Are You Being Judged or Challenged?

Recently, I was involved in a conversation with another Christian who suggested that I was judging him.  The conversation actually began over the topic of people who are unmarried and living together.  We both know of a third party who is involved in a relationship like this and were discussing the potential challenges for them moving forward if repentance doesn’t take place.

The conversation shifted when I asked this unmarried person about something in their life.  I was aware of a relationship they, too, were involved in that had included overnight stays.  Immediately the pushback began: “I don’t think that’s any of your business….don’t [be] judging me!”

Why is it that so many Christians believe that by asking them about a specific area of their life that isn’t in conformity with God’s word that somehow you’re “judging” them? 

Is there so little accountability being practiced today that it has become a foreign concept to many in the church and therefore suspect to being an action of condemnation?  

I reminded this person of our responsibility as Christians to challenge one another to live godly lives and that biblical discipleship is every believer’s personal responsibility.  In Galatians 2, Paul directly confronts Peter over his hypocrisy.   Nathan confronts David over his sin (2 Sam 12).  To the church in Galatia, Paul writes, “Brethren, if a man is overtaken in any trespass, you who are spiritual restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness…” (Gal. 6)  In Hebrews 10:24-25 we read, “And let us consider one another in order to stir up love and good works….exhorting one another….”   To the church in Rome, Paul expressed his confidence in their ability to “admonish one another” (Rom 15:14).  In 2 Tim. 2:2, Paul instructs Timothy to teach the things he has heard to other faithful men so that they could “teach others also.”  In making disciples, Jesus said to be “teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you” (Mat. 28:20). 

It couldn’t be more clear. These exhortations from Scripture (along with many others) tell us to disciple one another, and that includes addressing sin (Mat. 18:15-17).  This is not a ministry exclusive to pastors / elders, but one involving every member of the church.  

After sharing some of this with this fellow Christian, it was evident he remained in a defensive posture and unappreciative of being challenged to examine his walk.  Instead, he offered more pushback.  When asked about discipleship and accountability within his own church fellowship, he replied that people in his church “only show grace.”   

It was clear that - in his mind - discipleship and accountability were somehow inconsistent (if not opposite!) with showing grace.  Have we misunderstood the command to “make disciples” as only the act of winning a soul to Christ and not also helping one another to make continued biblical change towards Christlikeness? 

It’s not fun to be confronted with sin (I know!), but when we understand the importance and purpose then we should actually welcome it! 

Well-known pastor, John MacArthur, writes of a time when someone confronted him about sin: “When I received a letter from someone who noticed something wrong in my life, I wrote back to him asking for his forgiveness and thanking him for bringing it to my attention. If something is wrong in my life, I want to know it. But if someone doesn’t tell me because he or she is afraid to, I’m apt to keep making the same mistake. Everyone in a church should have that kind of accountability with one another so that everyone’s life is pure. Husbands and wives especially should hold one another accountable. It isn’t right for anyone’s sinfulness to be tolerated. Anyone in sin should be lovingly confronted.” ¹

MacArthur is right.  We need to be willing to be challenged in our walk and honest about sin in our lives.  Having these conversations with a Christian friend while using the Scriptures as the source for informing our minds, correcting our thoughts, and guiding our actions (2 Tim. 3:16) will result in growth and maturity so that we become more like Christ.  That after all is the goal of discipleship!

Berg writes, “If you are uninvolved in personal discipleship, is it because you think the problems of others are “none of your business”? Somehow this position of neutrality sounds justified, but often it is merely a way to protect ourselves from the vulnerability that comes in ministry to others (e.g., “If I challenge him about his problem, he will point out some problems and inconsistencies he knows about my life” or “If I try to help him, he will ask some questions I don’t know how to answer”).  No matter what our argument, God intends to use this vulnerability to stimulate us to further change and growth ourselves.  Avoidance of the responsibility to biblically challenge others is a sure way to remain a spiritual baby.” ²  

Berg makes a very interesting argument here in establishing a link between a Christians’ progressive sanctification and his involvement in challenging others to live biblically also.  Have you considered how your maturity in Christ might be effected through the process of biblically challenging others?    

Don’t wave-off the ministry of discipleship as something only for pastors / elders.  While those who serve in that office must be involved in personally discipling others (Luke 15:4-7, 2 Tim. 2:2, Eph. 4:11-12), so too should every Christian.

A characteristic of a church full of mature believers is the ability of the whole congregation, not just the pastor, to care for the souls of those in the body. ³    

Let’s embrace the ministry of discipleship and accountability as taught in the Scriptures so that we grow together in Christ, maturing in the faith.  If a fellow Christian brings to your attention a concern about your life, consider for a moment that you’re not being “judged” – only challenged.

By grace, through faith,

Ranzall Cox 

1. John MacArthur, The Master’s Plan for the Church (1991, Moody Publishers) p.47
2. Jim Berg, Changed Into His Image (1999, BJU Press) p.20
3. Ernie Baker, Answers Magazine (Oct-Dec 2012) p.81

Objectivity (pt. 2)

When I drive through a scenic area, I like to drive slow enough to see things.  Yeah, I’m a “lookie-loo.”  I may get on the nerves of the person in the car behind me, but I get to see things that I wouldn’t otherwise.  I’ve also had the experience of having driven by the same place for years without noticing something until one day, I’m stuck in traffic, sitting still, and I look over and see something and think, “I never noticed that before!” It happens as a result of slowing down. 

Many times I’ve read a passage of Scripture and discovered something I had never seen before and wondered, “How did I miss that?”  More often than not, it’s when I read slowly that God brings these things to my attention.  If you take nothing else away from this post, let it be this: Make an effort to s-l-o-w d-o-w-n when you read.  You’re objectivity will increase and you will see much more during your study time.

Similar to driving by the same place numerous times before noticing the seemingly obvious, reading and re-reading the same passage multiple times in one sitting increases the likelihood of seeing something previously unnoticed.  When I select a chapter or specific passage to study, I generally read it 8-10 times.  It’s often the seventh or eighth time that God opens my eyes to something awesome. 

The next thing that helps with objectivity is that of “observation.”  In the close of the previous post, I mentioned approaching the Bible with a “careful, intentional study method.”  The “careful” part is largely what we covered above – the pace at which we read as well as re-reading.  The “intentional” part is a considerably larger topic based on observation.     

Webster’s dictionary defines observation as “An act of recognizing and noting a fact or occurrence.”  For Bible study, observation is noting what the text actually says, not what we think it means (that’s interpretation, which happens later.).  By intentionally observing the text, we begin to be more objective and less subjective. The question then is how and what are we to observe while studying the Bible?

There are many things to intentionally observe, but here’s a few to start with: people, places, events, identifying the type of literature (poetry, narrative, discourse, history, prophecy, etc.), keywords (words or phrases that repeat), lists occurring within the text, the tone of the writer, commands for the recipient to obey, conditional statements, comparisons and contrasts, grammar usage, and how the writer structures his argument including the flow and division of the text.

Using a passage below, let’s make a few observations.

1 John 2:15–17 (NKJV)) ¹⁵Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. ¹⁶For all that is in the world—the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life—is not of the Father but is of the world. ¹⁷And the world is passing away, and the lust of it; but he who does the will of God abides forever.

Repeating Words: Did you see which words repeat in this passage?  How many times is the word “world” used?  How about the word “love”?  By taking the time to observe words the writer uses repeatedly, we start to develop an idea about what the passage is emphasizing; what it’s context is.     

Lists occurring within the text: Check out verse 16.  There are 3-things that John groups together concerning the world. 

Comparisons and Contrasts:   There are several contrasts in this passage.  The word “but” is helpful in identifying contrasts.  In verse 17, there are two things that are being contrasted:  The “world” with the individual and “passing away” with “abiding forever.” 

Commands: Are there any commands that the Apostle John gives to his audience?  How about verse 15? 

Type of Literature: What type of literature does this passage best represent?  Narrative? Prophecy, Discourse (teaching), History or other?

Conditional Statements: These are basically “if….then” type statements.  Often, the word “then” will be left out, but the sentence structure shows itself to be a conditional statement.  With that in mind, does verse 15 contain a conditional statement?

These are just a few examples of how and what to observe.  By taking the time to make observations on facts stated in the text, we begin to see what God wants us to see instead of putting our own presuppositions onto the text.

If you have never tried this study method before, but want to begin incorporating with your own study, I would suggest starting your observations with the easy things first, such as People.  If you’re reading a N.T. book for example, begin by noting all of the facts about the writer and the recipient(s).  Remember to limit your lists to only what the text actually says about them.

A helpful way to go about this is to mark in a distinctive way each time the writer or recipient is mentioned (including pronouns).  You might choose to underline the writer each time his name or a pronoun referring to him is used and you might draw a circle around every mention of the recipient.  Then go back and read each occurrence while noting what the text says about each one.  When finished, read the lists you made.  I think you’ll be impressed with how much you will learn.  Don’t forget to read s-l-o-w-l-y and re-read the chapter or passage several times.    

[A closing sidebar: For both reading and studying, I find that a Bible formatted with single-column paragraphs to very helpful.  The reason is that it’s easier to read, which is why most books are formatted like this this.  It also helps with maintaining context, as paragraphs are “groups of thought.”]

May your time in His word be enriched.

Objectivity (pt. 1)

One dictionary entry for the word “objectivity” includes the following: “Not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased.”

I have found that being objective is not easy. In fact, merely recognizing how little objectivity I posses can be challenging in itself. Numerous things influence and shape my perspective without my even noticing it; such as experiences, familiarity, education, tradition, and the cultural environment that we all live in. Have you ever considered to what degree these things influence your own objectivity?

This is not to suggest that being subjective – the antonym for objective - is inherently a bad thing. In fact, a certain level of subjectivity – or to use another term: presupposition - can be beneficial. For example, if you were invited to a wedding, but didn’t receive any instructions on dress code, I would “presuppose” that you would not show up wearing cut-off blue jeans and flip-flops, why? Because, my prior experience attending weddings is that people dress up, not down. And why do they do that? It’s a cultural expectation we have. Now, if the wedding is in Hawaii, I’m packing my flops!

So how does this relate to studying the Bible?

Well, we often bring to our study of God’s word a certain level of subjectivity that prevents us from seeing the things that God wants to show us.

For example, as we approach the Christmas season, think about the things that you will see or hear that have influenced your thoughts and interpretations surrounding the events of Christ’s birth. Were there only three wise men that brought gifts to the baby Jesus, or is our interpretation of that event based on the manger scene in the neighbor’s yard outside? What about the design of the manger structure itself? Have you ever seen one designed to look more like a cave instead of a lean-to? Do you see how tradition and culture can influence our interpretation of the scriptures?

I remember, for a long time, thinking that when Daniel was thrown in to the lions den that he was a youthful lad. And where did I come up with that? Most likely, I saw an image in a children’s Bible when I was young that depicted the scene that way. Later, when I studied the book of Daniel and noted that it was Darius who reigned in Babylon at the time, I researched him and found that his reign didn’t begin until 539 B.C. I then realized that Daniel would actually have been around 80-years old at the time!

The examples noted above are of no theological consequence. Whether Daniel was 18 or 80 when he was in the lions den doesn’t change the lesson of faith and obedience that we learn from his experience, nor does the number of wise men or the lean-to structure in the neighbor’s yard change the reality of Christ’s birth. However, what other presuppositions might one bring to the text of scripture based on experiences, familiarity, education, tradition, or cultural environment that would have theological consequences?

Consider an example from the category of “experiences”. Imagine a child that grows up in a home with a Dad that is warm and caring. Later in life, when the child becomes a young man, his subjectivity about what our heavenly Father is like is probably more accurate than someone who’s Dad was cold and uncaring. The resulting theology produced by this is of great importance, as it would shape his perspective about the very nature and character of God!

You can probably think of more examples from these categories on your own. One category unique among the others - and perhaps the most difficult to overcome - is that of “familiarity”. Suspending it long enough to approach the scripture with a fresh investigation is what’s needed. This doesn’t mean forgetting everything that we’ve learned beforehand, but rather, ones heart needs to be in the right posture to see new things. It has been said that the biggest barrier to learning something new is related to ones perception that he already knows it.

I suspect there are many books available on the ways in which objectivity is compromised by subjectivity, but the purpose of this post was simply to heighten our sensitivity to the fact that we have a subjective nature, which influences our study of the Bible. When we study the Scriptures, we want to try to do it without too many assumptions, familiarities and presuppositions, which often prevent us from seeing much more of the things that God wants us to see in His word.

I believe the “antidote” for too much subjectivity begins with prayer - asking God to do things like removing my cultural blinders - and then approaching the Bible with a careful, intentional study method. In the next post, I will share a few of those study methods that have helped me regain some objectivity.

I pray that your 'time in His word' is enriched.

The World of the New Testament: Comparing the Various Sects of Judaism in Relationship to the Old Testament Writings, Oral Traditions, Supernaturalism and Politics

          Judaism has a long and rich history.  Today, millions of people call this religion their own.  Its beginnings stretch back hundreds of years before Christianity and approximately one thousand years before Islam.  Judaism has experienced many changes since then, but even today elements of its exilic beginnings can be observed in the local synagogue.

            The formation of Judaism began to take shape during the Babylonian exile between 605 B.C. and 539 B.C. when the Jewish people had no temple in which to worship or offer sacrifices.  With no common meeting place and no temple, small groups formed, which came to be known as synagogues, and studying the Torah became the focal point of Jewish religion, now called Judaism.  It was during this period that the Jewish people learned the seriousness of spiritual adultery.  They would never again entertain false gods but would instead seek to worship Jehovah.  They were finally ready to listen to what God had been saying to them from the beginning.  “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one!” (Deut. 6:4 NKJV)           
         Some of the most interesting periods of Judaism’s history occurred during the 400 years leading up to the first Advent of Christ and the century that followed.  Those days witnessed the fracturing of Judaism into distinct splinter groups called sects, with some maintaining sharp disagreements with the others over a variety of issues.  These fractures were in no small way influenced by the Hellenistic culture of Greece and the oppressive government of Rome.

A familiarity with these sects and a basic understanding of their beliefs is important to the Christian today, not only from a historical perspective, but also because these sects influenced the religious environment that Christianity was birthed in.  Of this fact, M.C. Tenney wrote, “Christianity is the child of Judaism.”¹  

Moreover, the range of doctrine, philosophy and even the rituals practiced by some of these sects were competing for the Jewish minds of that day.  While these sects were well known among the Jewish people, they comprised a very small percentage of the population.  In fact, the average Jew was not a member of any of them, but it was against the backdrop of these sects that many of the doctrinal arguments of Christianity were contrasted.       

            This post will examine four sects of Judaism that were active during the time of the first century, including the Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes and Zealots.  Each possessed qualities that were common and unique to the others.  The comparison will include each sect’s relationship to the Old Testament, the Oral Tradition, supernaturalism and politics. 

The Pharisees

This sect is mentioned more than eighty times in the New Testament, while its closest rival, the Sadducees, is mentioned less than fifteen.  The name “Pharisee” appears to mean “those who separate themselves,” and at the time of Christ, there were an estimated 6,000 of them.²   The formation of this sect may have occurred during the rule of Antiochus IV.  He instituted laws against studying Torah, observing the Sabbath, circumcision and eating kosher foods.  The dedication of the Pharisees in keeping the law and their refusal to embrace the Hellenistic culture, which the Syrian ruler sought to impose on them under penalty of death, would certainly have earned them their name.  Other plausible theories do exist concerning the initial formation of this sect.

For the Pharisee, there was nothing more important than a commitment to reading, interpreting and obeying the law of the Old Testament.  The Pharisee recognized the righteous requirements of the law and sought to obtain that righteousness through his strict adherence to it.  They sought to be legally pure, separate from any form of defilement, and believed that the difference between being “clean” and “unclean,” was predicated on keeping the law.³  Along with the scribes, the Pharisees became the primary religious leaders within Judaism.  However, in their attempt to acquire righteousness by keeping the law, they missed the spirit of the law.  In one of their encounters with Jesus, He said to them, “You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me!” (NKJV John 5:39) 

The Pharisees counted six-hundred thirteen (613) laws in the Torah.  There was a need to understand how to apply these laws in everyday life in order to maintain a state of purity.  The fulfillment of this need arrived through rabbinical teachings passed down from one generation of Rabbis to the next.  These religious instructions were known as the “Oral Traditions” or “Oral Law,” and the Pharisees considered them highly important.  Of particular interest to the Pharisee was the laws governing Sabbath observance, food restrictions, tithing, and ceremonial purity.⁴ 

The Pharisees did embrace certain doctrines agreeable with those taught in the Bible, including the resurrection from the dead, rewards for the righteous and punishment for the unrighteous.  They also believed in the existence of angels and spirits (Acts 23:8).  However, overshadowing the few correct doctrines they embraced was the religious legalism they practiced, which had been derived from the Oral Traditions.  These traditions placed great importance on the outward purity of the individual instead of the inward.  This led to a perceived self-righteousness among the Pharisees.

            With regard to political interest, the Scriptures portray the Pharisees as mostly uninterested and unconcerned.  Nevertheless, their occasional rifts with the Sadducees contained political overtones.  By in large, however, they were apolitical. This was likely in response to the government of Rome’s contentment to allow the people groups they conquered the latitude of practicing their native religion - as long as they abided by the civil laws and paid their taxes.  Therefore, the Pharisees took little interest in political pursuits so long as the existing government left them alone.⁵

The Sadducees

            This sect was smaller in number than most others, yet they held the majority within the powerful Sanhedrin assembly, where they presided over the civil and religious affairs of the Jewish people. 

            The Sadducees considered the five books of Moses to be the word of God.  This was one of the seemingly few areas of agreement between them and the Pharisees.  However, their regard for the Torah was higher than for that of the Writings and the Prophets.⁶   

On one occasion, the Sadducees approached Jesus with a question about the resurrection.  While Jesus could have referenced numerous Scriptures to prove their error, He chose instead to refer them to a passage from the book of Exodus (Ex. 3:6, 15).  This may affirm the observations made by others that the Sadducees view of other Old Testament texts were not on par with the Law of Moses.  Otherwise, Jesus would have pointed them to much more explicit passages regarding resurrection; such as found in Isaiah 26:19 and 1 Sam. 2:6.

Unlike the Pharisees, who were concerned with ceremony and ritual, the Sadducees did not consider the Oral Traditions - passed down by the Rabbis over many generations - to have any valid purpose in true spiritual life. 

With regard to supernaturalism, the Sadducees differed sharply with their counterparts, the Pharisees.  The one area of disagreement that earned them the most notoriety was their disbelief in a bodily resurrection.  In fact, the gospel writers often qualified the identity of this sect to their audience by citing the denial of this very doctrine (Mt. 22:23, Mk. 12:18, Lk. 20:27).  The level of conviction, even distain, which the Sadducees maintained for this position is betrayed in how intensely and quickly they responded to the Apostle Paul’s own confessed belief in the resurrection (Acts 23:6-10).  The Sadducees also denied the existence of Angels and Spirits (Acts 23:8).  Their rejection of these particular doctrines cannot be fully considered apart from the influence Hellenism had on them.

In contrast to the Pharisees, the Sadducees were politically motivated and seemingly connected.  Concern for their relationship with the local Roman officials took priority over whether or not the claims of Christ were genuine (Jn. 11:48).  In addition, their positions within the council of the Sanhedrin granted them access to those with wealth.  It was with this class of people that they enjoyed the most influence; the majority supported the Pharisees.⁷

The Essenes

            Consisting of about 4,000, they probably fit the definition of a “sect” more so than the others do.  They voluntarily removed themselves from the social and even religious atmosphere of the rest of Judaism in order to relocate to secluded areas and live a communal existence.  There they lived lives governed by strict regulations where acceptance to the group was granted only to those who demonstrated a commitment to their values and regulations. 

From the archeological evidence, which suggest that a sizable population of Essenes lived at Qumran, this sect viewed the Old Testament Scriptures with high regard.  Their energies were directed to the study of the Law.⁸  They invested substantial time in making copies of the Old Testament texts, with some of these copies being stored in clay pots and placed in nearby caves for preservation and protection. 

What manner of respect existed for the Oral Traditions is perhaps reflected in their own regulations governing daily life.  Literary artifacts discovered at Qumran indicate that the Essenes were particularly concerned with ceremonial purity and the practice of asceticism.  Like the Pharisees, ritual bathing prior to eating meals was mandatory.  With regard to Sabbath observance, they were stricter than other Jews, even preparing their food the day before so that no fire would need to be kindled.⁹

Concerning supernaturalism, the Essenes believed in an omnipotent, omniscient and sovereign God who created the world and everything in it.  They believed the soul of man to be immortal and his body temporal.  They believed in a coming kingdom and judgment.  They also believed that those who lived good lives would be spared a dreadful eternity in favor of an eternal paradise.

Withdrawing from society in favor of seclusion, the Essenes were not politically active.  They sought to establish their own communities with their own rules and regulations, many of which were designed to promote community over politics.  Any real political interest they had lie in relation to a coming kingdom, led by a Jewish Messiah, which they believed was due in their lifetime.  

The Zealots

            The extent of their relationship to the Old Testament is difficult to apprehend, being that what is mostly written about them is of a political nature.  Nevertheless, it may be assumed that each member of this sect grew up in the environment of Judaism, where exposure to the Scriptures would be certain and further study encouraged.  The Zealot’s belief in God’s covenant with Abraham for the land of Israel is seen in the intensity with which they labored for the overthrow of their foreign occupiers - the Romans.  Further evidence of their belief in the Old Testament is found in the words spoken by Eleazar - the leader of the Zealots during the siege of Masada.  He stated that, “the same God, who had of old taken the Jewish nation into his favor, had now condemned them to destruction…” ¹⁰   The Zealot’s, therefore, believed in the God of the Torah.

            If determining the Zealot’s relationship to the Old Testament is difficult, determining their relationship to the Oral Traditions is more so.  There is nothing to indicate that this sect respected the practices taught in the Oral Law. 

            The Zealot’s did believe in a division of the soul and the body.  They also believed in the continuance of the soul after death.  During the siege at Masada, Eleazar reminded those with him of the latter as a means of encouragement.

            The Zealots were extremely political, more so than any of the other sects within Judaism.  They sought the ouster of the Romans from the Jewish state and embraced violence as an acceptable means of achieving that goal.  They equated paying taxes to the Roman government with treason against God.¹¹  This view resulted in the persecution and even death of fellow Jews who did not share their passion. 

1. Merrill C. Tenney, New Testament Survey (Grand Rapids: Inter-Varsity Press, 1953, 1961, 1985), p. 80

2. Flavius Josephus, Josephus, The Complete Works (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1998) p.544

3. Ralph Gower, The New Manners & Customs of Bible Times (Chicago: Moody Press, 2005) p.231

4. Robert E. Picirilli, Paul the Apostle (Chicago: Moody Press, 1986) p.23

5. Robert E. Picirilli, Paul the Apostle (Chicago: Moody Press, 1986) p.24

6. Merrill C. Tenney, New Testament Survey (Grand Rapids: Inter-Varsity Press, 1953, 1961, 1985), p. 107

7. Flavius Josephus, Josephus, The Complete Works (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1998) p.426

8. Merrill C. Tenney, New Testament Survey (Grand Rapids: Inter-Varsity Press, 1953, 1961, 1985), p. 110

9. Flavius Josephus, Josephus, The Complete Works (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1998) p.728

10. Flavius Josephus, Josephus, The Complete Works (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1998) p.918

11. Ralph Gower, The New Manners & Customs of Bible Times (Chicago: Moody Press, 2005) p.237

Problems In The First Century Church and the Apostle Paul's Method of Addressing Them.

            This post will analyze one major problem that Paul faced in each of the following letters: 1 Corinthians, Colossians, 1 Thessalonians, and 1 Timothy. The cause of each problem will be identified along with Paul’s method for dealing with it. Scripture quotations are from the NKJV.

1 CORINTHIANS
            There were a number of problems in the church at Corinth, which Paul addressed in this letter. One of the main problems discussed is in chapter 6:1-11, where we learn that Christians were bringing legal action against other Christians in the courts of non-believers (6:6).

            To the extent that the Christian life should contrast the lives of the unsaved, Paul described the Corinthian example in this particular matter as an “utter failure” (6:7).

Paul’s Response:

The tone of Paul’s response is perceptibly indignant and matched by his shock in learning of the problem. He asks, is there “not a wise man among you, not even one, who will be able to judge between his brethren?” (6:5).

The brevity with which Paul responds to this problem is also noteworthy. Yet it does not detract from the seriousness of the matter; only that in Paul’s mind, a lengthy response was unnecessary, as the Corinthians knew better. Paul asks six questions within the first six verses, each clearly expecting an affirmative answer. Two of which begin with the words, “Do you not know…?”(6:2, 3).

The literary device Paul employs to encourage them in judging their own affairs is that of logic. He does this by arguing two points:

1. If they will one day judge "the world," then they should be able to judge the “smallest matters” affecting their own lives (6:2). 
2. If they will "judge angels" in the life to come, then they should be able to judge the "things that pertain to this life." (6:3).

      In this way, Paul demonstrated – logically – that the Corinthian church should be judging their own disputes, without involving unbelievers (6:4). He then follows up with the question: Is there “not a wise man among you, not even one, who will be able to judge between his brethren?” (6:5). The logical answer is “yes”.

      Although Paul instructed the Corinthians to keep judgment of disputes within the confines of the local church, he appears more concerned over their willingness to take one another to court in the first place, calling it an “utter failure” (6:7).

      In the remaining verses (7-11), Paul divided his comments between two parties in the Corinthian church: [1] The Plaintiffs (Those who suffered loss) and [2] The Defendants (Those responsible).

       Paul appealed to the injured parties to forgive the wrongs committed against them for the sake of the witness of Christ, asking, “Why do you not rather accept wrong? Why do you not rather [let yourselves] be cheated?” (6:7).

       To those responsible for committing wrongs and cheating their fellow brethren, Paul warns them against being deceived, comparing their actions with those of the unrighteous, unconverted sinner, who has no inheritance in the kingdom of God (6:9-10).

       Finally, and by means of contrasting the conduct of their former lifestyles to their new identity in Christ, Paul encourages them to start living in a way that reflects the life changing, sanctifying power of Christ (6:11).
      To summarize Paul’s message: The church is to be different from the world.

COLOSSIANS
            The letter’s content suggests that the problems facing the church in Colossae centered on a challenge to the sufficiency of Christ in bringing those who professed faith in Him to a complete salvation. Supportive evidence for this claim is Paul’s exhortation: “you are complete in Him” (2:10) and his question of their willful subjection to regulations (2:20) despite Christ having fulfilled the requirements of the law on their behalf.

Identifying the source(s) of the problem is not easy and requires some deductive analysis of the letter, as Paul does not specifically name the individuals or groups responsible for their propagation. A broader appreciation for the nature of the challenge is seen by examining how Paul responds to the problem.

Although not directly named in the letter, some evidence exists to suggest an early form of Gnosticism was threatening the church. Evidence is also present to suggest that Judaizers may have been in Colossae. As to which of these – if either - might have represented the greatest threat the letter does not say. The teachings of each group held that something more was required for man to be saved than simple faith in Christ’s death on the cross, burial and subsequent resurrection.

Evidence for possible early form of Gnostic involvement at Colossae appears in several places within the letter, including Paul’s warning to “Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit…” (2:8). Gnostics held a philosophy about the nature of material things – specifically, that matter was evil and that God had created the world through a demiurge. They guarded this philosophy as “secret knowledge,” teaching that without it, a person could not be saved.

Possible influence by Judaizers appears in the legalistic and ascetic practices that Paul references. Apparently, circumcision was being encouraged in Colossae (2:11), as were other legalistic practices involving food, festivals, new moons and Holy days (2:16). Paul summarizes the ascetic practices in saying: “Do not touch, do not taste, do not handle” (2:21).

Paul’s Response:

Paul’s method for addressing the challenge to Christ’s sufficiency was not to focus on the false doctrines, but to focus on Christ. First, however, he begins by introducing himself as an “Apostle of Jesus Christ” (1:1), thereby asserting authority in the doctrinal matters he would be addressing.

He warns the Colossians to beware of those who with persuasive words would deceive them through philosophy and empty deceit (2:4, 8).

He testifies concerning the nature of Christ, relating Christ’s preeminence in all things and pointing out that in Christ, nothing is lacking, “For it pleased the Father that in Him all the fullness should dwell” (1:19). Paul taught that Christ was in the believers at Colossae (1:27), thereby supplying them with the fullness of salvation. He reminds them of how it was they became Christians (1:21-23) and that their position in Christ was “above reproach” (1:22).

Paul stated that it is the Christian to whom a “mystery which has been hidden from ages and from generations…..has been revealed” (1:27). Therefore, the Christian in Colossae need not be concerned with thinking that he lacked a “secret knowledge” for salvation, but rather, he could be confident in the “full assurance of understanding” (2:2). After all, it is in Christ that “all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge” are hidden (2:3).

            Paul argued that circumcision, and the legal requirements of perfect holiness under the law, had been fulfilled in Christ (2:11). For the Christian, fulfillment of the law was no longer his burden; Christ had “taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross” (2:14).

Paul argued that the Christian’s assuredness of salvation was guaranteed in Christ’s own resurrection, having been “raised with Him through faith” (2:12). Being under no obligation to keep the law, Paul encourages the Colossians to let no one judge their salvation in regards to legalism (2:16) and for them to remain “rooted and built up in Him” (2:6-7).

Paul defeats the Gnostic argument against complete salvation through faith in Christ by teaching about the fullness in Christ. He then defeats the same argument from Judaizers by teaching about the fulfillment by Christ. In response to Gnosticism, Paul taught that Christ was in the Christian (1:27); in response to legalism, Paul taught that the Christian was in Christ (2:10).

1 THESSALONIANS

            The short-term ministry in Thessalonica was successful in gaining many converts (Acts 17:4). However, opposition by those who did not accept the gospel became fierce, forcing Paul and Silas to flee for their own safety (Acts 17:10). In their absence, the opposition began a campaign of false accusations against Paul and Silas, attacking their motives and character. Although unsuccessful in changing the minds of the new converts (1Th 3:6), Paul considered the attacks a serious matter, offering a defense of the ministry early in the letter. He wanted to reassure the new believers and defend the ministry against further slander.

Paul’s Response:

Although Paul knew the accusations were not true, he avoids embarking on a negative rant against his accusers. Instead, he offers a mostly positive defense of his ministry while maintaining a calm tone in his remarks.

Changed lives offered the best defense of Paul’s ministry in Thessalonica, and he begins by citing this fact: “our coming to you was not in vain” (2:1).

Paul further defends his ministry by writing of his personal hardship in bringing the gospel to them. He notes that prior to arriving in Thessalonica, he and Silas were in Philippi, where they “had suffered before and were spitefully treated” (2:2). Nevertheless, Paul states that because the gospel which they brought to Thessalonica was true and “did not come from error or uncleanness, nor was it in deceit” (2:3), “we were bold in our God to speak to you the gospel of God in much conflict” (2:2).

In defense of the genuine nature of his ministry, including his qualifications and those of his ministry team, Paul writes, “…we have been approved by God to be entrusted with the gospel” (2:1). Moreover, the purpose of their sharing the gospel with others was “not as pleasing men, but God” (2:4).

For further evidence that Paul’s motives were pure, he points to the absence of deceitful tactics like the use of “flattering words” or a “cloak for covetousness” (2:5), often used to mask ulterior motives. Additionally, they did not “seek glory from men” or “make demands as Apostles of Christ” even though Paul’s comment suggests that, in the case of the latter, they reserved the right (2:6).

After describing in negative terms what their ministry was not, Paul begins to describe in positive terms what their ministry was. He describes his ministry among them in terms of a “nursing mother” that is gentle, that cherishes and affectionately longs to be with her newborn children, willing to impart the best she has, investing her life into theirs (2:7-8).

Defending against claims that Paul and Silas were in the ministry to gain financially from others, Paul reminds them of their “laboring night and day, that we might not be a burden to any of you” (2:9).

Defending against claims that he and Silas exhibited poor behavior while in Thessalonica, Paul reminds them of the facts, specifically that they behaved “devoutly and justly and blamelessly” (2:10). Here in verse 10, as in verse 5, Paul invokes a courtroom like atmosphere in his defense by claiming God as a witness in these matters.

1 TIMOTHY

The major problem in Ephesus consisted of men who once taught faithfully the gospel of God with sincere faith, teaching doctrines, which found no support in the scriptures. Paul describes these men as “having strayed”, “have turned” (1:6), “having rejected” and as having “suffered shipwreck” (1:19), with many of them “desiring to be teachers of the law”, yet having no understanding of its proper use (1:7). The seriousness with which Paul viewed the situation is underscored by his use of the term “warfare” (1:18), describing the spiritual environment Timothy would be entering in order to correct those in error.

Paul’s Response:

Paul could have addressed the problems in Ephesus by writing a public letter to the church, but his confidence in God’s calling on Timothy’s life to minister resulted in a private communication aimed at encouraging Timothy to embrace his calling and lead by example. Therefore, Paul writes to encourage Timothy to “remain in Ephesus” despite the challenges.

He reminds Timothy that he is to command those who are teaching false doctrines, trusting in fables, and placing emphasis on genealogies, to cease doing so immediately. Those who do not comply should be excused from the ministry (1:20).

Concerning those who wanted to teach the law (1:7), Paul reminds Timothy of its proper use: To convict the ungodly and sinners (1:8-10). Paul recounts his own attempt at salvation by keeping the law, describing it as a time of ignorance and blasphemy (1:13), while naming Christ as the only true means of salvation (1:15). Paul’s life was an example to be used by Timothy in showing the legalist his need for grace and mercy over justice (1:16).

Paul commands Timothy to get in to the spiritual battle there in Ephesus by “waging the good warfare”, reminding him of the spiritual calling on his life revealed to him by way of prophecy (1:18).

Paul encourages Timothy to spend time in prayer for everyone (2:1) and outlines requirements for those desiring to be involved in ministry (3:1-12).

Paul’s overall means of responding to the problems at Ephesus is to encourage Timothy in two primary areas: First, teach the word of God (4:13) and second, be an example to everyone of how a Christian is to live his life (3:15, 4:12, 16).

Finally, he encourages Timothy to guard his own heart from being drawn away from the truth (6:20).

Observations on Love from Song of Solomon (followed by three personal interviews)

1:1 Love can be expressed through song and music. 1:2 Love inherently desires reciprocal action from the object of its affections. It has the ability to stimulate the senses more than intoxicating substances. Love recognizes a value beyond that of the material. It can be expressed through acts of affection, such as through kissing or caressing. Simply experiencing love is not enough; equally important is who expresses that love. 1:3 Love gives without expectation. It gives out of a desire to express love and to bless. 1:4 True love can have a lasting effect. When other things are long since forgotten, the impact of having been loved by someone can last a lifetime. 1:5 Love, in the context of marriage, allows for the appreciation of qualities, which can include physical attributes. The Shulamite recognizes this. 1:6 Genuine love allows one to look past the things it finds unpleasant to focus on what really matters. 1:7 Love is willing to be vulnerable – it shares its thoughts of affection with the one it loves. Love desires to be with those whose relationships are valued. 1:8 Love invites love and does not neglect. 1:9 Love recognizes the inherent beauty in the one it loves. 1:10 Love notices the small things that might otherwise go unnoticed. Love pays attention. 1:11 Love puts forth its best effort, desiring to give the very best it has, because, second best will not suffice. 1:13 Love wants to be close to the one who is the object of its affection. 1:14 Love can be like the sweet aroma of flowers. 1:15 Love compliments. It reinforces and reaffirms. It builds up and doesn’t tear down. 1:16 Love acknowledges the strong parts of the relationship, the qualities and the beautiful parts. Yet, love is also willing to have an honest discussion concerning shortcomings.

2:1 Love is distinguished from other emotions in its words and deeds. 2:2 Love involves risk, and sometimes in the search for love there is pain. If it is strong enough, love can survive even in the most difficult environments. Love seeks to protect that which it loves and values. 2:3 True love bears the fruit of love: It is considerate and humble. It protects and comforts. 2:4 Love desires the involvement of the one who is loved in its activities. It seeks to please the one loved. It is not self-absorbed; instead, it is concerned with the well-being of others. It is outwardly focused as opposed to inwardly focused. 2:5 Love must be maintained. It cannot sustain itself. Like a fire, it must be fed - with the fruit of love’s attention. 2:6 Love supports and holds up. It draws near and doesn’t push away. It seeks to include rather than exclude. 2:7 Love can wait patiently. Love trusts. It chooses to believe the good and dwell on the positive. 2:8 Love is exciting. 2:10 Love pays compliments and speaks kindly. 2:11 Love is always ready to begin anew; to make a new start or try again. It is willing to put the past behind and move forward. 2:12 Love gives reason to rejoice. I can rejoice in the love God has shown toward me. He has made His love known through His Son, Jesus, and He demonstrated that love while I was dead in my sin (Rom. 5:8). 2:13-14 Spending time together is important in a loving relationship. The experience of quiet time together and the attention given to the one who is loved allows love to grow. Love desires to look into the face and eyes and see the person inside. Love enjoys the voice of the one loved. 2:15 Love is the willingness to address the issues that may prove to be a problem if left unattended. Love shows concern for another’s possessions and valuables. Love notices value even in the small things. 2:16 An essential understanding of love is seen in the marital relationship between husband and wife. In the covenant of marriage, the two become one flesh (Gen. 2:24). Love takes into consideration the feelings of the other person.

3:1 Love is experienced through intimacy in the covenant of marriage. Love is that feeling that causes us to miss the person we care about when they are away, and it produces rejoicing when we see them again. 3:11 Love is seen and declared in its most powerful public display through the wedding ceremony. It is in this beautiful ceremony that love from the heart is pledged for all to hear. Good times and bad, true love accepts them both. True love keeps its word. The heart filled with love is a heart full of gladness.

4:1 Love speaks with gentleness. 4:7 The words of love build up and encourage. 4:9 Love causes feelings inside the human heart more powerful than any other. 4:12 Love is respectful. It considers the great value of relationships before making decisions. It considers the consequences if those decisions are wrong. Love seeks to preserve that which it has. 4:15 Love makes life worth living.

5:2 Love brings about celebration. 7:1-10 Love can stir passion in the heart. 8:6 Love is as strong and stronger than death: As much as death can take away life, love can give life (Jn. 3:16 “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.”). 8:7 Real love can survive impossible challenges. Love promotes resolve and binds together those who have it. Love is so valuable that no amount of money can purchase it. No collateral can adequately secure its worth. Love truly is priceless.

I asked three people to comment on what they thought concerning the meaning of love.  Their responses are included below followed by a brief analysis.

First up is Joan, who states:

      Most people think love is sweet baby kisses, wagging puppy dog tails, a bouquet of roses, or a syrupy-sweet card to a loved one. As I get older, I am seeing love from a different angle. It is when I am so mad at my husband that I don't want to even see his face, but I go where he is anyway, and apologize to him for being so mean--even though I know at that moment that I WAS right.

Love is choosing the smaller of the two leftover chocolate chip cookies so he can have the big one. Love is not being able to even remember why I was so mad at him the other day--really, I seriously can't remember the reason.

Love has become the thought not spoken that we both understood from the look. Love takes time to become. Love is being so at home with each other no matter where you are, that quiet is just as comfortable as talking used to be. Love is knowing that no matter what comes along my sweetie will choose me. God chose me that same way. He took the cross for me. He rose for me. He ascended to the Father for me. He loves me. He loves me. He loves me!

That feeling of security is what we all crave. Love offers that feeling, but we don't choose it most of the time because it doesn't look good. Love is definitely not that rose filled vase, diamonds, or a puppy. Love is choosing to overlook the “yuck reality” and believing in the promise. When I believe the promises my sweetie made to me on our wedding day I am happy, secure and full of love. When I believe the promises God made to me, love just happens.

Analyzing Joan’s Answer:
            She begins by stating what love is not and proposes that it is something much more significant. Her understanding of love contains several components.

The first one is humility. Her willingness to humble herself and be the first to seek reconciliation demonstrates that she understands how to love in the midst of tension and division (Eph 4:32 Be kind to one another, tender-hearted, forgiving each other, just as God in Christ also has forgiven you.). In a similar way, it is God, who being pure and innocent of any wrongdoing, pursues the sinners heart for the purpose of reconciliation. Even though the sinner is responsible for the broken relationship, God pursues and seeks restoration because of His love for those He created.

The second component of love found in Joan’s reply is that of unselfishness. In choosing the smaller of the cookies for herself, so that her husband can have the larger ones, she is living out Romans 12:10b “…give preference to one another in honor.” Love is honoring others above yourself when there is no requirement to.

A third component of love noted in her reply is that of forgiveness. Joan states that love is “not being able to even remember why I was so mad at him…” In 1 Cor. 13:5b, we are told that love “does not take into account a wrong suffered…” Likewise, God’s love for us is seen in His willingness to forgive and forget. Isa. 1:18 “Come now, and let us reason together,” says the Lord, “Though your sins are as scarlet, they will be as white as snow; though they are red like crimson, they will be like wool.” In addition, from Isa. 43:25 “I, even I, am He who blots out your transgressions for My own sake; And I will not remember your sins.”

Joan’s experience has taught her that love can be conveyed without words, through a mutual tender gaze into the eyes of her husband. In Mat. 19:21, the scripture tells of the encounter between Jesus and the rich young ruler. It states, “Then Jesus, looking at him, loved him…” Jesus’ look was a look of love toward this man. He loved him while looking at him. Surely, it was a tender, loving gaze.

Joan understands that love takes time to grow, and that time spent together builds trust, and trust results in security. In this environment, where trust and security exist, love flourishes.

For Joan, love is about humility, unselfishness, forgiveness, trust, and security.

Next up is Ken, who states:

             Of course, we cannot know what love is without knowing the originator and source who is Jesus Christ - our God - the lover of our souls. So, to find the answer we must search the Word of God because it is the only place to find what is Love.

First, we could not love God or love our neighbor unless God loved us first. “Beloved, let us love one another, for love is from God, and whoever loves has been born of God and knows God. Anyone who does not love does not know God, because God is love. In this the love of God was made manifest among us, that God sent his only Son into the world, so that we might live through him. In this is love, not that we have loved God but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins. Beloved, if God so loved us, we also ought to love one another. No one has ever seen God; if we love one another, God abides in us and his love is perfected in us. Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love.” (1 John 4: 7-12)

There is no end to the number of scripture references that speak of God's love toward us as in John 3:16, Romans 5:8, and 1 John 4:19. The best description of love in practice toward our neighbors that I know of is in 1 Corinthians 13.4-8 “Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. Love never fails.”

Jesus said that the world would recognize His followers by their love for one another. "By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another."(John 13:35)

Unfortunately, love is growing cold in our culture as Jesus said, "Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, but he who stands firm to the end will be saved. (Matthew 24:12-13)

I know this is mostly quoting the Word of God, notice all are from the New Testament as well, but this is the only way I know to describe what is love.

Analyzing Ken’ Answer:
             Ken is right about the foundation required for understanding the real meaning of love. If we do not know God, it really is impossible to understand love, at least as God desires for us to understand it. “The world” has its own perverted view of what love is. However, love, in its pure and unpolluted form, can only be understood through God. 1 John 4:1 describes it this way: “We have come to know and have believed the love which God has for us. God is love, and the one who abides in love abides in God, and God abides in him.”

Therefore, to know love is to know God. The two are not mutually exclusive but inclusive and integral. In fact, God and love are indistinguishable. God is love because He is its source.

Ken then argues the point that “to find the answer we must search the Word of God.” Here, too, Ken is right on. Since what we know of God is based on His Word, if we want to understand love, we must get to know God, and therefore, get to know His Word.

Ken makes another great point concerning love when he states, “we could not love God or love our neighbor unless God loved us first.” Our ability to love others the way God loves us - with an agape type of love – is only because God initiated the first move in reconciliation (But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (Eph. 2:4-5)). God, indeed, loved us first, and those who have a relationship with Christ, are also alive in Christ, and have His Holy Spirit abiding in them. This allows us to “love our neighbor” with the love of Christ.

Finally, we have Trina’s thoughts about love:

             Real love comes from the heart, not your head. You can think you love someone, or are in love with someone, but real love is in your heart. You would be willing to lay down your life to save the people you truly love. Jesus gave his life for us. I have no idea if a husband or wife would give their own life for the other, if it came down to it. However, as a mother, I would give my life for either one of my sons in a heartbeat.

Analyzing Trina’s Answer:
            She recognizes that love is something more than an intellectual position that one holds concerning another human being. She associates love with the heart, and believes that the heart is the seat of love.

Trina’s view of love includes a moral component of self-sacrifice. In her reply, the measure she employs to determine true love, is the willingness on the part of one person to lay down his/her life for another. If a person is unwilling to do that, then his/her love is probably not true love. This caused me to consider the following verse from Romans 5:7 “For one will hardly die for a righteous man; though perhaps for the good man someone would dare even to die.^”

Then, as an example of the ultimate example of true love, she points to Jesus’ own sacrifice. In this, I am reminded of the Apostle Paul’s words in Romans 5:8 “But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.” Undoubtedly, God chose what He knew would be the most powerful example of love that He could ever communicate to us -- self-sacrifice through His Son.

The Israelites: Lessons from Their Experience in the Exodus and Wilderness Wanderings

Trust for Provision

The account of captive Israel and their time in the desert is not unlike that of the Christian life, as the Christian also began in bondage - to sin.  By His sovereignty and grace, God also rescued (redeemed) the Christian.  Like the children of Israel, the Christian is filled with joy at being set free (Ex. 15:1-21), and begins by rejoicing and praising God for his deliverance from bondage.  Just as God endeavored to teach the children of Israel to trust Him for everything, God wants Christians today to learn to trust Him for their daily needs. 

At times, the Christian, like the children of Israel, will face trials and find himself in situations that may appear hopeless – apart from God’s intervention.  His maturity is marked by an increasing faith and a decreasing dependence on the need to see before believing.  If he believes and trusts God, as evident by his obedience, he too, will enter the “Promised Land.”

On the fifteenth day of the second month, after their escape from Egypt, the Israelites arrived in the Wilderness of Sin (Ex. 16:1).  The number of men was 600,000.  This number does not account for the women and children who accompanied them.  All total there may have been as many as two-million Israelites by some estimates.¹

While in the Wilderness of Sin, they begin to complain about the lack of food.  They were so full of self-pity that they said, “Would that we had died by the LORD’S hand in the land of Egypt…” (Ex. 16:3).  They went on to accuse Moses and Aaron of bringing them out in to the desert to kill them!

I find it difficult to imagine how they could have gone from praising God and singing songs to Him only forty-five days earlier (Ex. 15), to wishing they had died in the land of Egypt.  After all, they were eyewitnesses to God’s supernatural power, which He executed on their behalf in order to secure their release!  Moreover, they walked on dry ground through the Red Sea, which God had parted, and watched in safety from the shoreline as those who held them in bondage for 430 years (Ex. 12:40-41) were drowned as they tried to cross in pursuit. 

Did the children of Israel really think that God went to these extremes only to allow them to perish before His very eyes, while on the way to the Promised Land?  Sadly, the answer is yes.  Yet, they had no valid reason for doubting God or that He would take care of them and provide for their needs. 

Like the children of Israel, I have no valid reason for doubting God either.  If He can take care of more than 600,000 people in the desert, He can certainly take care of me!  He went to extraordinary measures to demonstrate His love for me, too – while I was still dead in sin, He sent His son to die on the cross for me (Rom. 5:8).  Previous experience and the promise of His word should result in great confidence concerning future provision.

Unfortunately, the children of Israel focused on themselves instead of what God was doing.  When their needs were not met according to their timing, they began to doubt God’s promise and even resent their freedom. 

The nature of man is to be concerned with himself and satisfying the desires of his flesh.  God wants to change man’s focus from being self-centered to being God-centered.  This is modeled perfectly in the response given by Jesus to His disciples when they returned to find Him sitting at the well in Samaria.  The disciples were focused on food and eating but Jesus responds to them by saying, “I have food to eat that you do not know about.”(Jn. 4:32) “My food is to do the will of Him who sent Me, and to accomplish His work.” (Jn. 4:34) 

            Of course, God did provide food for the children of Israel in the form of manna.  His provision was daily (Ex. 16:4), it was adequate, and it was completely satisfying.²

Concerning the manna, God told Israel to take only what they needed for each day, except on the day before the Sabbath when He allowed them to collect provisions for two-days.

Obviously, God could have provided them enough food in one day to last them for six-weeks or six-years. However, God wanted the children of Israel to look to Him on a daily basis.  He wants me to trust Him on a daily basis, too.  He wanted them to learn to trust Him for their needs regularly.  Likewise, He wants me to have the faith that I can always depend on Him to meet my needs.

 The provision of manna was enough to meet the needs of the entire population and this miracle occurred even before the first census took place. This demonstrates to me that God knew exactly how many Israelites there were, even before they did.  He knows my need before I do and He knows it before I ask (Mat. 6:8). 

I note that God’s care for the children of Israel extended beyond the national level; it extended right down to the family and individual levels as well.  This seems apparent in the schedule He commanded them to ad hereto. They were to collect the manna for six-days and rest on the seventh day.  Likewise, I need a day of rest, too. 

Just as God put stipulations on the gathering of the manna, He may also put them on blessings he bestows in my life today.  If I ask the Lord for something in particular and He provides it, I should be sure to put it to use in the manner intended.   As a Christian, I need to be a good steward of the blessings that He has given me.  

God’s provision for Israel came with a test to see if they would obey Him (Ex. 16:4).  However, Israel ignored the instructions from God and gathered more than they should have; some of them even ventured out on the Sabbath looking for the manna (Ex. 16:27). 

Their attempt to gather more than they needed, only to have it spoil and prove useless, illustrates to me that spending time trying to gather more than I need is also fruitless, especially in light of the coming kingdom of God.  It might also reveal a lack of faith on my part to trust God for future provision.  It displeases the Lord when His children disobey Him (16:28).  He remains faithful even when those who call Him “Lord” do not.

The limited resources of the environment where Israel was camped had no impact on God’s ability to provide for them.  In fact, the Bible records God as saying that He would “rain bread from Heaven” (Ex. 16:4).  Israel’s lack of faith prevented them from imagining that God could sustain them in the desert.  They failed to consider God’s creative power and they were amazed when their eyes saw the manna for the first time (Ex. 16:15). 

As a Christian, I should never doubt God’s ability to provide for me, in spite of the circumstances that may exist.  God’s provision in my time of need may come in unexpected ways – like manna from Heaven. 

The children of Israel must have expected that life out from under the bondage they experienced in Egypt would be easy.  They apparently expected that along the way to the “Promised Land,” they would be in locations where food and water were plentiful.  Yet, God led them to places that had little of either - if any at all.  However, it was in these environments where God did some of the most incredible miracles in the entire Bible!   Unfortunately, Israel’s attitude while in the desert was to doubt, complain, and be resentful. 

When I find myself in situations or places where the things I need are not plentiful, or even non-existent, I need to remember the miracles God did in the presence of Israel during the exodus.  It was in that wilderness experience that God’s supernatural intervention is unmistakable and His power undeniably manifest.    

In my walk with the Lord, there have been seasons of life that seemed as though I was in the desert.  As I look back on those experiences, it is now clear that God was working in my life.  As I continue to follow the Lord, there will certainly be more “desert-like” experiences to come.  Although they are not pleasant at the time, they do present opportunities for God to build my faith, while at the same time giving Him the opportunity to get the glory He so rightly deserves.

Murmuring Against Those in Leadership

            Throughout their wilderness experience, the children of Israel often expressed themselves by murmuring and complaining.  Their reason for doing so varies slightly with each account.  The first instance of any complaint took place while they were still in bondage under Pharaoh.  After Moses and Aaron approached Pharaoh to ask him to release the children of Israel, Pharaoh became angry, and as a result, made their labor more difficult.  The “officers of the people” did not expect this response by Pharaoh to their new representative, Moses.  They were not happy about the results and made sure Moses new about it (Ex. 5:21).

When changes in leadership occur, as in this instance, from the “officers of the people” to Moses, it often results in new and unforeseen challenges for those people who are under that leadership.  Our response to challenges, because of changes in leadership, should not begin with grumbling or complaining; instead, we should trust God that the new leadership is in place because of His appointment.  Having this perspective allows us to accept the new leadership in spite of the unforeseen challenges or difficulties that may arise because of that change.  However, this is not an easy principal to apply to ones life, because the flesh does not like unexpected difficulty.  Nevertheless, we need to be willing to embrace it with all of the challenges that come with it.  In doing so, we are submitting to God, and honoring him by obeying his instructions to honor those who are in positions of authority over us. (Rom 13:1-2),

When the children of Israel entered in to the Wilderness of Sin, the Bible says that they “grumbled against Moses and Aaron in the wilderness.” (Ex. 16:2)  However, Moses reveals something interesting about the nature of their complaint; He said, “And what are we? Your grumblings are not against us, but against the Lord.”  (Ex 16:8)  

When tempted to complain about someone who is in leadership over us, we need to remember that God placed that person there for a reason, and to complain or murmur against him or her, is really to do so against God.  God takes all sin very seriously, and this one is no different. 

Three-days after the children of Israel departed from Mt. Sinai, they were complaining in their camp yet again.  God heard them complaining and His anger was aroused.   The scripture says that it so displeased the Lord, that He destroyed some of them with fire.  The way in which God deals with this sin in Numbers 11:1 illustrates just how serious it is.  

By not complaining against those who are in leadership over us, we please the Lord by obeying His word.  As a result, we do not have to fear the disciplinary action that He may justifiably bring against us because of this sin.

People often think the act of complaining will have no affect on those around them.  However, the example found in Numbers 11, illustrates this to be a falsely held view.  In fact, complaining and murmuring can and will affect others.  It is dangerous because it motivates them to engage in the same type of behavior. 

If allowed to continue, complaining and murmuring have the potential to spread to those in positions of leadership as well.  They, too, may begin complaining as a means of expression.  This is exactly what happened with Moses after he had been exposed to their complaining for such a long period (Num. 11:11-15).  The constant complaining by the children of Israel wore on him to the point that he was even ready to be absolved from all responsibility of leading the people. 

We need to support those in leadership over us; they have tremendous responsibilities.  If we were to complain all the time about how they were handling those responsibilities, instead of encouraging them, they, like Moses, could become apathetic and decide to quit.  We need to pray for their strength and protection, and encourage them when we have the opportunity.

Perhaps the most dangerous consequence to unbridled complaining is its eventual usurping of authority.  After being around the children of Israel for so long, with all of their complaining and murmuring, Aaron and Miriam, Moses’ brother and sister, eventually lost their respect for Moses, too (Num. 12:1-2).  Were it not for God intervening and reaffirming His choosing of Moses to lead the people (Num. 12:5-9); the leadership structure would have certainly collapsed.

By the time the children of Israel reached the wilderness of Paran, at Kadesh, the place from which they were to enter the “Promise Land,” their faith in Moses’ leadership had eroded to the point that they no longer trusted him at all.  This was the culmination of all their complaining and murmuring.  They refused to trust anyone who did not share their view of the situation.  When two of their own men, Caleb and Joshua, returned with news that the land was indeed theirs for the taking, they absolutely refused to go.  When Caleb tried to reassure them that God was with them and not to rebel, they wanted to stone him to death.  This was the final act of disobedience before missing their opportunity to enter the land of Canaan - which God had promised to them.  They would spend the next 40 years in the desert. 

  The seeds of this tragedy were sewn prior to Israel’s freedom from Egypt (Ex. 5:21).  Their practice of complaining about circumstances and those God had placed in positions of leadership, eventually led to all-out rebellion; as a result, they forfeited the very land they had traveled so far to inherit.  How very unfortunate, as they at one time completely trusted God and his servant, Moses (Ex.14:31).

At first, murmuring and complaining may seem like a harmless activity; however, if the practice does not stop soon after it begins; it could result in unforeseen and very costly consequences in the future. 

1. Roy R. Matheson, Old Testament Survey (Chicago: The Moody Bible Institute of Chicago, 1989, 1999, 2001), p. 39

2. Roy R. Matheson, Old Testament Survey (Chicago: The Moody Bible Institute of Chicago, 1989, 1999, 2001), p. 23