it worked. And yet, the writer of Hebrews calls it faith.

And, I suppose, it was faith. After Sarah dies, Abraham has other kids, so it wasn’t Abraham who had the difficulty, it was Sarah who was barren. That’s not a criticism, it’s an important detail. Abraham doesn’t “jettison” his wife at any point along this process. She’s not the “problem”, from his point of view. He is dedicated and devoted to her even though she cannot, in herself, provide the promised child. In a way, her barrenness is what brings God to the forefront. Unless He steps in, nothing changes. But, even as long as he doesn’t, Abraham is faithful to this barren woman, and is for her whole life. That’s faith.

You see, we can become so pragmatic about how God’s promises are fulfilled. We can “see” His work, only under certain parameters, as if He can only work in certain ways. And yet, Abraham simply obeys God, remaining faithful to this woman who cannot provide him a son, an heir, the one thing he needs to see what he has been promised. And in remaining faithful to her, he remains faithful to the One promising.

Let’s pay close attention to the example of faith provided in Abraham. Let’s be uncomfortable, persevere without seeing our hope fulfilled immediately, and live faithful to the ones our Savior has provided to us. Being cooped up with people around the ones we love can strain that love. But it can also build it, renovate it, rejuvenate it, and make it new again. Your choice. Like Abraham, let’s choose faith.

Scripture quotations taken from the NASB. Copyright by The Lockman Foundation

What’s In a Name?

As I have been cruising through Hebrews, the writer (I call him Nicodemus now), refers to an obscure character from the Hebrew Scriptures, Melchizedek. He refers to both his appearance in Genesis 14:18, and a strange reference to him in Psalm 110:4. What if the reference in Psalm 110 isn’t a name at all?

The Hebrew text has the following construction: מַלְכִּי־צֶדֶק (see Strong’s H4442) for what is typically referred to as the name of the king of Salem in Genesis 14:18. To break this down a bit, it is a compound construction of two words, “meleki” and “tsedek”. The first word has a suffix (the “i”) which adds a first-person possessive meaning, “my”, to “melek” which renders, “my king”. The second word is the Hebrew word for “righteousness”. And between these two words is a bar, called a “maqaf” which is both a separator and a connector. That sounds odd, but it’s not that peculiar in Hebrew, and it’s the meaning of this punctuation mark that’s in question here.

So, if this is a name, then it could mean, “my king is righteous”, “my king of righteousness”, or even other options. Now, unfortunately, the Hebrew unicode in this entry is tiny, but you may see the various combination of dots under the Hebrew letters. Those are the “vowels”, which do not appear in ancient or modern Hebrew. The ancient group of Jewish scholars from Europe, known as the Masoretes, added those to enable a consistent use of Scripture in Jewish Synagogues. They also added a lot of notations to enable consistent pronunciation as well, including the maqaf.

And there’s the thing, the maqaf wouldn’t be in the ancient/original text. So, it’s possible that this was originally two words, and the guy who comes out to Abram was known as a “righteous king”, and Abram calls him “my righteous king”. You can see how this might be possible, but also it’s obviously very improbable. Yet, the more modern Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh has the following translation of Psalm 110:4

The LORD has sworn and will not relent,
"You are a priest forever, a rightful king by My decree."

Now that is very different than most every translation, including the 1917 edition of the same JPS Tanakh which has the following:

The LORD hath sworn, and will not repent:
"Thou art a priest forever after the manner of Melchizedek."

So, a change was made in the 1985 edition to remove the reference to Melchizedek. Now, why would that option be chosen? By the way, there is a footnote in the 1985 edition that says, “Or ‘After the manner of Melchizedek.'” So, the translator’s acknowledge that the reference to Melchizedek is still valid. But it’s the maqaf, right? Well, maybe not.

The place where David was born is Bethlehem, right? Well, that, too, is a compound word made up of “house” and “bread”. Guess what is always found between the two words in Hebrew? You guessed it, the maqaf. And yet, this is translated as “Bethlehem” throughout the 1985 Tanakh.

When the Jewish scholars of Alexandria Egypt translated the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek about 150 years Before the Christian Era (for those for whom this a more comfortable reference) or 150 BC (for those more comfortable with the traditional reference), they transliterated Melchizedek into Greek. So, before the Masoretes added punctuation, these brilliant Jewish scholars also understood both references to be a name, not some other reference. In the time of Nicodemus writing Hebrews (you never know, it could have been), the accepted understanding of Psalm 110 was that it referred to the man who brought bread and wine out to Abram after his successful rescue of Lot. And so should we.

And yet, there are those who would see this differently, focus on the slim possibility that David didn’t have this obscure character in mind when he penned this Psalm. Let’s accept that possibility, and still point out that even so, it does not take away from Jesus’ role as our High Priest. So, His order of priesthood would be as a righteous king. I’m good with that. Jesus remains our King, Priest, and Prophet. He is the Anointed One in all roles, and will one day appear on a white horse with a robe dipped in blood. The High Priest will lead the hosts of heaven as King of Kings. I hope to be among the host. You?

I’m excited! Let’s ride!

What’s your view through the knothole this morning?

Modifying God’s Plans

Now she sent and summoned Barak the son of Abinoam from Kedesh-naphtali, and said to him, “Behold, the LORD, the God of Israel, has commanded, ‘Go and march to Mount Tabor, and take with you ten thousand men from the sons of Naphtali and from the sons of Zebulun.  ‘I will draw out to you Sisera, the commander of Jabin’s army, with his chariots and his many troops to the river Kishon, and I will give him into your hand.'” Then Barak said to her, “If you will go with me, then I will go; but if you will not go with me, I will not go.”  She said, “I will surely go with you; nevertheless, the honor shall not be yours on the journey that you are about to take, for the LORD will sell Sisera into the hands of a woman.” Then Deborah arose and went with Barak to Kedesh. (Judges 4:6-9 NASB)

This probably never happens to you, but have you ever tried to bargain with God to change His plans for you?  I have.  Don’t.  Barak did, and his fun ended at a woman’s tent.  See, God will modify His plans to accommodate us, and our level of faith.  But those accommodations often will make clear that we need to up our game with Him, because we will see what we missed with our modifications.

Barak is told that if he will drag himself out in front of the army of Naphtali and Zebulun, then God will drag his enemy out to be defeated.  Well, fine, but Barak wants the prophet, the ‘mouthpiece’ for God, to come along as assurance.  After all, God wouldn’t let anything happen to her, right?  What if he needed a last-minute insight?  What if he didn’t understand the instructions (which seems to have happened)?

Barak wanted to obey, but with conditions.  His faith wasn’t where it needed to be for full obedience.  God called him to put 10,000 men up against 900 chariots and other soldiers.  That was simply too intimidating.  Those chariots just roll right over people.  They’re just not safe at all.  So, Barak wanted additional assurance that this scary plan would work.  And he got it.

The modification of Barak cost him the final victory, but not God.  God still won, but He used another woman, Jael.  Barak was not the guy.  He didn’t get Sisera, the chariot general of Jabin.  Jael, the wife of an ally of Jabin, got the general, and she got him with a tent peg through the temple, into the ground.  Very dramatic ending, but not very manly.  Barak was kept from defeating Sisera, but God still won the victory.

In similar ways, my Master will accomplish His plans, with or without me.  He will accomplish these plans using me as He intends, or, if my faith just isn’t there, in whatever way He wants, just with diminished returns for me.  I gain from my participation in His plans only to the level of my faith.  In other words, my level of cooperation determines the quality of what I get out of that cooperation.

God does negotiate.  Anyone reading Genesis 18:20-23 (a passage to be read with a Yiddish accent, or misunderstood) knows God negotiates.  In some ways, the Middle Eastern Bizarre is more the setting for our relationship than the military chain of command.  On the other hand, it’s in the midst of those negotiations that we lose something of what our Master has for us.  That’s what we bargain away.

On the other hand, there are times when our Master intends for us to negotiate; that’s the act of obedience.  Moses is told to step away from the Sons of Israel for Yahweh is going to destroy them.  But Moses negotiates for their survival.  That is what God wanted from Moses; that was the act of obedience.  So, how do you know?  What is it that tells you that negotiation isn’t obedience or that negotiation is the obedient thing?

The only way I can think of is to get to know God better.  The better we know His voice, His character, His plans and desires become clearer, and we’ll be able to better distinguish His will.  Be transformed by the renewing of your mind.  It is the experience we gain with and of God that enables us to know God’s mind, His will, and then be obedient.  Then we will know the good and acceptable and perfect will of God.

Well, that’s my view through this knothole.  What’s your view of God through the fence today?

No Thumbs

They found Adoni-bezek in Bezek and fought against him, and they defeated the Canaanites and the Perizzites.  But Adoni-bezek fled; and they pursued him and caught him and cut off his thumbs and big toes.  Adoni-bezek said, “Seventy kings with their thumbs and their big toes cut off used to gather up scraps under my table; as I have done, so God has repaid me.” So they brought him to Jerusalem and he died there. (Judges 1:5-7 NASB)

History is one of those fields of study that vainly attempts a scientific approach, but which always fails to avoid a good story.  After all, it’s the story of a culture that is the object of any anthropological study.  Unfortunately, people can be distracted by the details and miss the point.  I think that’s what happens way too often to this story.

Adoni-Bezek (or Adonai-Bezeq), is a person we can’t find.  The city of Bezek was found (we think), but it’s not in Judah’s territory.  At the end of this account, this king is taken to Jerusalem.  I mention that because in Joshua, which most of Judges 1 repeats, there is a king referred to as Adonai-Zedek who is the king of Jerusalem.  Maybe, though there’s no real evidence, there was a simple misspelling of the name, and this account in Judges refers to the same king in Joshua.  I suggest this for two reasons.

First, Jerusalem is the city of Salem mentioned in Genesis 14.  Melchizedek brought bread and wine out to Abraham after he rescued Lot, and Abraham gave him a tithe.  Melchizedek was referred to as “king of Salem”, and “priest of God Most High”.  So, this priest worships the same God as Abraham.  The name of this peculiar character is most often translated as “king of righteousness”.  I believe the name combines the two roles, priest and king, into one person.

Second, Salem becomes Jerusalem when the Jebusites inhabit it.  At that point this “king/priest” role seems to change, or at least the god worshiped seems to change.  Because when the Sons of Israel show up after 400 years, the people of Jerusalem are not on their side.  The name of this king, Adonai-Bezek (or Adonai-Zedek) uses the term for “lord” instead of “king”. These two titles are not that far apart, so, it would be “lord of Bezek”, or “lord of righteousness”, instead of “king” of whatever.  It’s somewhat semantic in difference.

Notice that this king still remembers the name of Yahweh (Lord).  He knew the God of the Sons of Israel, but didn’t worship Him.  He knew that becoming thumb-less was due to his treatment of others, a judgement on him by the God Most High his city used to worship.  He knew, but too late.  He didn’t act on what he knew.

What do I know, but don’t act on?  I know in Whom I have believed, and I too am persuaded that He is faithful.  I know that what I have entrusted to Him, He will keep until we meet in eternity.  But do I live that way?  Do I behave as if this is true, that I am persuaded of it?  How confident am I in my Master that He truly has my back, and that He loves me?  How much am I at His service?  Would people with whom I work know that about me?  Would the ones with whom I speak on the phone pick up on that?

The return on the investment of my life in my Master isn’t an improvement in my immediate surroundings.  The return on the investment of my life in my Master is in a changed lifestyle.  He changes me by my close association with Him.  It’s not that I try to be better, or kinder, or more polite.  By association, He changes me into someone who is simply more like Him.  Or, at least, that’s what’s supposed to be happening.  Sometimes I wonder.

What’s your view through the knothole this morning?