12 · 10

Time for Finals

Media_httplyimgcomaoi_habeb
December signals not only the end of the year, but also the end of the fall semester. In the blistering cold, scholars scurry about as they attempt to complete term papers or prepare for rigorous exams. Adventists are not exempt from this tenacious ordeal. Rather, they face a heavier load. The average student studies for school all seven days of the week and skips devotion (non-Adventist Christians do take time for devotion). Meanwhile, the Adventists studies for six days and prays to God morning and night.

The American public school system is not organized in a manner that complements Christian beliefs, and neither can it be. Building a public school system around the beliefs of a particular religious group would violate the nation’s belief in one’s right to practice his or her religion freely (someone of a contrary religious perspective will always sound the battle cry). The First Amendment in the Bill of Rights states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” Even though some Americans claim that this is a Christian nation, its own laws conflict with that description. It claims to be a nation which embraces people of various religious expressions. Therefore, all attempts to hedge the schools within the confines of Christian thought will fall on deaf ears.

If America did agree to adhere to Christian values and build schools around them, then the question would be, “Of which denomination?” Would it be Catholic, Baptist, Adventist, or Anglican? The various denominations found in Christendom are at odds with each other theologically, and therefore a recommendation from one will arouse a disagreeable spirit from another. The merging of conflicting perspectives will only serve to enhance problems. Furthermore, one only needs to think of the conservative/liberal camps that are locked in mortal combat within each denomination, and any thought of consensus seems more obscure.

Since laws to accommodate our beliefs are far from the horizon, what can the Adventist do to keep up with the masses and excel in their academic endeavors? The answer to that question is one that we have been hearing for a long time: Pray. Prayer is a necessity that is comparable to breathing. However, one who prays must acknowledge the capabilities of the One prayed to. If we distrust God’s ability to perform what we pray for, then doing so will be meaningless to us. The one who is conscious of a living God who is actively involved in the affairs of the universe must also believe that He deals with the affairs of the mind.

Daniel and his three friends attended a university that differed with their religious convictions and they were able to be successful. It is possible to operate as a Christian student in a non-Christian educational entity. “To these four young men God gave knowledge and understanding of all kinds of literature and learning” (Dan. 1:17 NIV). The same God, who delivered Jerusalem into the hands of Nebuchadnezzar (1:1), is now giving intellectual prowess to the four young Judeans (all in the same chapter). God is involved in global events and in the life of the average person.

As you run “to and fro” searching for the proper citation, invigorating vocabulary, or the best study corner, remember that God is a genius. If you want “knowledge and understanding” in “all kinds of literature and learning,” the God who was there in the time of Daniel is still capable.

12 · 04

Theological Reflection: On the Degradation of Normality

Media_httpus123rfcom4_beelm
The end of a cherished ‘normality’ (life as we know it) can be an unpleasant thought that one wishes to vanish from the musings of the mind. However, in this ‘topsy-turvy’ world where Islamic terrorist, African pirates, and the economy have gotten a choke hold of our ‘normality,’ we have learned (unwillingly) to entertain new ones. In other words (if I may borrow the utterance of Judy Garland in the Wizard of Oz), “we’re not in Kansas anymore” and therefore we cannot think or behave as if we are. If one continues to do so it is because they are either self-deceived (perhaps due to their unwillingness to accept the new), deceived by others (due to their inability to perceive truth), or the ‘normality’ that they know of has not been touched.

Whether you agree with my philosophical ramblings or not (and I’m using philosophical loosely), you must admit that things are not like they were in the not too distant past. There is a heaviness in the air that has caused a sense of urgency that cries out, “something is going to happen, and it’s not good.” The world seems to assume that it has unmasked a new villain—‘contra-normality’—and this villain desires to usher us into an age when they say “peace and safety; then sudden destruction” (1 Thess. 5:3 KJV).

A cherished Judean ‘normality’ came to a devastating halt in 605 B.C. (Stefanovic, 43) when “Nebuchadnezzar [II] King of Babylon came to Jerusalem and besieged it” (Dan. 1:1 NIV, emphasis mine). Written in the sixth century B.C., the book of Daniel Daniye'l—“God is my judge”—begins by bringing us up close and personal to the reality that is to be unveiled in great detail through-out the entire book: “there is a war going on outside, no man is safe from.”  The tale of two camps, which is illustrated and typified thought-out all of scripture, manifest itself in the form of two ancient cities—Jerusalem and Babylon.

Eliakim was renamed Jehoiakim by Pharaoh Neco when he dethroned Jehoahaz (2 Kg. 23:31-34). He served as a vassal for Nebuchadnezzar for three years before rebelling (24:1). In response to the evil that he had been doing all along (23:37) and “the sins of Manasseh and all he had done, including the shedding of innocent blood. For he had filled Jerusalem with innocent blood” (24:3, 4), the Lord let the enemy lose! As the word of the prophets had proclaimed, God “sent them [the enemies] to destroy Judah” (24:2, emphasis mine). In Daniel’s account of Jerusalem’s fall, the enemy that shattered the Judean ‘normality,’ was allowed to do so because God “delivered them …into his [Nebuchadnezzar] hand” (Dan. 1:1, emphasis mine). Captivity didn’t occur without the permission of God; He was in control.

The King of Judah (whose name glorifies God—Yehowyaqiym, “God raises up”) was delivered into the hand of the king of Babylon (whose name glorifes his god—Nabû–kudurri–uṣur, “O Nabu, guard the offspring” or “O Nabu, protect the boundary stone”). Concerning the besieging of Jerusalem and the Lord giving it over, Gerhard Pfandl Ph.D. states, “the first statement describes the event in terms of secular history; the second supplies the event’s spiritual dimension” (Pfandl, 14). In fact, this is the structure of the book—historical events with spiritual dimension attached. In Daniel we are on the top of the world and watching the movements of massive empires colliding with each other for power, while God is holding the reins.

I believe that the book of Daniel  shows us two ways of looking at the world, side by side. One is from the historical/literal standpoint—by this, I mean what is real and can be seen by all—and the other is from the spiritual standpoint. It is the seer that declares that the Lord gave them over, not the historian. Everyone saw the towering World Trade Center come crashing down and killing the innocent, everyone sees the economy free falling into the abyss, everyone hear of the pirates terrorizing the African coast, and everyone sees destruction and doom breathing out violent threats. Indeed, sudden destruction has come and will come. But not all are able to see the other side of the coin.

Daniel opens by displaying that this is indeed an ‘open universe’ where God doesn’t just watch but is active in it. In these times where ‘normality’ pushes and shoves and refuse to be define, those who look to God sees a reality that is definite. God is a constant acting being even if it looks like the whole world has gone mad. As Daniel points out in 1:2, let’s look for God in the madness and see what He’s doing.

Works Cited:

Pfandl, Gerhard. Daniel: The Seer of Babylon. Hagerstown: Review and Herald Publishing Association, 2004.

Stefanovic, Zdravko. Daniel: Wisdom to the Wise. Nampa: Pacific Press Publishing Association, 2007.

11 · 30

Rejoice and Weep

Media_httpidealistikj_cdhvt
You may be surprise at the thoughts that flash across the screen of your mind when hard times come along. It’s as if the person that you thought you were melted down and a new persona (which may not be new, but been laying low in your sub-consciousness; or perhaps it is new, and the present problem is the cause of its development) emerges forth. Bringing with it ideas and actions which would of never been thought or acted-out by the one who you ‘thought’ you were. These can range from thoughts that you are not worth anything to those of suicide (in extreme cases). It may feel as if the breath that is circulating through out your body is slowly being squeezed out of you, and no one cares or notice.

Unfortunately, there are many such incidents in our communities, homes, and churches that go un-noticed. Life has become so much about self-preservation that the ‘neighbor’ is treated as a stepping-stone (or a decoration that is placed along the road to your fame) and thus his/her struggles is view as his/her business; in other words, “who cares.” What has emerged from the capitalistic belly of the United States is a Christianity that has become unconcerned about the ‘neighbor.’

One may reason that it is impossible to know (as in acquaintance by experience) intimately every person that they come in contact with. That is understandable, but if “each one, reach one” (the origin of this quote escapes me) then our communities, homes, and churches will be better places. Not because there will be no crisis or difficult situations, but because the love and support from others will help those feel the sense of community and belonging that are expressed in these words, “rejoice with those who rejoice, weep with those who weep” (Rom. 12:15, ESV ).

Simple words often present sophisticated imagery; and we see this in the scripture quoted above. It calls for sensitivity to the emotional health of one other than yourself. It doesn’t say that people should weep and rejoice when you do so, but it places you (us) in the seat of the one who is to do the action; the one who is to feel concerned. This is evident in the voice that the Greek words χαίρειν (rejoice) and κλαίειν (weep) are found. Both are in the ‘active voice,’ meaning that the subject of the verb is doing the action (Black, p. 12). Paul places the addressees in the position of doers.

This verse implies that a relationship must exist. We are not called to be there only when weeping is going on, but when a person is experiencing events that make them joyful. We can’t let people slip under the radar and drown in the complexities of life, we ought to be there (writer and readers). How many times have you and I let it happen?

In a world that calls for you to “get your fame on,” why not answer the higher calling in Jesus Christ and be a good neighbor—a good Samaritan. As “ambassadors for Jesus” (in the melody of the late and great theme song for Adventurers (smile)) let us strive to be the best representatives of His character as we can. We are not guaranteed to get it right all the time, but God sees the efforts that we will make and will bless it.

Christ did not establish a people that is insensitive to the conditions of others, but one that is concerned about the good times and the bad. Maybe for you, Paul’s words to the Romans, is a “hard saying.” Perhaps you need a moment of reflection to contemplate on the solemn duties of a Christian. Pray, then take a person and be the best representative of Jesus that you can be for them. They are out there and they need us to do something.

Works Cited

Black, D. A. (1994). Learn to Read New Testament Greek: Expanded Edition. Nashville, Tenessee: Broadman & Holman Publishers.

11 · 18

Inauguration Day Meditation

Media_httpbrightcovev_glass

This morning, I watched the inauguration ceremony for the 44th president of the United States. Barack Hussein Obama J.D. is officially the first black president of this nation. Many have taken this as an opportunity to reflect on the struggles of African Americans, in a primary sense, and minorities as a whole. Even if you’re not one of those that care, you can’t deny that it has been a long journey for minorities.

The journey from the disease infested dungeons of the slave ships to the highest office in the land did not pass quietly. Under blood and sweat, the people who were viewed as “lower” did not fail to produce heroes and heroines that argued, whether with words or with bullets, that the Negroes were as equal as the white men. So today, many are reflecting and some are probably wondering if they are dreaming. Years of determination has produce what some are viewing as the “Great Black Hope,” a title that I’m attributing to President Obama because of the expectations that are riding on him. Today, Barack Obama has become the most powerful man in the world.

His speech was not one of a man that is afraid, but of a mighty king who is facing the dangers ahead with an unshakable conviction that he will overcome. Powerful words sprinkled with the aroma of a firm resolution flowed from the lips of he who must be looked at as one of the most gifted orators in recent political history (certainly from the view of this writer). Accompanied with the pomp, elegance, and prestige that the United States can offer, many hearts have melted and have viewed this as a new start. Indeed it is! Others have paved the way and now it seems to some that the cry of the black people to the lord, which echoes the words of Israel to Samuel the Prophet in 1 Sam. 1:5 “Give us a King,” has been answered. Can we trust Barack? Some will shout “Yes we can!” But the scripture says no! Ps. 146:3 says, “Do not trust in Princes, in mortal man, in whom there is no salvation.” No salvation can be found in the rulers of the world, or any man. No salvation can be found in this brilliant minded knight clothed in a shining armor. The blessed is “he whose help is the God of Jacob, whose hope is in the Lord His God” (Ps. 146:5). Is there anything wrong with rejoicing over a leader? Certainly not, but don’t place your trust or your salvation in a person, but rather in the One, Jesus Christ. There is something that we can do for the new president. We as Christians do have a sacred responsibility. Many have failed in practicing the words of the verse found in 1Tim. 2:1-3 when George Bush was in power, maybe we will do better this time (smile). The verses says, “First of all, then, I urge that entreaties and prayers, petitions and thanksgivings, be made on behalf of all men, for kings and all who are in authority, so that we may lead a tranquill and quiet life in all godliness and dignity. This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour.” If these things are good and acceptable from God’s point of view; it should certainly be things that those who are interested in what is pleasing to Him do. Ultimately, God desires for us to live the best life as possible, and the very fact that He tells us to pray for these leaders is a confirmation that He will certainly heed our prayers, according to His will (for we know that the end is near). This is the start of something new, and if you have never prayed for a president before, you should pray for this one. This one has all the forces of racism gearing up to go after him, so pray for him and his family. Pray that he may surrender himself to Jesus Christ so that he may be one of those who rejoice when the King of Kings appear!

 

 

10 · 28

On the Making of Many Translations…

Media_httpweirdthinke_fmohd
Preliminary Remarks

It was the Scottish writer Thomas Carlyle, translating the phrase from German, that wrote: “Silence is golden,” in his book, Sartor Resartus (1831/32.) This phrase should hold considerable weight in the minds of all who find themselves in exchanges concerning issues of which they are uninformed or deficient in. Thus, I am often quiet (though, I sometimes break that trend due to my personality) in dialogues concerning Finance, Math, etc., because my knowledge of these disciplines is limited. My statements can only go so far (smile.) Thus, I admit that it is hard to follow certain principles even when we know them to be true.

Having said that, allow me to present a disclaimer. People tend to read more into statements than authors intend. The principle stated in the paragraph above should not be seen as a platform constructed to elevate some to the position of the ‘elite’. Rather, it is presented in hope that contemplation occurs before articulation. Knowing when to speak (or write) is just as important as knowing when not to at all.

Introduction

One of the topics that have caught the attention of many young people in the church is the one on Bible translations. They are so deeply involved that many have gone as far as to debate (arguing really) about which versions to use. Before I comment further, a little compassion is needed. These young people are speaking passionately concerning what they believe and/or been taught. Patience is required as we speak to them concerning these issues. All things must be done in love.

The KJV

The so-called ‘authorized’ version, known as the KJV, is the one that is being presented as the only true translation. Their claims do not arise from a prophetic announcement in scripture or conclusions from research of the biblical manuscripts and languages (Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic). They are based on tradition and the video presentations of one man (among many)—Walter Veith, professor of Zoology. The fact that he is not a theologian does not disqualify him from speaking concerning what he has researched. A degree in Theology is not necessary for one to rightly divide the word (2 Tim. 2:15), for “Spiritual things…are spiritually discerned” (1 Cor. 2:13, 14.)

The KJV is a good translation. [1]Written in the language of “seventeenth-century England” by scholars under the command of King James VI (of Scotts, also known as James I of England and Ireland), the version replaced the Latin Vulgate. The word ‘authorize’ has no spiritual implications and should not be presented as such. Since its arrival in 1611, it has gone through its own revisions, to the point where it does not read like the original.[2] The NKJV came about because a need was felt for a more thorough revision.

[3]The manuscripts that were used in the translation of the KJV came from what is referred to as the ‘Byzantine family.’ These manuscripts came from a similar location, namely Istanbul of modern day Turkey (formerly known as Constantinople; Byzantium prior to that.)  The manuscripts that belong to this family are extensive and read similarly. It has been argued that the Byzantine Empire, which is really the Roman Empire (eastern Roman Empire), had all the capabilities necessary to facilitate the extensive copying of their manuscripts and to preserve them.

Arrival of the Modern Bibles

[4]Since 1611, researchers have discovered manuscripts that pre-date the Byzantine era. These discoveries have brought about new translations such as “the British Revised Version” (1885) and the “American Standard Version” (1901), which are (really) attempts to revise the KJV so that it may line up with the “new textual discoveries.” Some may argue against these attempts, but on what real basis. Taking a dogmatic stance is appropriate when one can identify the dogma.

[5]In 1952, the RSV version arrived on the scene. Though some were not happy with some aspects of it, it was “far superior in fluency and accuracy to any other English version available.” It was updated in 1971 and the NRSV came out in 1990. The NASB (1971), a revision of the ASV, and the NIV (1978, Evangelical translation) came soon after. Though philosophies of translation (by this I mean, ‘systems of principles for guidance’ concerning translations) vary, the goal was the same; giving the public something to read and study in a language that is understandable.

Ellen White and Translations

[6]In an article by Arthur L. White, The E. G. White Counsel on Versions of the Bible (Biblical Research Institute), he discusses E.G’s views on; inspiration, God’s preservation of the Bible, and the versions that were coming out. Concerning the latter, he quotes W. C. White’s (her son, “who was closely associated with her in her public ministry and in the preparation and publication of her books”) report that Mrs. White spoke approvingly of the revised version and led him to believe that it would be “a matter of great service.”[7] In the section that deals with Mrs. White’s use of the newer versions in her writing, he lists; The Great Controversy, Ministry of Healing, Steps to Christ, Desire of Ages, etc.

Finally, when it came to the revision of her books, Mrs. White was call to discuss the use of the revise version. She would study each text carefully and then make a decision. In some cases, she wanted a revised version use and in others, she wanted the KJV. W. C. White also states that she never condemned the American Revised Version and the reason she did not use it on the pulpit is because the church was familiar with the KJV rendering of the texts and that use of new words may cause ‘confusion.’[8]

Conclusion…for now

Solomon, the wise man, writes: “Of making many books there is no end” (Eccl. 12:12 NIV.)  This is a wise saying and has shown itself to be true since this translation debate has started; there has been many books written about translations, and more will be. This discussion will go on as long as there are people with opinions. I hope that this attempt to help stir some from becoming ‘translation critics’ will result in reflection.

This was not an attempt to attack the KJV, as I said above: “The KJV is a good translation.” Rather, it is an attempt to set the foundation for the real issue; what is the translation philosophy of the version(s) under discussion. If you do not know the difference between ‘literal,’ ‘Formal equivalent,’ ‘dynamic/function equivalent,’ and ‘paraphrase’ translations, perhaps it is best for you to just declare your preference for a version instead of presenting against others.


[1]William W. Klein, Craig L. Blomberg, and Robert L. Hubbard, Jr., Introduction to Biblical Interpretation (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publisher, 1993), 127.
[2]For example, words like ado, ague, anon, apothecary, bray, etc., are not part of our common vernacular.
[3]Klein, Blomberg, and Hubbard, 127.
[4]Klein, Blomberg, and Hubbard, 128.
[5] Klein, Blomberg, and Hubbard, 128.
[7] W. C. White, DF 579 (1931); Ministry, April, 1947, p. 17.
[8] White Estate DF 579; Ministry, April, 1947, pp. 17, 18.
10 · 21

John the Baptist – Part 1

Media_httpwwwhistoryc_fmbff

At Bethany on the other side of the Jordan,” (John 1:28 NIV) John the Baptist faced off in a questioning session(s) against “priests,” “Levites,” and “Pharisees” (1:19, 24). They wanted to know who he was. They came to questioned him concerning his identity. Questioning of one’s identity is the typical human response to a newcomer, especially one who is speaking out publically. John’s message must have drawn a lot of attention, or else it would not have caused the leaders in Jerusalem to send out representatives. The Jews wanted to know if John was “the Christ,” “Elijah,” or “the Prophet” (John 1:20, 21). In those days, you didn’t ask those type of questions to small timers. These titles were of great religious significance. They were only mention in connection to people who were shaking the nation. John, who’s “clothes were made of Camel’s hair” and a belt of leather (Matt. 3:4), was so popular that it could be said that “the whole Judean countryside and all the people of Jerusalem” (Mark 1:5) came to hear him. Included in the crowds were the hated “tax collectors” and “soldiers” who were looking to be right with God (Luke 3:10, 12, 14). Yet, in the midst of all this popularity, John did not take the glory for himself. Instead when asked concerning whether he was the Christ, Elijah, or the Prophet, John answered no. Knowing that they needed to report something worth hearing, the priests and Levites told John to give them an answer (1:22). In response to their demands, John identifies himself as the voice in Isaiah 40:3. Since John did not claim to be any of the big three, those who were of the Pharisaic sect questioned him about his authority to baptize (John 1:24). Instead of answering the question, he changes the focus to the one who is coming after him (1:27). John was mission-minded. He was “a man who was sent from God,” for the purpose of, testifying about the light that came into the world (John 1:6, 7). As we read the Bible there are many things that we can over-look, simply because we think them insignificant. Today I challenge you to take another look at John the Baptist. He was humble at a time when it was being said “the whole world has gone after him.” He remained a servant, announcing the coming of his Lord. That is a timeless example.
10 · 09

A Few Good Counselees

Parents play pivotal roles in the lives of their children. However, one role that never cease no matter how old the child becomes is that of a counselor. Parents are not the only ones that can give counsel. There are those who may be qualified in specific areas that can contribute significantly to our lives. Whether one agrees with the counsel or not, they can’t deny the counselor’s experience. In these times of moral and economic upheaval, the counselors may be looking for “a few good counselees,” are you available?

The “I know all” stance that has become too prominent in the post-modern mind is lethal. It is an intellectual self-sufficiency that rejects theoretical and practical contemplations other than its’ own. Whether one posses mental prowess or not, that is beside the point. Whether one is considered a fool or an intellectual, both can proclaim to know all, yet both are susceptible to erroneous ideologies and or actions. Since infallibility is a common denominator among mankind, there is a dire need of counsel.

The words of the wise man simmer like ice cold water on the desert floor when he writes: “Plans fail for lack of counsel, but with many advisers they succeed” (Prov. 15:22 NIV). No matter what version one reads this in—I for one read nine of them—it is impossible to miss-understand the verse. It is a formula for success that is vital for any endeavor; “if you don’t get advice, you will fail. “

A juxtaposition of the two sections of the verse ([a] “plans fail for lack of counsel” and [b] “but with many advisers they succeed”) shows two things[1]. In order for one to be successful there must be יוֹעֲצִ [ya`ats counselors]. The wise man is declaring the need for many advisers and thus giving the advisee multiple perspectives. The many, is not defined and so it leaves the amount of perspectives limitless. The verse does not say what one is to do with the counsels, just that a large amount is beneficial if success is the goal.

On the other hand, the analysis shows that one who does not have counsel will reap a harvest of הָפֵר [parar]. Parar is the Hebrew word use here to describe the result of plans with no counselors. It means, “Break, destroy, frustrate, invalidate[2].

Not all counsel is worthy of application, but they all deserve a hearing. Our finiteness limits us in all categories, but if we work together, things can turn out for the best. Ultimately, the counselor that will not fail is Jesus Christ. He should be the One that is above all else. He is never too busy for an appointment. Are you in need of counsel? Choose wisely.


[1] One should also note that the negative action and its result are shown prior to the positive.
[2]TWOT Hebrew Wordbook entry.
09 · 16

Reflection on the Presentation of the Sanctuary Message and its Impact on Believers

Media_httppossessthev_hvlab
Ellen G. White, in page 221-222 of the book Evangelism writes, “the subject of the sanctuary and the investigative judgment should be clearly understood by the people of God. All need a knowledge for themselves of the position and work of their great High Priest.” It is being quoted from page 488 of The Great Controversy where she is speaking of the importance of personal study of the Sanctuary and the Investigative Judgment (and the truth in general).

When this is presented to members of the church who have not spent time studying these particular subjects, there is an excitement that arises among some. I do not say this in a negative sense. Some begin to feel, rightly, that they must study. For some reason others go further—the excitement tends to build up into a desire to want to know everything at once. Then this desire is acted upon by the rapid overloading of the mind with information. This is dangerous. Why? Because when speed is used in the acquirement of any knowledge, the simple foundations are not laid out with care. Simply put, the foundation counts (Matt. 7:24-27. I’m using the principle found in this context concerning what type of foundation one builds upon—rock or sand).

Sometimes, those that present messages on the sanctuary do so without knowing whether the listeners already know what the sanctuary is. This is not necessarily their fault because they came, or were invited, to present a subject in the confinement of a specific time and they will never get to the point that they need to make if they have to explain every single detail. However, this results in the listeners saying, for example, “Jesus is the shewbread (or showbread)!!” Without knowing: what is the shewbread, How was it used, and how do we know it represents Christ?

The knowledge of the presenter is so impressive that many seek to attain the same heights almost overnight. This, as they soon find out, is impossible. They learn the what without the how, the conclusion without the beginning, the symbolism without the sanctuary. They can’t seem to fight the feeling that if they don’t know every single thing quickly then they are somehow unfit to be followers of Christ. Knowledge can easily become the means of salvation for them without their notice. Biblical knowledge can easily become an idol by which one is made proud.

They learn subconsciously to be disciples of individuals instead of disciples of Christ to whom all of these individuals belong. How does this happen? They didn’t learn everything and therefore they always have to go back to the source—the person, book, or video that they learned it from—in order to explain to others what they are saying. So the person, book, or video becomes the authority for them. A college class test, unless it is an open-book test, is to check your knowledge on materials that you were supposed to have stored in your mind. If you have to go back to the textbook in order to get the answer, then you probably haven’t learned it yet.

If you want to learn about the sanctuary, start where it begins—the Bible. Work your way through learning all the details about the building, the services, etc. After you have built upon this foundation, then look for where these things are mentioned in the other parts of the Bible. Flee the desire to spend more time reading books (listening to sermons or watching videos) about the Bible then the Bible. I’m not saying don’t use those other things at all, but that they shouldn’t be what is used primarily.

As a 29 year old member of the Adventist church, I’ve had my experiences with trying to understand everything rapidly. I’ve learned, by the grace of God, how to put the lessons of my experiences into practice. Therefore, I choose not to do studies without concise explanations of how I arrive at certain conclusions. This way, anyone can trace my reasoning with the Biblical text in hand and see whether it makes sense or not.

We will hear many preachers/teachers say amazing and extraordinary things, and they should because the Bible is deep and the Spirit of God knows how to drop knowledge. The only way you will know whether these things are true or not, if you don’t know already, is by starting your own Bible study (with the Holy Spirit) on the subject. Take your time, don’t rush.

09 · 11

Keep Thy Heart—Proverbs 4:23

Media_httpwwwnuclearm_semfb
Evaluating what is put in the mouth is a practice that is done by many. No one—I hope—goes to a restaurant and tells the waiter “I’ll have whatever you have.” Instead, we sit and analyze the menu in search of something that is familiar to us. At other times we choose based on our ability to identify a meal by the wording on the menu. We are careful with our taste buds and our tummies, but what about our hearts?

The book of proverbs is full of practical wisdom concerning this issue; one verse will do. The KJV rendering of Prov. 4:23 says “Keep thy heart with all diligence; for out of it are the issues of life.” God placed this verse in the scriptures, therefore we would do well if we heed the counsel.

The focus is on the heart, how we should be concerning it, and why. The heart that is spoken of here is not the blood pumping muscle in the human body. It is leb לִבֶּ  meaning “inner man, mind, will, heart, understanding.” Thus, the meaning and the context provide ample evidence showing why the word can’t be understood as referring to the physical heart.

However, the metaphoric value is retain in the reason—“for out of it are the issues of life.” The NASB captures the feel when it says “For from it flow the springs of life.” Just like the heart pumps out life giving blood to the body (cf. Lev. 17:11, 14), the mind pumps out what is within it. What is coming out of you?

Since this is the case, one needs to be careful about what influences and what goes in the mind. We are told to “keep” it—the mind—“with all diligence.” This is a command that places the owner of the mind in the position of the doer of the action. The command is stating that preventive measures need to be taken.

The Hebrew words natsar נְצֹר (meaning “to watch, guard, keep”) and mishmar מִשְׁמָר  (translated “diligence” in the KJV, means “place of confinement, jail, prison, guard, watch, observance”) gives the preventive measures. The mind needs to be guarded as if it is the most important possession you own.

Think about it. What are some of the things that we should be concerned about? Maybe it is the books that we read, or the movies and T.V. shows that we watch, the music we listen to, or the type of conversations we get into. It is better to be safe than sorry, so “keep thy heart.”

09 · 08

Paul the Bond-Servant in Romans 1:1

Media_httpwwwrchurchn_gjrrb
Paul’s letter to the Romans is one of the epistles of the Bible that is not read often. Most laymen are scared of it and most preachers refuse to preach from it. Some consider the book too difficult to understand. However, they have forgotten that there is a “Spirit of Truth” which guides “into all truth” (John 16:13 KJV). The Holy Spirit is willing to guide us as we wrestle with trying to understand scripture. I pray that you welcome Him in your study hour.

It is suggested that Paul wrote the epistle to the Romans around A.D. 57-58 when he was in Corinth (Brown, 560). There are two major clues in Romans that support this position. Paul names two people who are from the Corinth area in the last chapter.

The first is found in Rom. 16:1 where Paul “commends,” to the Roman church, a lady name “Pheobe, who is a servant of the Church which is at Cenchrea.” Cenchrea was a seaport that was located about 6 or 7 miles east of Corinth on the Saronic Gulf (Nichols). Paul’s depiction of her in verse 2 have led some scholars to believe that she was the one that delivered the epistle to the recipients (Brown, 574).

The Second is a man named Gaius (16:23), who is described as providing a meeting place for the Christian community where Paul is writing from. The verse also suggests that Paul is staying in his house. The Gaius mention here may be the same one “whom Paul baptized in Corinth” according to 1 Cor. 1:14 (Carson and Moo, 394).

In the beginning of the Epistle, Paul writes that he is “a bond-servant of Christ Jesus.” Upon seeing that word, the first thought that comes to the mind of the modern reader is that Paul sees himself as one who is in the employment of another. However, the word that is often translated as “Servant” or “Bond-servant” in the English Bibles, can be best translated as “Slave” [gr. doulos δου̂λος]. A slave is “one who serves in obedience to another’s will” (Friberg Lexicon).

After Paul’s name, the first thing that the Romans read about him was that he was a slave. He was a person who was devoted to the will of another. He did not hide it; he declared it unapologetically. It shows that to Paul, Christ was worthy enough to dominate over all aspects of his being. His view of Christ was so high that he found the lowest position in society as fitting for him to identify with.

Would you take that title, slave of Jesus Christ, upon yourself? Many would rush to say yes, but give it some thought. Putting Jesus’ will above yours is not easy. However, it is absolutely necessary. It is the best decision we can make, and He is waiting for me and you today.

Works Cited

Brown, Raymond E. An Introduction to the New Testament. New York: Doubleday, 1997.

Carson, D. A. and Douglas J. Moo. An Introduction to the New Testament. 2nd Edition. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005.

Nichols, Francis D. The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary: The Holy Bible with Exegetical and Expository Comment. Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1978.

jerryjacques

I love to write.

About