Archives For Interpretation

Why Psalm 40:1-3 Does Not Justify Using CCM to Evangelize Lost People

October 30, 2014

I have been closely following another lengthy online discussion about CCM. One participant in this discussion recently asserted that Psalm 40 justifies using CCM to evangelize lost people. He wrote,

The “new song” which God puts in our hearts may very well change with each generation. You have no right to determine subjectively what that means. You certainly have the right to hold to your position on music as preference, but if God has given us a “new song” which “many will see and fear, and put their trust in the Lord,” it destroys one of the key IFB arguments against CCM–“Music is never used for evangelism, only for edification.” With each generation, God has given a new song to communicate His truth to this generation. The style may not speak to the spirit of my heart, but it will speak to the heart of someone else who needs the message of the Gospel. I have no right to put God into a box and tell him He cannot use a certain style of music.[1]

A close look at two key aspects of the beginning verses of Psalm 40 shows why this argument is erroneous.[2]

The Identity of the Person Giving Testimony in Psalm 40:1-3

Psalm 40 begins with the following testimony:

Psa 40:1 <To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David.> I waited patiently for the LORD; and he inclined unto me, and heard my cry.

2 He brought me up also out of an horrible pit, out of the miry clay, and set my feet upon a rock, and established my goings.

3 And he hath put a new song in my mouth, even praise unto our God: many shall see it, and fear, and shall trust in the LORD.

From these verses, we know for certain that king David is the one who is giving this testimony.

Is this, then, an evangelistic testimony of how he became a true believer in the Lord or is it something other than that? Answering this question properly requires that we closely examine the precise nature of his testimony in these statements.

The Nature of the Testimony Given in Psalm 40:1-3

David begins by declaring, “I waited patiently for the Lord” (Ps. 40:1a). He then affirms how the Lord inclined Himself to David and heard his prayer (Ps. 40:1b-c).

Scripture never affirms that any unbeliever waits patiently for the Lord; in fact, they have turned away from Him and do not on their own want anything to do with Him (Cf. Rom. 3:10-18). The opening statement in Psalm 40, therefore, makes plain that this is not an evangelistic testimony that David gave about how he was saved—David is testifying of what he did as a true believer in the Lord and of the Lord’s response to him!

Not only is verse one therefore not an evangelistic testimony but also verses two and three therefore are also not verses relating David’s giving an evangelistic testimony; rather, they are his testimony as a believer of how God delivered him out of dire straits and filled his heart with a new song of grateful praise for His delivering him as a believer. This analysis shows that the reference to a “new song” in Psalm 40:3 does not have anything to do with giving lost people the gospel in song so that they will come to be true believers in the Lord.

Conclusion

Contrary to the confident assertions cited at the beginning of this post, the teaching about the “new song” in Psalm 40 does not provide any evidence that “destroys one of the key IFB arguments against CCM—‘Music is never used for evangelism, only for edification.’” A sound handling of Psalm 40:1-3 shows that it does not have anything to do with evangelizing lost people using a new song.

Psalm 40:1-3 does not justify using CCM to evangelize lost people. Those who believe that it is legitimate to use CCM to give the gospel to lost people cannot use this passage legitimately to support their view.

[1] Comment posted on October 14 at 10:08pm in the discussion, “The Sacred Cow” of CCM! 2-Part Discussion Question:”; https://www.facebook.com/groups/319245621580408/permalink/331652423673061/

[2] I am indebted to my pastor, Dr. Mark Minnick, for how his treatment of this passage in a message helped greatly to provide me with this proper understanding of the true nature of the testimony given in Psalm 40:1-3.

For more help with issues concerning CCM, please see the resources that I provide here.

Copyright © 2011-2024 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

In CCM, Interpretation
 permalink

Did King Josiah Die Out of the Will of God?

October 26, 2014

King Josiah was one of the best kings ever to rule over God’s people (2 Kings 23:25). A comparison of the two accounts of his death, however, raises the question of whether he may have died out of the will of God.

God’s Gracious Promise to Josiah

Because king Josiah had responded properly upon his hearing the Word of God (2 Kings 22:19; 2 Chron. 34:27), God graciously made the following promise to him:

2Ki 22:20 Behold therefore, I will gather thee unto thy fathers, and thou shalt be gathered into thy grave in peace; and thine eyes shall not see all the evil which I will bring upon this place. And they brought the king word again.

2Ch 34:28 Behold, I will gather thee to thy fathers, and thou shalt be gathered to thy grave in peace, neither shall thine eyes see all the evil that I will bring upon this place, and upon the inhabitants of the same. So they brought the king word again.

According to these statements, God promised to Josiah that he would be gathered to his grave in peace. This revelation from God very likely would seem to have led him to believe that he would die in a peaceful manner that would not involve great pain or suffering.

Did Josiah Reject Later Divine Revelation Because He Misunderstood This Promise?

Perhaps this promise of his going to the grave in peace even led Josiah to conclude that it would not be possible for him to die in a battle setting at the hands of an opponent. If so, this understanding (or something like it) that he would have had would explain why he did not heed the warning that Necho king of Egypt gave him not to fight against him:

2Ch 35:20 After all this, when Josiah had prepared the temple, Necho king of Egypt came up to fight against Carchemish by Euphrates: and Josiah went out against him.

21 But he sent ambassadors to him, saying, What have I to do with thee, thou king of Judah? I come not against thee this day, but against the house wherewith I have war: for God commanded me to make haste: forbear thee from meddling with God, who is with me, that he destroy thee not.

22 Nevertheless Josiah would not turn his face from him, but disguised himself, that he might fight with him, and hearkened not unto the words of Necho from the mouth of God, and came to fight in the valley of Megiddo.

In a striking statement, the inspired writer of 2 Chronicles makes known that Josiah rejected “the words of Necho from the mouth of God” (2 Chron. 35:22), which indicates that Josiah went against divine revelation that God chose to warn him with from the mouth of this Egyptian king!

Because Josiah did not heed that warning, he was fatally wounded and died a painful death:

2Ch 35:23 And the archers shot at king Josiah; and the king said to his servants, Have me away; for I am sore wounded.

24 His servants therefore took him out of that chariot, and put him in the second chariot that he had; and they brought him to Jerusalem, and he died, and was buried in one of the sepulchres of his fathers. And all Judah and Jerusalem mourned for Josiah.

His dying such a death hardly seems to be a fulfillment of the promise that he would be gathered to his grave in peace. On this reading, Josiah died out of the will of God because he did not heed the warning that God gave him through the mouth of Necho.

If this is in fact what happened, God intended that Josiah would die later in some peaceful manner, but Josiah died out of the will of God. Alternatively, the promise that God gave to Josiah may have meant all along that Josiah would receive a proper burial regardless of how he would die. In that case, God’s promise was fulfilled to Josiah, and he did not die out of the will of God.

What do you think?

Copyright © 2011-2024 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

In Interpretation, Theology
 permalink

Lessons from an Examination of How the Grace of God Abounded to Jephthah

October 19, 2014

Jephthah was a judge in Israel who made a problematic vow that may have led him to offer his only daughter as a human sacrifice (Judges 11). An examination of how the grace of God abounded to him in spite of the consequences of his vow provides us with some valuable lessons.

Jephthah as a Spiritually Minded Judge in Israel

During a dark period in Israel’s history, “Jephthah the Gileadite was a mighty man of valor” (Judges 11:1). Because he was the son of a harlot, his brethren prevented him from inheriting a share of his father’s estate (Judges 11:1-2). Fleeing from them, Jephthah lived in the land of Tob and became the leader over a band of “vain men” who joined up with him (Judges 11:3).

When the Ammonites warred against Israel, the elders of Gilead sought him out to lead Israel in fighting against them (Judges 11:4-10). In spite of his being the son of a harlot and drawing to himself a group of worthless men, Jephthah manifested at this time both to the Israelites and to their enemies that he was a spiritually minded man.

He testified to his understanding that if he would have success in fighting with their enemies, it would be from God’s working on his behalf: “The Lord deliver them before me” (Judges 11:9). He showed that he believed in the importance of communicating publicly with God on the important occasion of his being made the head and captain over God’s people: “Jephthah uttered all his words before the Lord in Mizpeh” (Judges 11:11).

He knew correctly the spiritual nature of Israel’s prior conquests (Judges 11:15-22) and testified faithfully to it in appealing to the king of the Ammonites not to war against Israel without just cause (Judges 11:21, 23). He also had a right awareness of and appreciation for what constituted wrongful human actions against other humans: “Wherefore I have not sinned against thee, but thou doest me wrong to war against me” (Judges 11:27a).

Jephthah’s testifying this truth to his enemies in the face of the impending conflict with them shows that he desired rightfully to prevent them from waging an unjust war. He also faithfully testified to his proper understanding of the Lord as the Judge who rightly judges among people who sinfully war against one another: “The Lord the Judge be judge this day between the children of Israel and the children of Ammon” (Judges 11:27b).

Taken at face value, these many statements point to Jephthah’s being a spiritually minded judge in at least a number of ways. When, therefore, we consider the problematic vow that he made, we must take care not to allow it to so color our perspectives about him as to prevent us from forming a right overall perspective about him.

Jephthah’s Problematic Vow and Subsequent Life

After the Ammonites refused to heed Jephthah’s efforts to dissuade them from attacking the Israelites (Judges 11:28), the Holy Spirit came upon him (Judges 11:29a). He then traveled to meet the Ammonites in battle (Judges 11:29b).

At this point, Jephthah made a problematic vow that if God would give him victory over the Ammonites, he would offer up as a burnt offering to the Lord whatever would come forth out of his house to meet him (Judges 11:30-31). This vow has occasioned considerable difference of opinion among interpreters about what he actually did and why.

Since God did for him what he had spoken of in his vow, Jephthah believed that he was constrained to keep his vow (Judges 11:35-40). His doing so further testifies to his being a spiritually minded man who believed that he had to keep a vow that he made regardless of how costly it might prove to him (cf. Ps. 15:4).

Because Scripture states that Jephthah “did with her according to his vow which he had vowed” (Judges 11:39), we must hold that either he actually sacrificed his only daughter as a burnt offering to the Lord or he did something else that somehow yet fulfilled his vow. Whatever he chose to do in fulfilling his vow became the basis for a new custom of lamenting in Israel, which points to the sorrowful nature of whatever he did to fulfill his vow (Judges 11:39c).

Following the account of his fulfilling his vow and its aftermath, Scripture recounts how Jephthah handled a pressing conflict with the Ephraimites (Judges 12:1-6). The Old Testament account of his life ends with information about the length of his judging Israel and about his death and burial (Judges 12:7).

Jephthah Mentioned in Hebrews 11

If Jephthah did in fact sacrifice his only daughter, he certainly committed a heinous act. Especially in that case, were Judges 11:1-12:7 the only revelation that we had about him, we might even be justified in doubting whether he truly ever was a believer in the first place.

New Testament mention of him in Hebrews 11:32, however, indisputably shows that he was a true believer in Jehovah regardless of how he kept his problematic vow. If he did keep it by sacrificing his daughter, Hebrews 11 magnifies God’s grace to Jephthah all the more because it shows that God chose to provide us with revelation many centuries after he had already died that shows that he was a true believer in spite of his having made a problematic vow and having committed a heinous act!

Especially because of Hebrews 11:32, we must take care not to make the account of his problematic vow the sum total of our viewpoint about him. Rather, we must allow both the evidence of his being an otherwise spiritually minded judge and the mention of him in Hebrews 11 to shape aright how we regard him as a believer.

Conclusion

Regardless of whether he sacrificed his daughter as a burnt offering to the Lord or not, Jephthah was a true believer. We certainly will see him in heaven one day.

God’s choosing to mention Jephthah in Hebrews 11:32 magnifies His grace and instructs us that we must keep in mind that there may be people in our day whose salvation we may strongly doubt who may yet be true believers in spite of the overt wickedness of some aspects of their lives. The account of Jephthah’s vow also instructs us to be very careful in making any promises to people without thoroughly considering every possibility for how unforeseen developments might cause us to regret greatly that we made those promises.

I look forward to meeting Jephthah one day and having him provide us with a fuller account of what he actually did to keep his problematic vow.

 

 

[1] For a helpful discussion of some pros and cons for holding the view that he did sacrifice his daughter, see this post by my friend Mark Ward.

Copyright © 2011-2024 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

In Exposition, Interpretation, Theology
 permalink

How You Should Prepare to Face Possible Exposure to Ebola

October 8, 2014

Possible exposure to the deadly Ebola virus is a sobering reality for which we all must prepare ourselves. Careful attention to a striking truth in Ezekiel 14 reveals a vital aspect of how we should prepare to face the possibility of contracting this potentially life-threatening disease.

Divine Revelation concerning Surviving Pestilence Sent by God

In Ezekiel’s day, many of the house of Israel were profoundly unrighteous people (Ezek. 14:1-11). God sent a stern message to Ezekiel that made known profound truth about who would be able to survive His fierce judgments that He would send on an evil land that had sinned against Him “by trespassing grievously” (Ezek. 14:12-20).

God declared that He would judge the sinful land through “four sore judgments” (Ezek. 14:21), including pestilence (Ezek. 14:19-20) that would “cut off from it man and beast” (Ezek. 14:19). In the midst of this grim message, God specified a remarkable truth about what would be the case if three stellar biblical personages (Noah, Daniel, and Job) dwelled in that land in the midst of such a pestilence:

Eze 14:19 Or if I send a pestilence into that land, and pour out my fury upon it in blood, to cut off from it man and beast:

20 Though Noah, Daniel, and Job, were in it, as I live, saith the Lord GOD, they shall deliver neither son nor daughter; they shall but deliver their own souls by their righteousness.

Although these godly men would not be able to deliver anyone else, even their own children, by their righteousness, we should not overlook that this statement directly affirms that they would be able to deliver themselves individually from this pestilence “by their righteousness”! In Ezekiel’s day, therefore, God affirmed that some people, if those people were exceptionally righteous people, would be delivered from a pestilence that He would send upon a wicked land.

Moreover, Scripture explicitly reveals that neither Noah (cf. Gen. 9:21) nor Job (Job 42:1-6) was a sinless person and yet they would have survived this pestilence “by their righteousness” had they been in a land that God would judge in that manner. Being a perfect sinless person, therefore, was not a requirement for surviving such a pestilence through one’s own righteousness.

Applying Ezekiel 14:20 to the Present Ebola Threat

Although Ezekiel 14:20 does affirm that Noah, Daniel, and Job would have survived a pestilence that God would send to judge a sinful land, it does not thereby affirm that people who were less righteous than they were would also survive under such circumstances. This observation suggests that a vital aspect of our properly facing the present Ebola threat is that we should strive by God’s grace to be as righteous as possible in each of our own lives individually.1

For those of us who are believers in Jesus Christ as Lord, let us all immediately turn from all unrighteousness in our lives and seek with all our might to please God in all things at all times. Striving wholeheartedly to obey and please God out of love for Him is not “legalism” (cf. Col. 1:10; Heb. 13:21), and doing so will put us in the best position humanly possible in the will of God to survive exposure to Ebola. (Of course, doing so does not negate the importance of our also making every effort possible to prepare for this threat by following proper guidelines for healthy living, etc.)

If you are not a believer in Jesus Christ as Lord, I urge you to repent toward God and believe in the Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 20:21). To learn more about how you as a sinner (like all the rest of us) can yet be declared righteous by God (after which you would then seek to live righteously before God, even as Noah, Daniel, and Job did), please see my post The Gospel of God and His Christ.

1Although there is no way for any of us to know whether God is using (or will use) Ebola to judge our countries for their evil, as He spoke of doing in Ezekiel 14:19-21, our inability to know this information does not seem to change the applicability of this passage to our circumstances. Even if this passage understood correctly should turn out not to be applicable directly to our situation, seeking to be as righteous as possible before God in our lives would still be a valid and vital way to prepare for this threat, as the account of Hezekiah’s pleading his righteousness before God (Isa. 38:3) shows when he was faced with terminal illness and then received healing in answer to his prayer (Isa. 38; cf. 2 Kings 20:1-11).

Copyright © 2011-2024 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

In Exhortation, Health, Interpretation
 permalink

You Can Be Pleasing to God in the Midst of Terrible Circumstances!

October 4, 2014

First Kings 14 provides a glorious account that has great relevance to the very difficult life circumstances that a vast number of people in the world are facing today. A close look at this passage shows that you can be pleasing to God in the midst of terrible circumstances!

The Great Wickedness of Israel under the Rule of King Jeroboam I

As His judgment upon Solomon for his wickedness, God brought about the division of His people into the Northern Kingdom of Israel and the Southern Kingdom of Judah (1 Kings 11-12). God raised up Jeroboam the son of Nebat to be king over the Northern Kingdom (1 Kings 11:31, 35).

Jeroboam was a horrifically wicked king (1 Kings 11:26-33; 13:33-34). He sinned greatly in spite of God’s great goodness to him (1 Kings 14:7-9; see this post for an explanation of this important point).

Under his evil rule, Israel became very wicked (1 Kings 12:30; 13:33; 15:30). False worship abounded in Israel far more than it ever had prior to the reign of Jeroboam (cf. 1 Kings 14:9).

One Who Was Pleasing to God in This Evil King’s Own Household

Scripture implicitly highlights the great wickedness of Jeroboam’s household in a noteworthy way by revealing that there was only one person in it who was pleasing to God (in some unspecified manner):

1Ki 14:13 And all Israel shall mourn for him, and bury him: for he only of Jeroboam shall come to the grave, because in him there is found some good thing toward the LORD God of Israel in the house of Jeroboam.

This statement, however, does much more than implicitly highlight the wickedness of Jeroboam’s household—it magnifies the reality that Abijah the son of Jeroboam (I Kings 14:1) was a person in the royal household in whom was “found some good thing toward the Lord” (1 Kings 14:13)!

The Glorious Significance of Abijah’s Uniqueness

In a manner that Scripture does not explain, Abijah was somehow still pleasing to God even though all the rest of his family was wicked, especially his father. Moreover, God found something good in him in spite of the great wickedness of all the people around him and of the country in which he lived.

Despite his terrible circumstances, especially the horrifically false worship that permeated Israel at this time, Abijah was yet pleasing to God to an extent that God deemed it worthy to record in His eternal Word how He would uniquely favor him in contrast to the fate that the rest of his family would experience! This record about God’s strikingly taking notice of Abijah provides us all with a glorious account of how someone was pleasing to God in spite of his terrible circumstances!

By not specifying anything about what was good about Abijah or about how and why Abijah had something good in him toward God, the Holy Spirit has made this text applicable for people who live in all kinds of bad situations. Undoubtedly, God intends from this passage that you would learn and believe that like Abijah, you can be pleasing to God in the midst of terrible circumstances!

May He grant you repentance (as needed) and faith to please Him regardless of how difficult your life circumstances may be.

To learn how you can be pleasing to God, please read my post The Gospel of God and His Christ.

Copyright © 2011-2024 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

In Exhortation, Exposition, Interpretation
 permalink

A Light in the Midst of Great Darkness

September 29, 2014

King Jeroboam I was one of the worst kings ever to rule over God’s people (1 Ki. 14:9). In the midst of a horrifyingly tragic account of his life, Scripture records some glorious revelation about God’s goodness in providing a light in the midst of the great darkness of this evil ruler’s life.

Tragic Sinfulness in spite of God’s Great Goodness

Because of the evil that Solomon and Judah had committed against the Lord (1 Ki. 11:1-9), God made known through the prophet Ahijah that He would “rend the kingdom out of the hand of Solomon, and [would] give ten tribes to” Jeroboam (1 Ki. 11:31). God then offered to Jeroboam a magnificent prospect if he would be righteous before the Lord:

1Ki 11:37 And I will take thee, and thou shalt reign according to all that thy soul desireth, and shalt be king over Israel.

38 And it shall be, if thou wilt hearken unto all that I command thee, and wilt walk in my ways, and do that is right in my sight, to keep my statutes and my commandments, as David my servant did; that I will be with thee, and build thee a sure house, as I built for David, and will give Israel unto thee.

Through his wickedly originating false worship among Israel, Jeroboam tragically forfeited the great favor that God had offered to him (1 Ki. 12:26-33).

God sent a prophet to Jeroboam to make known the fierce judgment that would come upon him for his wickedness (1 Ki. 13:1-3). Instead of immediately repenting and pleading with God for mercy, Jeroboam sought to persecute the prophet that God had sent to him (1 Ki. 13:4a).

Jeroboam immediately experienced divine judgment upon him, resulting in his hand drying up so that he was unable to pull it back in again to him (1 Ki. 13:4b). In an amazing display of yet more favor to Jeroboam, God even restored the king’s hand when the prophet interceded for him (1 Ki. 13:6).

Instead of allowing God’s continuing goodness to him to lead him to repentance (cf. Rom. 2:4), Jeroboam tragically continued in his wicked ways (1 Ki. 13:33-34). As a result, he experienced further judgment from God (1 Ki. 14:1-18).

Amazing Favor in the Midst of Great Wickedness

Because of Jeroboam’s great wickedness, God judged him by touching the life of his son Abijah (1 Ki. 14:1). Jeroboam deceitfully sent his wife to the prophet Abijah to find out what would happen to his son (1 Ki. 14:2-16).

Through the revelation that Abijah gave to Jeroboam’s wife, God confronted Jeroboam with how he had failed wickedly to be righteous before God in spite of God’s favor to him (1 Ki. 14:7-9). In fact, God made known to Jeroboam that he had been more wicked than all who were before him (1 Ki. 14:9).

God declared His fierce judgment that would could come upon him and his household because of his great sinfulness (1 Ki. 14:10-16). God’s judgment on Jeroboam would include the death of his son Abijah (1 Ki. 14:12).

In the midst of the record of God’s great judgment that would come on this horrifically wicked king, we read that God had favored Jeroboam in an amazing way by giving him his son Abijah, in whom alone there was “found some good thing toward the Lord God of Israel in the house of Jeroboam” (1 Ki. 14:13). This remarkable statement shows that even in the midst of the great darkness that permeated the life of this wicked king, God had given him light within his own home!

Jeroboam had the opportunity to see the truth of God through observing the life of his son. Jeroboam, however, failed tragically to behold the light that God had so graciously provided for him in his own household.

God had favored this wicked king in an amazing way even in the midst of how wicked he had been! Although Jeroboam did not profit from God’s provision of a light in the midst of great darkness of his life, we who have the privilege of reading this tragic account should allow the goodness of God that is abundantly seen in this passage to lead us to repent from all of our evil ways!

Copyright © 2011-2024 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

In Exhortation, Exposition
 permalink

How Joshua 6:25 Implicitly Authenticates the Miraculous Conquest of Jericho

September 25, 2014

Joshua 6 records how God directed the Israelites to conquer Jericho in part through His miraculously working through them to bring down the wall of the city. After the wall had fallen down (Josh. 6:20), the Israelites annihilated everyone in the city except for Rahab and her father’s household (Josh. 6:21-25).

Near the end of that account of their conquest, in a statement that could be easily overlooked, the Holy Spirit provides a striking implicit authentication of the miraculous nature of the Israelites’ conquest of Jericho:

Jos 6:25 And Joshua saved Rahab the harlot alive, and her father’s household, and all that she had; and she dwelleth in Israel even unto this day; because she hid the messengers, which Joshua sent to spy out Jericho.

Joshua relates here that Rahab was dwelling in Israel “even unto this day.” Because “this day” in this verse refers to the time that Joshua wrote the book, Rahab was still alive when Joshua wrote the book and was therefore a living non-Israelite witness to what had happened when the Israelites conquered Jericho.

Anyone who would have had doubts at that time about the miraculous conquest of Jericho could have come to Rahab herself and received firsthand verification of what took place at that time. By inspiring Joshua to pen these words, the Holy Spirit thus gave to many of those who were the first readers of the book a glorious implicit authentication of God’s miraculously working through the Israelites to bring about that conquest!

Furthermore, these words also serve the same purpose for all subsequent believing readers of the book because it informs us implicitly that those who first received the book would have rejected the book had they determined through direct contact with Rahab that its record of that conquest was inauthentic. In this way, Joshua 6:25 implicitly authenticates for every reader the miraculous nature of the Israelites’ conquest of Jericho!

Copyright © 2011-2024 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

In Interpretation, Theology
 permalink

Do You Understand How Deuteronomy 23:3-5 Illumines Romans 8:28?

September 18, 2014

Romans 8:28 is one of the most comforting statements in Scripture and gives every true believer great encouragement when it is received properly. I recently discovered that Deuteronomy 23:3-5 illumines Romans 8:28 in a way that is worth noting!

See if you can figure out how the former sheds valuable light on the latter:

Deu 23:3 An Ammonite or Moabite shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to their tenth generation shall they not enter into the congregation of the LORD for ever:

4 Because they met you not with bread and with water in the way, when ye came forth out of Egypt; and because they hired against thee Balaam the son of Beor of Pethor of Mesopotamia, to curse thee.

5 Nevertheless the LORD thy God would not hearken unto Balaam; but the LORD thy God turned the curse into a blessing unto thee, because the LORD thy God loved thee.

Rom 8:28 And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.

 Do you understand how Deuteronomy 23:3-5 illumines Romans 8:28?

Copyright © 2011-2024 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

In Interpretation, Theology
 permalink

How Scripture Exposes Some Common Tactics of Corrupt Politicians

September 9, 2014

Second Samuel 15 records some key tactics used by a popular man who obtained a top position of national leadership through corrupt practices. This revelation provides helpful biblical instruction about some common tactics of corrupt politicians.

Absalom as a Popular Figure in Israel

In addition to his being a son of the king, Absalom was an exceedingly handsome man who was highly praised for his remarkably unblemished physical appearance (2 Sam. 14:25). He also exerted considerable influence over his father king David (cf. 2 Sam. 13:27).

How Absalom Usurped His Father’s Throne

Absalom usurped his father’s throne through a “political” campaign of convincing aggrieved people (2 Sam. 15:2b) that his father did not really care enough about them to give them the justice that they deserved (2 Sam. 15:3). Using an extensive PR campaign of rising early to meet these people (2 Sam. 15:2) and patronizing them (Absalom “put forth his hand, and took him, and kissed him” [2 Sam. 15:5]), Absalom was able to steal away their hearts from their allegiance to David as their king (2 Sam. 15:6).

Absalom then lied to his father about his desire to serve God and did so in order to accomplish his evil purposes (2 Sam. 15:7-9). Through his influence over a vast number of co-conspirators, he was able to usurp the throne of David (2 Sam. 15:10-12).

The Deceitfulness of Absalom

Scripture provides no evidence that Absalom was truly concerned with providing unjustly treated people in Israel with the justice for which they sought. His goal was rather to attain supreme national authority (2 Sam. 15:10) by pretending that he really cared for their welfare.

To obtain his ends, Absalom asserted that King David had failed to depute someone to hear and settle their cases justly (2 Sam. 15:3). Scripture, however, does not mention anything about such a failure on David’s part.

Furthermore, Absalom asserted that he was qualified and eager to serve the people in such a capacity (2 Sam. 15:4). Again, we have no biblical basis for thinking that he had the character and training to exercise such authority over the people.

Instead, he used his “charismatic” appeal (cf. 2 Sam. 14:25; 15:5) to sway them into believing that he was qualified to do what he claimed he would do for them and that he would do so if they supported him in overthrowing their government. Through his great deceitfulness, Absalom even succeeded in manipulating many other people into unknowingly support him in usurping the throne of Israel (2 Sam. 15:11).

Some Common Tactics of Corrupt Politicians

The Scriptural account of Absalom’s corrupt rise to power reveals that he employed some common tactics to deceive people into wanting him to be in a leading position of authority over them:

1. He used his highly attractive appearance and his skill in patronizing people to ingratiate himself with them. Pretending to take a genuine personal interest in them, he was able to win their hearts.

2. He used his skill at deceitfully manipulating people so that they thought he was qualified to rule over them in a capacity in which he had no intent in doing so.

3. He deceived people who wanted justice from their existing governmental leaders into thinking that their government did not really care for them and that he really cared for their concerns and would see to it that their concerns would be addressed properly. He thus manipulated these people so that they would support him in overthrowing the supposedly unjust leader who was then ruling over them.

4. He lied to the existing governmental authority to achieve his evil purpose.

5. He pretended to be a religious man when it suited his evil designs.

6. He skillfully used his abilities to manipulate people to form a strong conspiracy against legitimate governmental authority. In fact, he was so cunning that he was able deceitfully to garner the support of a sizeable number of people who did not know anything about his evil intentions.

Through this passage that exposes these common tactics of corrupt politicians, let us beware of the use of such tactics by deceitful, popular people who are highly skilled in manipulating people into supporting them in their political activities. Furthermore, let us scrutinize carefully the claims of all those who assert that putting them into power would help us to get the justice that we deserve but supposedly have not received from existing governmental leaders who are legitimately in power over us.

Copyright © 2011-2024 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

In Discipleship, Exposition, Theology
 permalink

Interpreting the Bible More Accurately: Awareness of the Likelihood of Unstated Agency

August 24, 2014

An analysis of two passages concerning authorities whom the Bible speaks of as having performed an action that someone else actually performed reveals that we need to have an awareness of the likelihood of unstated agency in other similar passages. By keeping this aspect of biblical revelation in mind, we will interpret such passages in the Bible more accurately.

Who Executed the Amalekite Who Claimed to Have Killed Saul?

After Rechab and Baanah had slain Ishbosheth, Saul’s son, they came to David to give him the supposed good news of God’s avenging him:

2Sa 4:5 And the sons of Rimmon the Beerothite, Rechab and Baanah, went, and came about the heat of the day to the house of Ishbosheth, who lay on a bed at noon.

 6 And they came thither into the midst of the house, as though they would have fetched wheat; and they smote him under the fifth rib: and Rechab and Baanah his brother escaped.

 7 For when they came into the house, he lay on his bed in his bedchamber, and they smote him, and slew him, and beheaded him, and took his head, and gat them away through the plain all night.

 8 And they brought the head of Ishbosheth unto David to Hebron, and said to the king, Behold the head of Ishbosheth the son of Saul thine enemy, which sought thy life; and the LORD hath avenged my lord the king this day of Saul, and of his seed.

David responded by rehearsing to them what had happened earlier when someone had come to him to give him the supposed good tidings of the death of Saul:

2Sa 4:9 And David answered Rechab and Baanah his brother, the sons of Rimmon the Beerothite, and said unto them, As the LORD liveth, who hath redeemed my soul out of all adversity,

 10 When one told me, saying, Behold, Saul is dead, thinking to have brought good tidings, I took hold of him, and slew him in Ziklag, who thought that I would have given him a reward for his tidings:

Note that 2 Samuel 4:10 relates that David said that he took hold of this one (who told him that Saul was dead) and slew him.

Although 2 Samuel 4 does not specify precisely who this one was who related the news about Saul to David, an earlier account in 2 Samuel 1:5-10 informs us that this man was an Amalekite who said that he had killed Saul:

2Sa 1:5 And David said unto the young man that told him, How knowest thou that Saul and Jonathan his son be dead?

 6 And the young man that told him said, As I happened by chance upon mount Gilboa, behold, Saul leaned upon his spear; and, lo, the chariots and horsemen followed hard after him.

 7 And when he looked behind him, he saw me, and called unto me. And I answered, Here am I.

 8 And he said unto me, Who art thou? And I answered him, I am an Amalekite.

 9 He said unto me again, Stand, I pray thee, upon me, and slay me: for anguish is come upon me, because my life is yet whole in me.

 10 So I stood upon him, and slew him, because I was sure that he could not live after that he was fallen: and I took the crown that was upon his head, and the bracelet that was on his arm, and have brought them hither unto my lord.

Second Samuel 1:13-15 then makes known who actually slew this Amalekite:

2Sa 1:13 And David said unto the young man that told him, Whence art thou? And he answered, I am the son of a stranger, an Amalekite.

 14 And David said unto him, How wast thou not afraid to stretch forth thine hand to destroy the LORD’S anointed?

 15 And David called one of the young men, and said, Go near, and fall upon him. And he smote him that he died.

Whereas in 2 Samuel 4:10 we read of David’s saying that he took hold of this Amalekite and slew him, 2 Samuel 1:15 informs us that what really happened was that David ordered one of his young men to slay him. These two passages, therefore, provide an example of a statement about the action of an authority figure that depicts the authority figure as having performed the action (2 Sam. 4:10), but in reality, he performed the action through the agency of another (2 Sam. 1:15).

Who Beheaded John the Baptist?

The Synoptic Gospels record three parallel accounts of the death of John the Baptist. An examination of these accounts shows that they provide us with another example of the actions of an authority figure that involved agency but that agency is explicitly stated in only one of the accounts.

Luke records that king Herod Antipas said that he had beheaded John: “And Herod said, John have I beheaded” (Luke 9:9).[1] Mark, however, makes clear that Herod himself did not behead John directly:

Mar 6:25 And she came in straightway with haste unto the king, and asked, saying, I will that thou give me by and by in a charger the head of John the Baptist.

 26 And the king was exceeding sorry; yet for his oath’s sake, and for their sakes which sat with him, he would not reject her.

 27 And immediately the king sent an executioner, and commanded his head to be brought: and he went and beheaded him in the prison,

Here we learn that an executioner sent by Herod was the one who actually beheaded John. Comparing Luke 9:9 with Mark 6:27 shows that Scripture records in Luke 9:9 that an authority figure claimed to have performed an action, but what he said was in reality a statement that did not make explicit the agency of another who actually performed the action at the command of the authority figure.

Application 

Two passages illustrate how we should apply the understanding developed above concerning having an awareness of unstated agency when the Scripture records the actions of an authority figure. We will look at one passage each from both Testaments.

First, 2 Chronicles 28:6 declares, “For Pekah the son of Remaliah slew in Judah an hundred and twenty thousand in one day, which were all valiant men; because they had forsaken the LORD God of their fathers.” Obviously, Pekah did not himself directly kill 120,000 men in one day because he would have had to kill more than one person per second for every second of that day to slay that many men himself!

Clearly, we are to understand that king Pekah of Israel was an authority figure who authorized others who killed these people. The lack of mention of these agents and the possibility that king Pekah did himself kill some of these on that day in Judah in no way detracts from the certainty that others under him were actually responsible for killing the majority of these people.

Based on both the logistical impossibility of king Pekah’s personally slaying 120,000 men in one day and the implications of the passages that we have assessed above, we can be confident that a right interpretation of 2 Chronicles 28:6 requires a proper awareness of unstated agency in such passages.

Second, Acts records that king Herod Agrippa I persecuted the early Church (Acts 12:1-6). Luke writes of his killing James, one of the key leaders of the early Church:

Act 12:1 Now about that time Herod the king stretched forth his hands to vex certain of the church.

 2 And he killed James the brother of John with the sword.

Based on what we have observed earlier in the accounts of kings who executed people through the agency of others, it is highly probable that Herod did not himself use a sword to kill James—we should understand rather that he likely had one of his men do so.

 

 

 

 

[1] Matthew speaks similarly of Herod’s actions: “And the king was sorry: nevertheless for the oath’s sake, and them which sat with him at meat, he commanded it to be given her. And he sent, and beheaded John in the prison” (Matt. 14:9-10). Grammatically, the subject of “beheaded” in this verse is Herod, but because Matthew does say that Herod “sent and beheaded,” agency is also implied in this account.

Copyright © 2011-2024 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

In Interpretation
 permalink