To day, in paradise

Luke 23:43 And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.

Some theologians, feeling the weight of the statement of Jesus to the thief,[i] reorganize the wording as “Verily I say unto thee to day, Thou thou be with me in paradise” (that is, moving the comma after “to day” so to change today to referring to when Jesus made the statement, rather than when the thief would be in paradise). The purpose is to diffuse the strength of Jesus taking the thief with him to paradise on the very day he made the statement. They want to deflect to the idea that Jesus is just saying it today, not that the thief will be in paradise today.

To put the comma after “To day” would be an odd way to speak. When I am telling you something today, I do not have to tell you that I am telling you today. What other day would you be saying it? Translators consistently put the comma before “To day.” Every Bible translation at Bible Gateway that I looked at (even some other than English) has the verse translated in such a way to mean that “to day” refers to when the thief would be in paradise. In some translations, the comma does not come into play due to how the sentences are written. Further, the usage of semeron (σήμερον, today) in Luke demonstrates the same. When there is a quote, semeron (today) goes with the verb in the quote – not with the verb “said” before the quote (in other words, referencing the day on which something significant is happening). See Luke 5:26, 19:5, 19:9 for other examples in Luke. Compare also Mark 14:30, Hebrews 3:7, 3:15, and James 4:13 for other New Testament uses. The word “today” is an adverb that goes with the quote to tell when concerning the statement in the quote. It does not go with “I say” as if telling when “I say” it. The use of “Today I say,....” is not found in the New Testament.

---

[i] Most often, the objectors are those who do not believe in the immortality of the soul and/or the immediacy of paradise. For example, the Jehovah’s Witness New World Translation changes the verse to fit their theology: ‘And he said to him: “Truly I tell you today, you will be with me in Paradise.’” Notice, for example, how the incident of the death Stephen fits the theology of Luke 23, with the believer being received by Christ upon death (Acts 7:55-60). Others seem to fear a supposed contradiction between Luke 23:43 and John 20:17, and run from it in this manner (i.e., changing the comma in Luke 23:43).

John 13:1-17, Matthew Henry

What follows is four points on John 13:1-17, by the old English commentator Matthew Henry. In the past I have referred to these points by Henry for teaching/preaching on this passage. I believe they are helpful, and share them here for your edification.

I. Christ washed his disciples’ feet that he might give a proof of that great love wherewith he loved them; loved them to the end, vs. 1-2.

II. Christ washed his disciples’ feet that he might give an instance of his own wonderful humility, and show how lowly and condescending he was, and let all the world know how low he could stoop in love to his own. This is intimated, vs. 3-5.

III. Christ washed his disciples’ feet that he might signify to them spiritual washing, and the cleansing of the soul from the pollutions of sin. This is plainly intimated in his discourse with Peter upon it, vs. 6-11

IV. Christ washed his disciples’ feet to set before us an example. This explication he gave of what he had done, when he had done it, vs. 12-17.

The genealogies of Jesus

The inspired authors were giving the theology and redemptive history of Jesus Christ. They had neither interest in nor reason for answering skeptics. There is obvious intentional difference, with no concern about contradictions. Perhaps that should guide us in our approach. The most obvious distinction is that the trees trace two different lines from David forward. Also Shealtiel and Zerubabbel are in both lines.

Different Timing – Matthew gives the genealogy first, before he relates the virgin birth; Luke gives the genealogy later, after he relates the baptism of John.

Different Types - ascending and descending; Matthew begins in the past and descends to the present; Luke begins in the present and ascends to the past.

Different Trees - Solomon versus Nathan; Matthew traces the line via David’s son Solomon; Luke traces the line via David’s son Nathan (1 Chronicles 3:5; Zechariah 12:12)

Different Terminal -Abraham versus Adam; Matthew begins with Abraham and ends with Joseph; Luke begins with Joseph and ends with Adam.

Different Theological Purpose - Royal Messiah lineage (from Abraham and David) versus Universal Saviour/Creation lineage (from God and Adam).

Different Target - Matthew gives a truncated genealogy of three groups of 14 generations. Luke gives an expanded genealogy of 77 generations, 7 X 11.

• A descending genealogy begins with a person and traces forward to their descendants. (Who came from that person)
• An ascending genealogy begins with a person and traces backward to their ancestors. (Where did that person come from)

Different Explanations:

• 1. Matthew is the genealogy of Joseph and Luke the genealogy of Mary.
• Objection:
• Mary is not mentioned in Luke.
•         Answer:
• Biblical genealogies follow the line of the men, not women.
• 2. Matthew is the genealogy of Mary and Luke the genealogy of Joseph.
• 3. Both genealogies are about Joseph
• “Sextus Julius Africanus, a Christian historian from the early 3rd century, gave an explanation for the differing genealogies of Jesus which he claimed he had received from the descendants of James, the brother of Jesus. According to this claim, Heli died childless, and Jacob married Heli’s widow in accordance with levirate law. The firstborn son of Jacob and Heli’s widow was Joseph, and he was considered the legal son of Heli, though the biological son of Jacob. (For this to be so these brothers, Jacob and Heli, were uterine brothers, having the same mother but different fathers.) Africanus’s letter to Aristides is not extant, but the church historian Eusebius cited it.”
• Objection:
• Nathan’s genealogy is 13 generations longer than David’s son Solomon.
• In itself somewhat immaterial, for anyone who spends much time doing genealogical research. The timing of different lines can get way off. Some grandchildren can be older than some children, for example.
• 4. Joseph was adopted as a child, and thus had both a “natural” genealogy and an “adopted” genealogy. 
• 5. Both genealogies are for Joseph, and the contradictions between them are a matter of poor record keeping in those days. (Often held by those who reject the inspiration of Scripture.)
• 6. The people in the genealogies had multiple names; the two genealogies refer to the same people by different names. 
• 7. Luke is the genealogy of Joseph, and Matthew is the record of the succession of kings from the throne of David, through Solomon, to Christ. That is, Matthew presents a royal genealogy to affirm Jesus’ claim to David’s throne; Luke provides an actual biological lineage through Joseph.
• 8. Augustine emphasizes the different placement – Matthew before the birth of Christ, and Luke after his baptism. He took this as Matthew relating ordinary biological generation, but that Luke highlights the priestly lineage.

Liberal/critical

• 1. Neither genealogy is an actual historical family lineage. They are rather literary constructs shaped by each Gospel’s theological purpose.
• 2. Both genealogies are for Joseph, and the contradictions between them are a matter of poor record keeping in those days.

Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John circulated as a collection of the Gospels shortly after they were written; then as part of the canon of the New Testament. Why would the two genealogies continue to be circulated together if they were contradictory and unreliable? Maybe there’s something we’re missing that earlier readers got!

Matthew Henry: The difference between the two evangelists in the genealogy of Christ has been a stumbling-block to infidels that cavil at the word, but such a one as has been removed by the labours of learned men, both in the early ages of the church and in latter times, to which we refer ourselves. Matthew draws the pedigree from Solomon, whose natural line ending in Jechonias, the legal right was transferred to Salathiel, who was of the house of Nathan, another son of David, which line Luke here pursues, and so leaves out all the kings of Judah. It is well for us that our salvation doth not depend upon our being able to solve all these difficulties, nor is the divine authority of the gospels at all weakened by them; for the evangelists are not supposed to write these genealogies either of their own knowledge or by divine inspiration, but to have copied them out of the authentic records of the genealogies among the Jews, the heralds' books, which therefore they were obliged to follow; and in them they found the pedigree of Jacob, the father of Joseph, to be as it is set down in Matthew; and the pedigree of Heli, the father of Mary, to be as it is set down here in Luke. And this is the meaning of hos enomizeto (Luke 3:23), not, as it was supposed, referring only to Joseph, but uti sancitum est lege--as it is entered into the books, as we find it upon record; by which is appeared that Jesus was both by father and mother's side the Son of David, witness this extract out of their own records, which any one might at that time have liberty to compare with the original, and further the evangelists needed not to go; nay, had they varied from that, they had not gained their point. Its not being contradicted at that time is satisfaction enough to us now that it is a true copy, as it is further worthy of observation, that, when those records of the Jewish genealogies had continued thirty or forty years after these extracts out of them, long enough to justify the evangelists therein, they were all lost and destroyed with the Jewish state and nation; for now there was no more occasion for them.

The rest below is just a mish-mash of stuff I copied. I am leaving it as is, just to have access to it.

https://www.oneforisrael.org/jesus-genealogies-contradictory-or-complimentary/

the son of Joseph, 

which was the son of Heli, 

which was the son of Matthat, 

which was the son of Levi, 

which was the son of Melchi, 

which was the son of Janna, 

which was the son of Joseph, 

which was the son of Mattathias, 

which was the son of Amos, 

which was the son of Naum, 

which was the son of Esli, 

which was the son of Nagge, 

which was the son of Maath, 

which was the son of Mattathias, 

which was the son of Semei, 

which was the son of Joseph, 

which was the son of Juda, 

which was the son of Joanna, 

which was the son of Rhesa, 

which was the son of Zorobabel, 

which was the son of Salathiel, 

which was the son of Neri, 

which was the son of Melchi, 

which was the son of Addi, 

which was the son of Cosam, 

which was the son of Elmodam, 

which was the son of Er, 

which was the son of Jose, 

which was the son of Eliezer, 

which was the son of Jorim, 

which was the son of Matthat, 

which was the son of Levi, 

which was the son of Simeon, 

which was the son of Juda, 

which was the son of Joseph, 

which was the son of Jonan, 

which was the son of Eliakim, 

which was the son of Melea, 

which was the son of Menan, 

which was the son of Mattatha, 

which was the son of Nathan, 

which was the son of David, 

which was the son of Jesse, 

which was the son of Obed, 

which was the son of Booz, 

which was the son of Salmon, 

which was the son of Naasson, 

which was the son of Aminadab, 

which was the son of Aram, 

which was the son of Esrom, 

which was the son of Phares, 

which was the son of Juda, 

which was the son of Jacob, 

which was the son of Isaac, 

which was the son of Abraham, 

which was the son of Thara, 

which was the son of Nachor, 

which was the son of Saruch, 

which was the son of Ragau, 

which was the son of Phalec, 

which was the son of Heber, 

which was the son of Sala, 

which was the son of Cainan, 

which was the son of Arphaxad, 

which was the son of Sem, 

which was the son of Noe, 

which was the son of Lamech, 

which was the son of Mathusala, 

which was the son of Enoch, 

which was the son of Jared, 

which was the son of Maleleel, 

which was the son of Cainan, 

which was the son of Enos, 

which was the son of Seth, 

which was the son of Adam, 

which was the son of God.

Abraham begat Isaac; 

and Isaac begat Jacob; 

and Jacob begat Judas and his brethren;

and Judas begat Phares and Zara of Thamar; 

and Phares begat Esrom;

and Esrom begat Aram; 

and Aram begat Aminadab; 

and Aminadab begat Naasson; 

and Naasson begat Salmon; 

and Salmon begat Booz of Rachab; 

and Booz begat Obed of Ruth;

and Obed begat Jesse; 

and Jesse begat David the king; 

and David the king begat Solomon of her that had been the wife of Urias; 

and Solomon begat Roboam; 

and Roboam begat Abia; 

and Abia begat Asa; 

and Asa begat Josaphat; 

and Josaphat begat Joram; 

and Joram begat Ozias; 

and Ozias begat Joatham; 

and Joatham begat Achaz; 

and Achaz begat Ezekias; 

and Ezekias begat Manasses; 

and Manasses begat Amon; 

and Amon begat Josias; 

and Josias begat Jechonias and his brethren, about the time they were carried away to Babylon:

and after they were brought to Babylon, Jechonias begat Salathiel; 

and Salathiel begat Zorobabel; 

and Zorobabel begat Abiud; 

and Abiud begat Eliakim; 

and Eliakim begat Azor; 

and Azor begat Sadoc; 

and Sadoc begat Achim; 

and Achim begat Eliud; 

and Eliud begat Eleazar; 

and Eleazar begat Matthan; 

and Matthan begat Jacob; 

and Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, 

of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

---

Africanus taught that one genealogy reckons by nature (Matthew) and the other by law (Luke). Heli and Jacob are uterine brothers (i.e., having the same mother but different fathers). Heli died childless, and his brother Jacob by levirate marriage raised up seed to him – Jacob was the father of Joseph by nature, but Joseph was the son of Heli by law. Therefore, Joseph was properly the son of both, one physically and one legally.

The Epistle to Aristides

https://www.tertullian.org/fathers2/ANF-06/anf06-48.htm#TopOfPage

page 139-140

The opinion that Luke’s genealogy is that of Mary was unknown to Christian antiquity. In the fifteenth century it was first propounded by Latin divines to do honour (as they supposed) to the Blessed Virgin. It was first broached by Annius of Viterbo, A.D. 1502. Christian antiquity is agreed that: —

1. Both genealogies are those of Joseph.

2. That Joseph was the of Jacob or of Heli, either by adoption, or because Jacob and Heli were own brothers or half-brothers; so that, m—

3. On the death of one of the brothers, without issue, the surviving brother married his widow, who became the mother of Joseph by this marriage; so that Joseph was reckoned the son of Jacob and the son of Heli.

4. Joseph and Mary were of the same lineage, but the Hebrews did not reckon descent from the side of the woman. For them St. Luke’s genealogy is the sufficient register of Christ’s royal descent and official claim. St. Luke give his personal pedigree, ascending to Adam, and identifying Him with the whole human race.

The Ante-Nicene Fathers: Translations of the Writings of the Fathers down to A.D. 325, Volume VI, Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, A. Cleveland Coxe, editors. Buffalo, NY: The Christian Literature Company, 1886

Commentaria Breviarium de Temporibus in Commentaria super opera diversorum auctorum de antiquitatibus loquentium, by Annius, Joannes [Nanni, Giovanni ; Annio da Viterbo], 1498

https://archive.org/details/bib_fict_4102734/page/n17/mode/2up

http://www.rtforum.org/lt/lt11.html#FN_25

What is a “normal” genealogy, when dealing with a miraculous virgin birth?

Acts 2:30 fruit of David’s loins

https://thecripplegate.com/is-lukes-genealogy-through-mary/

Levirate marriage, Mary’s genealogy, Legal Adoption, Consanguinity, Historical reservation (i.e. they are quoting others’ genealogy)

Bart Ehrman: “it differs from Matthew’s in numerous ways, many of them irreconcilable”

John Gill: “It is true indeed that Joseph was the son of Eli, having married his daughter; Mary was the daughter of Eli, and so the Jews speak of one Mary, the daughter of Eli, by whom they seem to design the mother of our Lord.”

https://thecripplegate.com/is-lukes-genealogy-through-mary/

Jesse Johnson, objecting to Luke’s genealogy being the line of Mary: “come together in Zerubbabel, then divide again at Shealtiel, then unite again at David. Identifying Luke as Mary’s doesn’t help this problem.” I’d say that identifying it as Joseph’s does not solve that problem either!

The Big Picture; or, a Forest Full of Trees

The Big Picture; or, a Forest Full of Trees.
1 Chronicles chapters 1-9.

In 21st century, genealogy is an interesting and fascinating hobby, which can be very rewarding in connecting us to our past. However, at the time the books of Chronicles were written, it was much more important than that. These books were written to a returning people who had been carried captive to a distant land, subjugated by a foreign power (cf. 1 Chronicles 9:1ff.). They have now returned back to their homeland, and they must reestablish themselves as a nation under God and its citizens. For the Jews, genealogies establish one’s tribe, clan, and family. The appointment of David to reign over the house of Israel, and the appointment of the Levites to serve at the house of God (tabernacle, temple) are important features.

There is a brief mention of Saul, followed by the Chronicler putting great emphasis on king David, especially his preparing for the Temple and his son Solomon building the Temple. See, for example, 1 Chronicles 22:2-5 (David prepares material), 1 Chronicles 22:6-19 (Solomon is charged), 1 Chronicles 23:1-26:32 (David organizes Temple worship), 1 Chronicles 27:1-29:9 (David and Solomon). Note also the emphasis on the religious reforms of Asa (2 Chronicles 14:1-15:15), Jehoshaphat (2 Chronicles 17, 19:1-20:30), and Hezekiah (2 Chronicles 29:3-31:21). Not only does the Chronicler positively emphasize the purpose of the book by adding material not in Samuel and Kings, he also emphasizes negatively omitting material found in them. Notice, for example, omissions of 2 Samuel :11:2-12:15; 1 Kings 11:1-40.

Except for the genealogies going back to Adam and forward to those in the exile and return – as well as not going back to Samuel – Chronicles covers the same timeframe as the books of Samuel and Kings.[i] Here is a rough parallel comparing them. 

Kingdom of Saul 1 Chronicles 10 1 Samuel 13–31

Kingdom of David 1 Chronicles 11–29 2 Samuel 1–1Kgs 2

Kingdom of Solomon 2 Chronicles 1–11 1 Kings 2–11

The Divided Kingdom 2 Chronicles 1–39 1 Kings 12–2 Kings 25

Two very significant verses:

1 Chronicles 17:24 - Let it even be established, that thy name may be magnified for ever, saying, The Lord of hosts is the God of Israel, even a God to Israel: and let the house of David thy servant be established before thee.

2 Chronicles 7:14 if my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.

The book of Chronicles begins from the first man in Genesis; the first word of 1 Chronicles is “Adam.” The first nine chapters of 1 Chronicles consists of genealogies. Those mentioned in them run from the first man Adam to six generations after the return from exile in Babylon (1 Chronicles 3:17-24). This covers a period composed of about 3700 years. The Chronicler retells stories of Israel’s past in order to revive Israel’s hope for the future. He was probably living in Jerusalem about 300 years before the coming of Jesus Christ. His writing points Israel toward the new king to come. The present Jews in Jerusalem were born in exile. They had returned to their homeland and needed to reconnect with their ancestry, the Law of Moses, and worshiping the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. 

The time period of the kingdom history covered in 1 & 2 Chronicles is the same as that described in 2 Samuel through 2 Kings. Although the time period covered is the same, the perspective is different. For example, the Chronicler includes David’s preparations for the temple, and the worship service of the temple. These are not found in 2 Samuel.

• God does not just work in the moment. He works over time.
• Each generation and individual was used to carry forth God’s promise.
• Individuals may not have known they were being used by God, or may not have understood how they were being used by God.
• The story of salvation preserved, culminating in the promised seed, Jesus Christ.
• God sees the big picture. God is in it for the long haul.

From Adam to the end of David’s reign as king covers almost 3000 years. Adam to the Flood 1656 years (1:1-4); Flood to Isaac 452 years (1:28); Birth of Isaac to the reign of David 886 years.

1 Chronicles 1:1-4. Adam to the Flood, 1656 years.

“Can’t see the forest for the trees” is an expression being too involved in the details of a problem to look at the situation as a whole. What can we acquire from these genealogies?

On the whole and in the parts:

• A continuation of the genealogies started in Genesis chapters 5, 10, etc.
• Some elucidation on variant spellings in the Bible (e.g. Seth/Sheth, Enos/Enosh, Cainan/Kenan, Enoch/Henoch).
• The verification of historical families (especially from the sons of Noah; cf. Gen. 10:32).
• Some connection of names and places (e.g., Tarshish, Kittim, Sheba, Zidon, Kedar, Midian).
• The delineation of the descent of the Jewish people (cf. Ezra 2:62; Nehemiah 7:64).
• The identification of the “seed” of Abraham and of David (Galatians 3:16; John 7:42).
• Some preparation for the first New Testament book (which starts with genealogy, Matthew 1:1). If I got through 407 verses in 1 Chronicles 1-9, I should be able to get through 17 verses in Matthew 1!
• Genealogies connect the present to the past, and look to the future. 1 Chronicles 1-9 is a descending genealogy, starting in the past and working to the present.[ii] Most modern genealogists start in the present and work backward (ascending genealogy).[iii]
• By including Ham and Japheth, the Chronicler connects people of every tongue and nation to the biblical record.

---

[i] Overall, the Chronicler goes from the creation of Adam to the decree of Cyrus, almost 3500 years (approximately 3484 years after the 6th day of creation).

[ii] That is, finding the descendants of a specific person.

[iii] That is, finding the ancestors of a specific person.

Building the House of God

For “to me”: A Christian’s Hope

Philippians 1:21 For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain.

I recently heard this verse referenced at a graveside, and as we are often wont to do, summarized as “to live is Christ, and to die is gain.” I have no criticism of that, as we generally understand it in that context. However, the three short introductory words are very potent.

“For to me” encompasses a Christian’s hope.

“To me” demonstrates that this is not a universal truth for all people. It is a truth for Paul (to me), and for people in the same category as Paul – born again believers. Unbelievers do not live in Christ and do not gain in death.

“To me” enforces that this statement is not just an abstract notion, but concrete reality. In life Christ lives in us (Galatians 2:20). In life Christ is the matter (Hebrew 12:1-2) and the goal (Titus 2:13). In death we gain relief (Revelation 21:4) and rest (Revelation 14:13). In death we gain reward (2 Timothy 4:6-8), gain union (v. 23; 2 Corinthians 5:8) and reunion (1 Thessalonians 4:13-14).

Epileptic or Lunatic

Did the NKJV translators believe epilepsy is caused by demon possession?[i] Or do they possibly believe the possession described here is not real, but rather figurative? Or something else?[ii]

• Matthew 17:15 AKJV: Lord, have mercy on my son: for he is lunatick, and sore vexed: for ofttimes he falleth into the fire, and oft into the water.
• Matthew 17:15 NKJV: “Lord, have mercy on my son, for he is an epileptic and suffers severely; for he often falls into the fire and often into the water.

• Epileptic, noun. A person affected by epilepsy (a disorder of the nervous system, characterized either by mild, episodic loss of attention or sleepiness petit mal or by severe convulsions with loss of consciousness grand mal.)
• Lunatic (lunatick), noun. A person affected with a severely disordered state of mind.

Lunatick or Epileptic? The Greek word is σεληνιάζεται, which means “lunatic” or “moonstruck.”[iii] Epileptic is a modern interpretation or application.

Whether reading in the King James Bible or a modern translation, the context is clear that this is a case of devil- or demon possession. Jesus rebuked the devil, and the devil was cast out of the man’s son. Again, I ask, do the NKJV translators believe epilepsy is caused by demon possession, or do they possibly believe the possession described here is not real? Or something else? Many modernists reject that Jesus was literally casting out devils. They ascribe this to ignorance of medical conditions. For example, William Barclay writes from his high modern horse, “As was inevitable in that age [emphasis mine], the father attributed the boy’s condition to the malign influence of evil spirits.” In other words, such medical problems as epilepsy were merely associated with demon possession because the people were ignorant and did not know any better! Such an accusation, however, means the inspired writers—and the one who inspired them to write—must have also been ignorant of the cause! God forbid! Do the NKJV translators side with the modernists against God?

Notice also that there are parallel accounts of this incident recorded in Mark 9:14-27 and Luke 9:37-42. These accounts also clearly point to an evil spirit that Jesus cast out. Textual scholars can be like politicians. Politicians create political problems so they can remain relevant by solving them. Scholars create Bible text problems to they can remain relevant by solving them. I think the simple solution is to leave “epilepsy” out of the equation. Doing so stops short of seeming to make a modern medical diagnosis. Most folks today think epilepsy is a neurological disorder caused by abnormal electrical activity in the brain, and has nothing to do with demon possession. Whatever the “medical diagnosis” of the boy in Matthew 17, it is clear from the Bible that it was caused by the activity of an evil spirit.[iv] Let God be true, but every man a liar.

---

[i] And other modern translations, including: ASV, AMP, CEB, CEV, CJB, ESVUK, EXB, GNT, ICB, ISV, MEV, NCB, NCV, NRSV, OJB, RSV, WEB. Interestingly, the LSB and NASB do not use epileptic.
[ii] Some commentators try to either explain or compromise the situation by allowing that some but not all cases of epilepsy are caused by evil spirits. It is notable that in the Believers Bible Commentary edited by Art Farstad and based on the NKJV, William MacDonald attributes this to be an epileptic seizure caused by Satan, pp. 1270-1271. Harold Fowler approaches it similarly, stating, “The child is an epileptic, but not just an epileptic, because this physical malady is merely the background upon which his demon possession is superimposed. Rather, the cause of the epilepsy and its accompanying symptoms was a demon…Although the NT does not teach that all, or even most, cases of epilepsy were produced by demonic power, this one was.” (The Gospel of Matthew, Volume Three. Joplin, MO: College Press, 1978, p. 620). The liberal Lutheran Ulrich Luz does not like the demonic explanation of the text and seeks to spiritualize it positively for modern readers: “Illnesses such as epilepsy do not conform to the human image willed by God, and the struggle against it takes place with the will of Christ and by his power” (Matthew 8-20, English translation by James E. Crouch. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2001, p. 408).
[iii] The modern NET Bible gives this note on Matthew 17:15: “tn Grk ‘he is moonstruck,’ possibly meaning ‘lunatic’ (so NAB, NASB), although now the term is generally regarded as referring to some sort of seizure disorder such as epilepsy (L&N 23.169; BDAG 919 s.v. σεληνιάζομαι).” From the root σεληνιάζομαι (lunatic), see also Matthew 4:24.
[iv] To be clear, I am not offering any diagnoses of any modern seizures. I am interpreting this case in the Bible in its context. The physical problem was caused by devils.

Parallels between Adam and Noah

Interesting commentary.

Parallels between Adam and the Original Creation and Noah and the Re-Creation.

The Flood defaces the original creation headed by Adam and cleanses the earth for its re-creation headed by Noah. Warren Gage notes striking parallels between the prediluvian and postdiluvian worlds, making Adam the father of all humanity and Noah its father in the postdiluvian world. (1) Both ‘worlds’ are created out of a watery chaos in closely parallel acts (see phases of re-creation below). (2) Both Adam and Noah are uniquely associated with the ‘image of God,’ ‘in the Adam narrative as the basis of man’s identity and in the Noah narrative as the basis of man’s protection’ (Gen. 1:27; 5:1-3). (3) Both ‘walk with God’  (3:8; 6:9). (4) Both rule the animals: Adam by naming (2:19), Noah by preserving (7:15). (5) God repeats almost verbatim his commission to be fruitful, to multiply, and to rule the earth (1:28-30, 9:1-7). (6) Both work the ‘ground’ (cf. 3:17-19; 9:20). (7) Both follow a similar pattern of sinning, the former by eating and the latter by drinking (3:6; 9:21). (8) The immediate result of their sin is shameful nakedness (3:7; 9:21), connected with ‘knowing’ (3:5; 9:24) and being clothed by another (3:21; 9:23). (9) Both have three named sons (4:1-2, 25; 6:10). (10) As a remote result from Adam's sin, judgment falls on all; from Noah’s, a curse on Canaan. (11) Among their three sons is judgment and hope, division into elect and nonelect. The conflict between the seed of the Serpent (i.e., the curse-laden Cainites) and the seed of the woman (i.e., the Yahweh-worshiping Sethites), is now carried on between the cursed seed of Canaan and the seed of Shem, whose God is the Lord. In addition, in both halves of the Prehistory (books 1-3 and 4-6), human disobedience impinges on the heavenly sphere and God responds using the first-person plural (‘like one of us’; ‘let us’; 3:22; 11:7), and alienation is part of his judicial sentence (from the Garden of Eden and from Shinar; 3:24; 11:9; cf. 4:12).”

Bruce K. Waltke, Cathi J. Fredricks, Genesis: a Commentary, Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2001, pp. 127-128.

[Note: Waltke’s commentary says that his parallel list is a modification and supplementing of Gage’s parallels, p. 127).]

Seven progressive phases of renewing creation in Noah’s day parallel the first week of creation.

Precreation

• 1:2 earth, deep, Spirit, waters
• 8:1b-2 wind, earth, waters, deep

Day 2

• 1:6-8 waters, firmament (sky)
• 8:2b heaven (sky)

Day 3

• 1:9 water, dry land, appear
• 8:3-5 water, tops of the mountains, seen (appear)

Day 5

• 1:20-23 fowl, above the earth (in the open firmament, sky)
• 8:6-12 raven, dove, off the earth (no need to renew water creatures)

Day 6

• 1:24-25 living creatures, cattle, creeping thing, (wild) beasts
• 8:17-19 every living thing, fowl, cattle, creeping thing

“the appearance/reappearance of the nuclear family”

• 1:26-28 man, image of God, male and female
• 8:16, 18 Noah and his wife
• 9:6 man, image of God

The blessing of God on his family/creation

• 1:28 blessed, be fruitful, multiply, replenish the earth, subdue it (rule…every living thing)
• 9:1-2 blessed, be fruitful, multiply, replenish the earth, fear and dread on every living thing

Waltke, pp. 128-129

Toward a biblical definition of “prophet”

Prophet, noun. According to Merriam-Webster, may be (1) one who utters divinely inspired revelations; (2) one gifted with more than ordinary spiritual and moral insight; (3) one who foretells future events. The third definition is probably that which comes most readily to mind to modern English speakers. What is a prophet, biblically defined?

The meaning of the word.

As we notice in the introduction, the English word “prophet” includes several different shades of meaning (e.g., 5 at Merriam-Webster, 7 at Dictionary.com). What about the Bible?

The primary Hebrew word for prophet is (נָבִיא nāḇî'). The word “seer” (הָרֹאֶה rō'ê/rā'â) is synonymous for prophet, according to 1 Samuel 9:9. The Hebrew word (הַחֹזֶה ḥōzêh) is also translated “seer.” In 1 Chronicles 29:29 all three of these Hebrew words are used (נָבִיא nāḇî') (הָרֹאֶה rō'ê) (הַחֹזֶה ḥōzêh).[i]

The primary Greek for prophet is (προφήτης prophētēs). Greek also has the word (ψευδοπροφήτης pseudoprophētēs) for a false prophet. Hebrew adds descriptors about prophets prophesying falsely rather than having a word “false prophet.”[ii]

The biblical use of the word.

The first use of the word “prophet” in the Bible is found in Genesis 20:7, where God calls Abraham a prophet. There it seems to primarily mean that Abraham is God’s spokesman or representative. The last use of the word “prophets” is found in Revelation 22, which seems to connect both the ideas of God’s spokesmen (v. 9) and the references to future events (v. 6).

God told Moses, “Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet” (Exodus 7:1). This also seems to emphasize the nature of the prophet as a spokesman (e.g. Is not Aaron the Levite thy brother? I know that he can speak well…and Aaron spake all the words which the Lord had spoken unto Moses, Exodus 4:14, 30). In Exodus 15:20, where Moses’s sister Miriam is referred to as a prophetess, she took a timbrel in her hand and led the women in singing to the LORD – emphasizing the nature of forthtelling. Notice also that the musicians for the tabernacle and temple were considered prophets (1 Chronicles 25:1-3).

The Old Testament prophets spoke for God. In connection with this, some of them also dreamed dreams, saw visions, and foretold the future (Numbers 12:6; Isaiah 1:11; Jeremiah 28:9; Ezekiel 33:33). The word and its related work included “forthtelling” and “foretelling.” The commonality in all of this seems to be that of accurately presenting and representing God’s truth. Those who wrote the Old Testament Scripture, or at least many of them, were considered prophets.

Many times in the New Testament, the word “prophet” refers back to the Old Testament prophet (Matthew 1:22; 2:17; Acts 2;16). “The prophets” may also mean the Scriptures of the Old Testament (Matthew 5:17; Luke 16:29; 24:27, 44: John 1:45).

However, prophets are also current/active in the New Testament. John the Baptist was a prophet (Luke 7:28), a spokesman for God who came before and announced the coming of the Christ.[iii] Those called prophets in the New Testament include Jesus; Agabus (Acts 11:27-28; 21:10); Barnabas, Simeon Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen, and Saul (Acts 13:1); Judas and Silas (Acts 15:32).[iv] Though prophets and apostles were different – that is, all prophets were not apostles – it seems that by default the Bible considers all the apostles to be prophets, even while not specifically naming each of them them thusly (Acts 4:33; 1 Corinthians 13:2; Revelation 1:3; 18:20: 22:6).

Paul refers to those who speak in the Corinthian assembly as prophets, who could speak in a way to edify, exhort, and comfort (1 Corinthians 14:3-5). Though prophecy is a gift (Romans 12:6; 1 Corinthians 14:32), the prophets are not out of control. They can contain themselves from all speaking at once (1 Corinthians 14:26, 29, 40), and must speak so as to acknowledge that the inspired words of the apostles are the commandments of the Lord (1 Corinthians 14:37). (Therefore, they cannot claim a the Spirit made me do it excuse for bad behavior.)

In Titus 1:12, Paul applies the word “prophet” in a “non-biblical” or “non-Christian” sense, calling a spokesman for the Cretians “a prophet.”

Prophecy is a spiritual gift, as we see from Romans 12:6; 1 Corinthians 12:8-10; 28-31; 13:2; and 14:1-6. Those who prophesy, prophesy according to the proportion of faith with which they are gifted, within the place in the body the Spirit has placed them.

The rhetorical question of 1 Corinthians 12:29 indicates that all of God’s people are not prophets (cf. Numbers 11:29). Everyone should be a representative of God in witnessing to and sharing his truths. However, some are gifted to do so in a more official way.

Paul indicates that supernatural tongues, prophecy, and knowledge will cease with the close of the biblical revelation (canon), 1 Corinthians 13:8. “Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.”

Concluding thoughts on the words and its meaning.

In the Bible, a prophet was a spokesman for God – one who conveyed a message from God to the people. The calling or work included foretelling (proclaiming God’s events and plan for the future) and forthtelling (publishing God’s will and truth in the present). Often this role of prophet combined these two features, for example, using warning of future judgment as a call to present repentance. Prophets guided the people concerning truth, faith, morality, and judgment (cf. Acts 24:25). His duty was not solely about predicting the future – and often not even primarily.

• The Bible reader should not just think “predicter of the future” when encountering the word “prophet.” A full picture is needed.
• The Bible reader should think of “spiritual gift” when encountering the word prophet, especially in the New Testament.

It seems difficult for the average modern English Bible student to think “prophet” and not think of someone who foretold the future. Yet, the common thread of all prophets is not that fact, primarily, but rather of being God’s sent spokesman. Perhaps these thoughts will help. What have I forgotten to consider? If something, please add in the comments.

---

[i] I have put these words in parentheses due to the tendency of the embedded “backward spelling” of Hebrew to go haywire in Microsoft Word, ending up at times in various crazy fashions.
[ii] The Old Testament calls five women prophetesses – Miriam, Deborah, Huldah, Noadiah, and the wife of Isaiah (Isaiah 8:3). The latter may simply mean the wife of a prophet, and Noadiah (Nehemiah 6:14) seems to be a false one, opposing the work of Nehemiah. The New Testament calls two women prophetesses – Anna (Luke 2:36) and Jezebel (Revelation 2:20). The first one is on God’s side, and the latter seems to only be one falsely so-called. Compare also Acts 21:9.
[iii] John the Baptist is evidence that a prophet did not necessarily perform miracles. “And many resorted unto him, and said, John did no miracle: but all things that John spake of this man were true” (John 10:41).
[iv] The emphasis of Judas and Silas as prophets was that they “exhorted the brethren with many words.”

Love of the...

The phrase “Love of the…” appears 5 times in the King James Bible.

1. Love of the Lord.
2. Love of the Spirit.
3. Love of the truth.
4. Love of the brethren.
5. Love of the Father.

1. Hosea 3:1

Then said the Lord unto me, Go yet, love a woman beloved of her friend, yet an adulteress, according to the love of the Lord toward the children of Israel, who look to other gods, and love flagons of wine.

2. Romans 15:30

Now I beseech you, brethren, for the Lord Jesus Christ’s sake, and for the love of the Spirit, that ye strive together with me in your prayers to God for me;

3. 2 Thessalonians 2:10

and with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.

4. 1 Peter 1:22

Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently:

5. 1 John 2:15

Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.

Born of God

John 1:11-13 He came unto his own, and his own received him not. But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

The sinner must be born. But born how?

This text sets up a contrast between the human and the divine in salvation, the new birth. A threefold negative denies any recourse to any human source.

1. Not of blood. (cf. Acts 17:26; Matthew 3:9)
2. Nor of the will of the flesh. (cf. John 3:6; Matthew 6:27)
3. Nor of the will of man. (cf. John 5:40; 6:44)

This threefold cord is too strong to be broken. It will not allow for salvation by any human means. The Jews prided themselves on being the descendants of Abraham. Even children of Christian parents may take false refuge in that type of relationship. Three times we are told that being born sons of God is not of man. Man cannot breed or birth his own salvation. Man cannot bring forth his own salvation. Man cannot buy or borrow his own salvation. It is not by human descent, human desire, or human development. Man cannot save himself. Salvation is of the Lord (Jonah 2:9; Ephesians 2:8-9).

In stark contrast to the threefold denial, John confirms, but [born] of God. Salvation is a divine work, not a human achievement.

John 6:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.

• as many as received him
• to them gave he power (to become the sons of God)
• them that believe on his name

Born of God!

“Ye must be born again.” (John 3:7)

Pagan names and pagan food?

Sometimes cultural decisions either can be or seem to be tricky. Pastor Calvin Summers of Glenfawn Baptist Church pointed out how that the four Hebrew children captured by the Babylonians accepted the king’s names (Daniel 1:7), but rejected the king’s meat (Daniel 1:8ff). That is interesting to ponder.

There is no indication in the context that they refused (to be called by) the names, as they did refuse the meat. That doesn’t mean they preferred or liked the names, but suggests they acquiesced to that which was external and outside their control. We are not responsible for what someone else does (including what they call us), but we are responsible for our own choices (including what we eat).

I think there is a lesson here to ponder.

Setting up stones

Joshua 4:6 … What mean ye by these stones? (Read Joshua Chapter 4.)

Joshua chapters 3 and 4 recount the Israelites passing over the Jordan River into the promised land. A momentous and meaningful lesson flows from the account of a simple act of removing twelve stones from the Jordan River. God opened up the Jordan River as he had done with the Red Sea (4:23; 3:16). The water coming down the river stood up in a heap. The waters flowing downstream separated from the standing water and passed on to the Salt Sea. The Israelites passed over Jordan into Canaan on dry ground (3:17). Joshua, as commanded by the LORD, chose one man from each of the twelve tribes to bring twelve stones out of Jordan (4:2-5, 8).[i]

These stones abided as a memorial of testimony (4:7). Joshua “pitched” the stones where they “pitched” for the night, at Gilgal (4:19-20).[ii] The memorial magnified Joshua’s leadership (4:14). Moses is dead (1:2). The power of God rests on Joshua (1:9). The people following God must follow Joshua (1:16-17).

The memorial marked the site of their first encampment (4:19). In Gilgal they set up these stones.[iii] In Gilgal they camped; they observed the Passover (5:10), they ate the old corn of the land (5:11), and they saw the disappearance of the manna (5:12). Joshua continued to camp there.[iv]

The memorial marked God’s marvelous miracle (4:22). They arrived in the land by means of God’s sovereign might (4:24). What the Canaanites have heard (and will hear) strikes fear in their hearts (2:11; 5:1; 9:24; 10:2). Now they will hear more! “…when all the kings … heard that the Lord had dried up the waters of Jordan … their heart melted…”

These stones provided a motivation to testify. The “oddly placed” stones would incite questions (4:6, 21).[v] Later, children, grandchildren, and descendants would arrive on the scene who had not experienced the crossing of Jordan – had not seen the stones being placed. They would see the stones and ask, “What mean these stones?” The “oddly placed” stones would invite answers (4:7, 22). “I’m glad you asked…Let me tell you…Those stones came out of the Jordan River when God dried it up!” “Oh, by the way, that was not the first time God did something like that. Let me tell you about when Moses brought the children of Israel out of Egypt…God revealed his power then, too!”

These stones suggest the value of providing means of testimony. When our children do not remember or know an experience in which the Lord worked in a marvelous way, some “stones” we have set up might cause them to ask, “What does that mean?” When we forget to keep narrating the wonderful experiences God has brought up through, some “stones” we have set up might cause us to need to relate it again. What tangible reminders do we have around the house, in our yards, in our lives?

Are we “setting up stones” that will generate curiosity in our children, our grandchildren, our churches, our communities? Or are we forgetting to provide a lasting testimony?[vi] Are we providing answers to those who ask up about “the stones” we have set up? May God help us.

• Joel 1:3 Tell ye your children of it, and let your children tell their children, and their children another generation.
• 2 Timothy 2:2 And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also.

---

[i] There seems to have been stones set up in Jordan as well, 4:9. “…there was a double monument to perpetually commemorate Israel’s passing through the place of judgment: the one in the midst of the Jordan, the other in their new camping-ground at Gilgal. What anointed eye can fail to see in them the two signs and memorials which Christ has instituted to symbolize that, as the result of their faith in His atoning death, His people have not only passed through death and judgment, but are now united to a risen Christ and are ‘alive unto God’! .... ‘Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into His death’ ... Christian baptism is designed to symbolize the believer’s union with Christ in His death, burial, and resurrection, as well as being his personal profession that he is dead to the world and has resolved to walk in newness of life. … The Lord’s Supper also, while it celebrates our passage with Christ through death, yet it is with the added blessedness and triumph of being now on the resurrection side of judgment.” (Arthur W. Pink, Gleanings in Joshua, 1945).
[ii] To erect or set up (a tent or camp, for example); to set in a fixed or definite place or position.
[iii] Gilgal means a rolling or rolling away. “And the Lord said unto Joshua, This day have I rolled away the reproach of Egypt from off you. Wherefore the name of the place is called Gilgal unto this day.” Joshua 5:9
[iv] For example, Joshua 9:6; 10:6, 43; 14:6.
[v] By “oddly placed” I mean something that is different and far enough from what they generally expect so as to raise the level of curiosity. “Well-placed” might be a better term. The stones were in an advantageous position. They made the descendants of Israel wonder.

[vi] Some of the testimonies can outlive us! Hebrews 11:4 By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts: and by it he being dead yet speaketh.

Weep not: a funeral procession is interrupted

And when the Lord saw her, he had compassion on her, and said unto her, Weep not.

...sorrow not, even as others which have no hope.

The cancelled burial, Luke 7:11-15.

When Jesus and his disciples entered the city of Nain (v. 11), a dead man was being carried out for burial (v. 12a). A large congregation accompanied the grieving mother (v. 12c), who was a widow (v. 12b). The dead man was the only son of this widow woman (v. 12b).

Jesus saw the woman and her situation, sympathized with her, and spoke to her (v. 13). Jesus stopped the funeral procession (v. 14a). Jesus spoke to the dead (v. 14b; cf. John 5:25-29). The dead man sat up, talked, and was taken to his mother (v. 15).

The direct outcome, Luke 7:16-17.

• God was feared.
• God was glorified.
• The news was spread.

Thoughts. The Lord has the power of life and death. He is the way, the truth, and the life. In him is life. Turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die? Why will ye die, when the power of life is so nearby?

---

Some weep not verses:

Luke 8:52 And all wept, and bewailed her: but he said, Weep not; she is not dead, but sleepeth.

Luke 23:28 But Jesus turning unto them said, Daughters of Jerusalem, weep not for me, but weep for yourselves, and for your children.

Revelation 5:5 And one of the elders saith unto me, Weep not: behold, the Lion of the tribe of Juda, the Root of David, hath prevailed to open the book, and to loose the seven seals thereof.

Psalm 30:5 For his anger endureth but a moment; in his favour is life: weeping may endure for a night, but joy cometh in the morning.

Ecclesiastes 3:4 a time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance;

Updating an older verb table

Below I am updating a table that I published about 12 years ago. You should be able to select the picture and enlarge it to see it better.

For discussion of the verb endings, see Use of "-est" and "-eth" in the KJV and The verb ending "-edst".

The Dimensions of God’s Love

The Dimensions of God’s Love

Ephesians 3:14-19 For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named, that he would grant you, according to the riches of his glory, to be strengthened with might by his Spirit in the inner man; that Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith; that ye, being rooted and grounded in love, may be able to comprehend with all saints what is the breadth, and length, and depth, and height; and to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with all the fulness of God.

What is its breadth?

• Its size in general; extent; reaches to all—whether Jew or Gentile.
• John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
• 2 Corinthians 13:14 The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen.

What is its length?

• From everlasting to everlasting.
• Jeremiah 31:3 The Lord hath appeared of old unto me, saying, Yea, I have loved thee with an everlasting love: therefore with lovingkindness have I drawn thee.
• Psalm 90:2 ...from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God. 1 John 4:8 ...God is love.

What is its depth?

• Reaches from the highest heaven and down to the lowest hell; rescues from the depth of hell (Proverbs 9:18) and resurrects from the depth of the grave (John 5:28).
• Proverbs 25:3 The heaven for height, and the earth for depth
• Psalm 86:13 For great is thy mercy toward me: and thou hast delivered my soul from the lowest hell.  (cf. Deut. 32:22). 

What is its height?

• What but the love of God in Jesus Christ, exalted far above all
• Psalm 102:19-20 For he hath looked down from the height of his sanctuary; from heaven did the Lord behold the earth; to hear the groaning of the prisoner; to loose those that are appointed to death...
• Philippians 2:9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:

Rejoice in the Lord

Rejoice in the Lord, Philippians 3:1; 4:4.

In the epistle to the Philippians, the word “rejoice” is found 10 times (1:18 (2); 2:16; 2:17; 2:18; 2:28; 3:1; 3:3; 4:4 (2)), “rejoiced” 1 time (4:10), “rejoicing” 1 time (1:26) “joy” 6 times (1:4; 1:25; 2:2; 2:17; 2:18; 4:1).

Looking back at the past events. (Cf. Acts 16:8-40.)

Philippians 1:3 I thank my God upon every remembrance of you…

Paul came to Philippi during his second missionary journey. He may have spent several months there. Paul’s ministry at Philippi coincided with his entrance into Macedonia. He was called to Macedonia through a vision he had while in the city of Troas. His memories included his call to go, his going, and his arrival. He was thankful for the memories, not just for memory’s sake, but to recall the will of God, the labor of love, and the fruit of the gospel.

Looking around at the present circumstances.

Philippians 1:12-13 But I would ye should understand, brethren, that the things which happened unto me have fallen out rather unto the furtherance of the gospel; so that my bonds in Christ are manifest in all the palace, and in all other places;

Paul is currently in bonds (1:7, 13-15) evidently in Rome (1:13; 4:22). This is probably the occasion of Acts 28, where he is under arrest awaiting the hearing of his appeal to Caesar. He was in a “hired house” (Acts 28:30) chained to a single guard (28:16, 20). Rather than look for things about which he could complain, Paul recognized God using the present circumstances in order to advance the gospel. Looking around for problems yields discontent; this perspective yielded contentment. Paul understood that “all things work together for good to them that love God,” and specifically God was working this for good. Priceless peace grows in the soil of God’s sovereign purpose.

Looking ahead to the future good.

4 Rejoice in the Lord alway: and again I say, Rejoice. 5 Let your moderation be known unto all men. The Lord is at hand. 6 Be careful for nothing; but in every thing by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known unto God. 7 And the peace of God, which passeth all understanding, shall keep your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus. 8 Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things.

Paul wrote the book of Philippians while he was under arrest in Rome. He was restricted in his movements, yet he was not discouraged. His joy did not depend on the circumstances in which he found himself. In fact, he realized that in this situation God had turned it for good, made beauty from ashes (Isaiah 61:3). He looked ahead, moving forward, looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith, knowing the God of the past and the present was the God of the future, the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever..

Philippians 4:4 Rejoice in the Lord alway: and again I say, Rejoice.

Concluding thoughts.

Philippians 4:10-11 But I rejoiced in the Lord greatly, that now at the last your care of me hath flourished again; wherein ye were also careful, but ye lacked opportunity. Not that I speak in respect of want: for I have learned, in whatsoever state I am, therewith to be content.

Joy is a fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22), a breadth in believing (Romans 15:13), and strength from the Lord (Nehemiah 8:10). Our perspective matters. The same circumstances that are a misery to one are to another. Our perspective of God, and the God of our perspective is the difference. Like Paul, let us learn to find contentment and rejoicing. It does not arise from our nature, but is a supernatural work of God within us.

Joy springs from contentment, and contentment brings joy. Dissatisfaction rises from an unwarranted attention to circumstances. Contentment rests in a wise allegiance to God who is over the circumstances. Charles Spurgeon said, “God keeps his promises before he makes them; and therefore, I am sure he will keep them after he has made them.” 

Whatever we face, trust in the Lord. Learn to be content. Find new joy. Let God define it and not man. “Glory hallelujah, I shall not be moved; anchored in Jehovah, I shall not be moved.” It is joy that is unspeakable and joy that is unshakable.

---

αὐτάρκης – content; sufficient or adequate in one’s self; contented with one’s lot.

1 Timothy 6:6 But godliness with contentment is great gain.

αὐτάρκεια – contentment; a frame of mind viewing one’s lot as sufficient, contentedness.

Galatians 5:22-23 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.

Romans 15:13 Now the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace in believing, that ye may abound in hope, through the power of the Holy Ghost.

Nehemiah 8:10 ...for the joy of the Lord is your strength.