Considering the Bible

Category: Church Authority

Traditions – 7

2022-08-28
Let’s get to work and jump into this verse immediately. I am looking forward to a mental exercise, a good work out, trying to understand Paul’s command to the believers in Thessalonian 2,000 years ago and to us today.

Let’s hope we can provide something of benefit to those dear readers who spend a few moments with me.

So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter. – 2 Thessalonians 2:15

Traditions, we learn from this short passage are taught. Taught by communication, that is through talking or reading/writing. Traditions are not instinctual, or merely a result of some internal thought process. Traditions are handed down, and this is actually one of the defining actions that produces a tradition.

Paul doesn’t directly speak of specific traditions he had handed down to this church in this passage. He does bring up the topic in 3:6. A definite link with 2:5! Ok Paul, thanks for the clarification, but this creates a bit of a confusion. When was the last time you thought of a tradition within the Christian church as a “willingness to work”.

Now we command you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you keep away from any brother who is walking in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us.

Idleness is against the tradition Paul provided to this church, and a good work ethic, if I am reading this passage correctly, is a Christian tradition/practice. This tradition is seemingly so sensitive to wrong influence, that Paul commands those with a work ethic to keep away from idle brothers. This is truly shocking to my mind, since I don’t usually consider idleness as a reason to avoid a brother.

But let us think on this for a moment. Does not the Word teach us to “not covet”? Idleness produces a spirit of covetousness, for an idle man is usually in need. Now I need to be careful to note that the command does not refer to those who cannot work, but to those who will not work. To those who are incapacitated, truly without the ability to perform some type of task to add to the community, the believer is to come along side and provide encouragement, financial assistance and support. To the one who refuses to work though able, Paul commands – STAY AWAY!

This is not, for the believer, a requirement to determine another persons motivations, intentions or desires, but his or her abilities. A man or woman who wants to produce, though incapacitated in some form, may find many hurdles to be productive, but may produce and find purpose. A man or woman who is able and makes excuses – Paul commands – STAY AWAY.

For even when we were with you, we would give you this command: If anyone is not willing to work, let him not eat.
2 Thessalonians 3:6, 10

But Paul – that is so unloving, so uncompassionate, that is, to let a brother or sister to go hungry. How heartless! Are you actually commanding believers to allow others to go hungry? Are believers to refuse to feed an idle brother?

In my opinion (careful dear reader – this is opinion!) to provide funds or gifts for those who will not work is foolish, since the limited funds we have in order to help truly needful souls is being misdirected. The idle able person receiving the funds could be a positive influence in the community, but is allowed to remain useless. No one wants to be useless, unless they are content with simply being a leach.

My wife and I speak of this compassion as “enabling” a sinful life. We have become somewhat “heartless”, in some peoples thinking, but have found folks that were idle (relatively) to become solid workers, building a work ethic that is positive financially, emotionally and physically.

What brings a person to a level of idleness? For the Thessalonians, it was a misunderstanding of the coming of the Lord. Some thought that since He may appear in a few weeks or months, working at a “9 to 5” was foolish. Why work when you can literally just wait? Bad theology creates wrong living!

What can bring a person out of this condition? Man shall not live by bread alone, but dag nab it, he certainly needs bread to live! Without bread, the motivation to work overcomes the desire to be idle, and the brother may become a positive influence for the community.

My friends, if you see a brother being idle, consider Paul’s command. Others may provide for the idle man or woman, enabling their life of ease and causing unnecessary suffering for those who truly have a need. To the extent you have in exercising your decisions, do not encourage a life of idleness.

It is not traditional!

Thanks for joining me in this short series on traditions. Much more may be spoken of on this topic but hopefully the few thoughts shared have produced some trigger to further read the Word and figger it out. A little work in the word would not cause any complaint from the Father, for He loves one who digs and seeks the truth. But it will require some work, and we know now that work is NOT a dirty word when it comes to the will of God!

Thanks again for coming to visit. I hope you found something of interest in this post and would appreciate a comment, to begin a discussion. If you would like to receive daily posts from Considering the Bible, click on the “Follow” link below
Go back
Your message has been sent
Name
Warning

Email
Warning

Website
Warning

Comment
Warning

Warning.

Δ
Follow Considering the Bible on WordPress.com
Share this:
Email
Print
Telegram
Like Loading…
Traditions – 6

2022-08-21
Earlier on in my blogging efforts, I posted a short note on the following verse, and linked an essay I found that challenged me on the meaning of “elemental”.

If interested, see Elements – Stoicheia. For this post, we will address the topic of human tradition.

Let’s read the passage and consider.

See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.
Colossians 2:8

Paul is giving a command (See to it…) in this verse, that a believer is to not be taken captive. This is a warning to believers that we have the capacity to fall victim to falsehoods and lies. He is providing the method of captivity, when He speaks of “according to human tradition”. This captivity Paul refers to depends on human tradition, is in conformity with human tradition.

So, what might we glean from this framing of a real danger Paul is warning us of? Is there a certain method or process that human tradition provides that will give us ample warning that we are slipping into dangerous territory? Maybe.

First off, let’s consider how traditions are handed down? This is the second aspect discussed in our opening post on this topic, that is, the faithfulness of the followers in continuing a tradition. Our first aspect was, as you may remember, the authority establishing the tradition, and of course, when Paul speaks of human traditions, he may be hinting at the source of authority of the tradition as being human. This definitely may be his intent, and is to be considered.

But my take on this verse is considering the method used when these practices are handed down. When Paul brings in the terms philosophy and deceit, I again lean to the opinion that this is describing a method of handing down a practice or tradition to the next generation. This method of handing down a practice to the next generation may include twisting of the tradition that was originally of the Lord, until it slowly becomes a tradition rooted in human authority.

But I digress again. The method, I suppose is my concern in this verse. The method! According to human tradition. Two items for you to consider, and remember my friend, as I sometimes suggest in this blog, we are dealing with my thoughts and extra-biblical research and not necessarily anything directly from the Scripture, so beware!

Slight Revisions to the Original Tradition/Practice

These slight revisions are often a result of using a thesis/antithesis argument, which inevitably produces a result, called the synthesis, which holds strictly to neither position, but finds a middle ground. This is an acceptable, convenient, and logic based way to move from the original intent, to a watered down message. Without a commitment to the authority of the Scripture, human logic allows for this movement, and therefore a sliding away from the original intent of the command. As the tradition veers from the original intent, there is no way to return to the original command using this philosophy. There always has to be a consideration of the opposing view, which humanly speaking is opposing to the Scripture.

A formal logic of this philosophy follows
- A thesis is a proposition
  - In this case, the original intent of the tradition/practice given by God. Let’s remember Exodus 20 where the original intent is to honor your parents.
- The antithesis is simply the negation of the thesis, a reaction to the proposition
  - Let’s consider Matthew 15, where the giving of money to God through the temple is a tradition negating the command to honor a father or mother.
- The synthesis solves the conflict between the thesis and antithesis by reconciling their common truths, and forming a new proposition – a new basis for the tradition.
  - The synthesis might be an allowance of both, giving a nod to the original intent of the Word, but not condemning the alternative option. It seems Jesus did not accept this as an alternative option.
A Dependence on Historical Precedent

Once this drift from the truth occurs, human tradition uses the historical precedent of this practice to support the practice. How often have you heard the saying – But we have always done it this way, to justify a certain action or practice. When you think of it, this argument completely ignores the importance of the original authority the practice is hopefully based on.

This post highlights, hopefully our dire need to always go back to the original commands from the Giver of truth. Logic and time may not provide us a basis upon which to depend on for traditions we exercise in our lives.

Let me finish this wordy post with a challenging passage from the Word.

For God alone, O my soul, wait in silence, for my hope is from him. He only is my rock and my salvation, my fortress; I shall not be shaken. On God rests my salvation and my glory; my mighty rock, my refuge is God. – Psalm 62:5-7

God alone is our source authority, He is our rock, our salvation, our fortress, our glory and refuge. He is the only One we can truly trust. Don’t argue against His word, trying to justify an alternate thinking. Be quiet and wait for Him.

Thanks again for coming to visit. I hope you found something of interest in this post and would appreciate a comment, to begin a discussion. If you would like to receive daily posts from Considering the Bible, click on the “Follow” link below
Go back
Your message has been sent
Name
Warning

Email
Warning

Website
Warning

Comment
Warning

Warning.

Δ
Follow Considering the Bible on WordPress.com
Share this:
Email
Print
Telegram
Like Loading…
Traditions – 5

2022-08-14
For you have heard of my former life in Judaism, how I persecuted the church of God violently and tried to destroy it. And I was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my own age among my people, so extremely zealous was I for the traditions of my fathers. – Gal 1:13-14

Paul speaks of his history, of his past desire to practice the traditions of the religion of Judaism. Of the persecution of the church of God as a result of his former life in Judaism. He was zealous. He was advancing in the traditions, seemingly due to his persecuting the church of God, trying to destroy it.

Two issues erupt in my thinking with this passage, in relation to traditions.

First, the traditions were bad! Very bad! The fruit of these traditions produced a murderous man, intent on destroying the work of God. This is an additional text in the New Testament that speaks to the negativity of traditions, religious traditions that were running amok.

In the New Testament, Jesus speaks of “wisdom being justified by all her children”. No matter the appearance or method of the delivering agent (whether it be by Moses, Jesus or John the Baptist), the fruit of a teaching is how it is worked out in those who hear it, the children of the wisdom. The appearance can be ridiculed, mocked and condemned. The children of the wisdom will justify the wisdom being taught and received.

For John the Baptist has come eating no bread and drinking no wine, and you say, ‘He has a demon.’ The Son of Man has come eating and drinking, and you say, ‘Look at him! A glutton and a drunkard, a friend of tax collectors and sinners!’ Yet wisdom is justified by all her children.” – Luke 7:33-35

In this regard, Paul’s desire to kill others is the fruit of a tradition that completely removed the intent of the commandments. For you see, the original intent of the Word of God was to save lives not kill. How can a man honor God by dishonoring his command not to kill?

God want’s us to honor our parents. How can I honor my parents if I become a murderous man?

God wants us to not covet. How can I love God if my motivation is to kill in order to maintain my own religion, covet my own faith?

No my friends, this tradition produced a fruit that was poisonous. Let us consider the wisdom we are consuming, in order to reflect our lives as being of the Lord, and not of some tradition that is of another intent!

Secondly, these traditions, many many moons back, were based on the Word of God. Now the iterations to take the holy commandments of God and to turn them into a belief that encourages persecution of the very followers of God, is an exercise in manipulation far beyond my understanding.

It took centuries to slip into a tradition that became a prevailing faith, and we have certainly experienced centuries of tradition within the life of the church. Over 2,000 years of manipulation by teachers and enemies within the church. This is the reason we need to refer to the Word and not depend on what a man says, even a well intentioned and or highly trained man may teach. Will we always be right if we turn to the Scriptures as our primary source. Absolutely not, for we are a weak, biased and selfish people, but we may find we are approaching a closer walk with the Master, a closer understanding of the intent of God in providing traditions for our lives.

Suffice it to say, let us depart from the “traditions of our fathers” and seek to follow the One who is worthy, who provided instruction in His Word. As Paul states just a verse later, God was pleased to reveal His Son in him. Traditions needed to be set aside in this revealing, traditions that were against God’s word and will.

Can you think of any traditions that may be causing you to loose out on God’s will?

Thanks again for coming to visit. I hope you found something of interest in this post and would appreciate a comment, to begin a discussion. If you would like to receive daily posts from Considering the Bible, click on the “Follow” link below
Go back
Your message has been sent
Name
Warning

Email
Warning

Website
Warning

Comment
Warning

Warning.

Δ
Follow Considering the Bible on WordPress.com
Share this:
Email
Print
Telegram
Like Loading…
Traditions – 4

2022-08-07
In our last post on Traditions, we suggested that the apostle Paul referred to “traditions” in the beginning of the 11th chapter of 1 Corinthians, and to the

Now I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I delivered them to you. – 1 Corinthians 11:2

Fifteen verses later, the apostle writes

But in the following instructions I do not commend you, because when you come together it is not for the better but for the worse. – 1Co 11:17 ESV

Paul commended the church for “maintaining the traditions”, yet needed to correct the Corinthians in the understanding of the head covering practice (tradition), and with regards to the Lord’s supper, he does not commend them (I do not commend you).

So Paul, when you say the church is maintaining the traditions in verse 2, I am beginning to wonder if you are referring to other traditions beyond the two you speak of in this chapter. Both the head coverings and the Lord Supper is requiring correction.

Is “to maintain” a polite way of saying the Christian church is keeping all the traditions alive with some correction needed in two of them? Is Paul speaking with grace towards this church, seeking to find something good to speak of prior to correcting them?

Nevertheless, we enter into the second tradition that many churches classify as an ordinance. The Lord’s Supper will be the subject of this post.

But in the following instructions I do not commend you, because when you come together it is not for the better but for the worse. For, in the first place, when you come together as a church, I hear that there are divisions among you. And I believe it in part, for there must be factions among you in order that those who are genuine among you may be recognized. When you come together, it is not the Lord’s supper that you eat. For in eating, each one goes ahead with his own meal. One goes hungry, another gets drunk. What! Do you not have houses to eat and drink in? Or do you despise the church of God and humiliate those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I commend you in this? No, I will not. – 1 Corinthians 11:17-22 ESV

Divisions in the church. Paul’s first concerns in dealing with the Lord’s Supper is unity in the Body. Paul does not address what may be a fevered discussion in you church, whether you have wine of grape juice, leavened or unleavened bread, one cup or many cups, once a week or quarterly, beginning of the service or end of the service. The arguments go on ad nauseum, and prove the very point of the apostle. He called this church immature, and detailed numerous problems throughout this letter, exposing their childishness.

Of course this immaturity is what causes divisions, and Paul understands this better than most, but again, he is looking for something amongst the mess to speak well of. Check out verse 19, where the factions in the church actually expose the mature members, the genuine followers.

there must be factions among you in order that those who are genuine among you may be recognized

He finds some glimmer of reality in this debauched church, but immediately corrects the body, staing the divisions they live in expose the churches intentions, for in their actions they expose what they want, what they are looking to enjoy during the Lord’s Supper. Satisfying their gluttony. Serving their self. I have wondered in the past that the ones who are genuine, who are recognized, are the same group who Paul later on speaks of going hungry, and are humiliated during the Lord’s supper in having nothing.

Might this teaching of division have more to do with class structure as opposed to a doctrinal difference?

But in the following instructions I do not commend you, because when you come together it is not for the better but for the worse. For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, “This is my body, which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” In the same way also he took the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.” For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes. – 1 Corinthians 11:23-26 ESV

Paul gives a history lesson, providing what the apostles must have supplied him, as the Lord established this tradition amongst His followers. So many things to consider in this passage, but I need to focus on the tradition topic within the church for this blog. Notice this practice/tradition/ordinance is to be practiced until He comes. No mention of scheduled rules or cycles to practice this tradition. This eating and drinking had a purpose, that is to proclaim the Lord’s death. The eating and drinking was not to provide an opportunity to gorge my appetite.

In every church I have ever attended, the opportunity to gorge my appetite has been completely removed. Usually a portion of a cracker and a few drops of grape juice are provided in a structured environment, controlled by sober men with deliberate actions in front of the group. This is not what I seem to read in this passage. It seems the Corinthians, in exercising this tradition, were coming together for what appears to be more like a pot luck with the body, as opposed to a structured ceremony.

Could this tradition be more about sharing of our goods, of providing a meal, of breaking bread with those we have fellowship with and recognizing the Lord’s death as opposed to a ceremony?

But in the following instructions I do not commend you, because when you come together it is not for the better but for the worse. Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty concerning the body and blood of the Lord. Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment on himself. That is why many of you are weak and ill, and some have died. But if we judged ourselves truly, we would not be judged. But when we are judged by the Lord, we are disciplined so that we may not be condemned along with the world. So then, my brothers, when you come together to eat, wait for one another– if anyone is hungry, let him eat at home–so that when you come together it will not be for judgment. About the other things I will give directions when I come. – 1 Corinthians 11:27-34

When the Corinthians came together to remember the Lord’s death, was it with an attitude of self serving gluttony, or with a proper reflection of the self giving sacrifice of the Lord in His death?

Jesus gave. We consume.

When Paul speaks verse 29, I am torn as to whether he speaks of the Lord’s body (Jesus physical body in the heavens) or the Lord’s body (Jesus mystical body, the church)

For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment on himself.

But Carl – read the passage. Paul speaks of “the body”. Not necessarily the Lord’s body, i.e. as some may have thought of earlier, thinking Paul is speaking of the Lord’s physical body in the heavens, the body that was broken and torn for our salvation.

I sense that Paul’s primary concern in this tradition is the unity of the group, unity of the body of believers. The body he speaks of is the church itself.

Love the body, in practical ways. Be harsh on yourself in your self judgement, and gracious to those who also trust in the living God. Wait for your brother. Satisfy your cravings in private in order to serve your brother in public. Don’t bring judgement to the church.

Give – don’t consume.

Thanks again for coming to visit. I hope you found something of interest in this post and would appreciate a comment, to begin a discussion. If you would like to receive daily posts from Considering the Bible, click on the “Follow” link below
Go back
Your message has been sent
Name
Warning

Email
Warning

Website
Warning

Comment
Warning

Warning.

Δ
Follow Considering the Bible on WordPress.com
Share this:
Email
Print
Telegram
Like Loading…
Traditions – 3

2022-07-31
In our last two passages in Matthew and Mark, we looked at the corruption of a tradition by the elders. A tradition based on the fifth commandment, relating to honoring your parents. Jesus brought us back to the original authority, and put the religious leaders in their place.

Prior to Jesus rebuke, many may have considered the ongoing tradition of the elders as being an acceptable method of worshipping God. Jesus laid that idea to rest. This leads my suspicious mind to consider whether some of our current practices are actually creating traditions that may be avoiding teaching of the Apostles for the church.

Hopefully we will gain some understanding from the remaining passages that speak of traditions provided to the church.

Now I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions even as I delivered them to you. – 1 Corinthians 11:2

Ok, so this passage from Paul, the apostle to the Gentiles, is commending the Corinthian church that they are maintaining the traditions he had delivered unto the church. A promising start in this study. Interesting that Paul provided a tradition (or multiple traditions) that he expected them to follow. But our question has to be – What were these traditions?

Immediately after this verse, Paul delves into the controversial head covering teaching, which speaks of authority, headship and honor. Fifteen verses later, he speaks of instructions (traditions?) that he does not commend the church for, that is, in their keeping of the Lord’s Supper. At the turn of the page, in the beginning of the next chapter, Paul makes a topical shift to spiritual gifts. Therefore, I would suggest Paul refers to two traditions in chapter 11.

Head Covering

If you have been following this blog, you may remember a post supplied on May 21st, where I provided a link for some teaching on 1 Corinthians 11:13-15. (See Let Me Tell You a Story – Head Coverings). In that post I spoke of my own struggle with this topic of head covering and found some answers in the link provided. Nevertheless, the intent of this post is to consider the tradition Paul handed down to the Corinthian church, what it was, was it cultural and are we to follow this tradition even today.

After the last two posts, where Jesus corrected the religious teachers and brought them back to the original authority, I am fearful of finding some excuse or reason to avoid this teaching. I suppose my concern is that I don’t quite understand this teaching.

Is it a tradition that emphasizes headship and honor, using a culturally accepted practice (long hair on a woman) to indicate submission and honor to her head? Or is it a tradition that is non-cultural, that is every lady in all of the churches worldwide, needs to have a covering in order to honor her head, her husband.

In two verses prior to 1 Corinthians 11:5, where a covering of the wife’s head is referred to, note that the submission of Christ to God is not described “visually”, i.e. with or without a covering on His head.

But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God. – 1 Corinthians 11:3

but every wife who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, since it is the same as if her head were shaven. – 1 Corinthians 11:5

As I mentioned in the linked post above, my family and I attended a brethren chapel for years where this passage was referred to in order to justify coverings on ladies heads while in worship. As a baptist entering into this environment, I had many questions, and struggled with it for quite a while. One fine believer told me that the entire passage made sense when he read the last phrase in the tenth verse.

That is why a wife ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels. – 1 Corinthians 11:10

His logic seemed irrefutable. The angels would have no concern for cultural practices, so this practice, that of covering a wife’s head in honor of her husband must be universal and not simply cultural.

This argument was convincing and nearly tipped me into accepting this as God’s intent, until I did a bit of digging and found that “angels” could be translated as messengers and may be simply referring to a company of men attending the church service.

In this passage, headship and authority is the principal theme, and my understanding is that the covering/veil used by the Corinthians was their culturally acceptable manner of displaying who was head and who wasn’t head. A definite order of responsibility (not of worth) is addressed in this passage.

This tradition, of headship, and of displaying the headship within the church has become derelict with our modern Christian lives. The modern church rebels against any hint of a man being the head, and of the woman honoring the husband. A full front attack on manhood has been active for decades, and the church, except for a small minority, has faithfully followed this tempting teaching.

It is a rare family that exercises this tradition, and that has a family order of a male head, with a submissive wife and obedient children. This, I believe is the intent of this tradition Paul speaks of within the church, and it’s natural outflow into all of the believers life.

Now before you claim I am some misogynistic woman hater, please slow down. I love women. I personally have hung out with a lovely person who is a woman for over forty years. She is truly my help meet and my best friend. I would be lost without her. Beyond my biased feelings toward this lady I know, I have also found that that some of the most spiritual people I have met happen to be women.

You see, sometimes folk get confused when dealing with this topic. They think the spirituality of a person is dependent on outward position or visibility. But this is not so! A quiet woman may have more influence with God than some flamboyant “in your face” preacher. Remember we are dealing with the Kingdom of God, a Kingdom that, in the world’s eyes, is completely upside down.

I seem to remember a passage in the word which speaks of the beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit.

but let your adorning be the hidden person of the heart with the imperishable beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which in God’s sight is very precious. – 1 Peter 3:4

Consider your family order. If you are a man in the family, love your wife, cherish her, team with her, talk with her (not at her!) and give yourself for her. Lead her into godly decisions and encourage her.

If you are a lady who seeks to honor God, honor your husband. Give him the freedom to make mistakes, support him when you “know” he is wrong. Discuss the issues with him, and trust God in your husbands discussions. (Yelling “I told you so” is not a godly action!) Don’t emasculate him! He desperately needs your support! And, by the way, the Lord is looking for a gentle and quiet (not a forceful and argumentative) spirit in supporting your mate.

As an aside, and for your reference, I am supplying a few verses of Paul’s teaching regarding headship. It may be of some use in helping you understand the apostles teaching, and in defending the order of headship (authority and accountability) within a church, and a family.

Head of every woman is man

But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God. – 1 Corinthians 11:3

Woman is the glory of man

For a man ought not to cover his head, since he is the image and glory of God, but woman is the glory of man. – 1 Corinthians 11:7

Woman was created from the man

For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. – 1 Corinthians 11:8

Woman was created for the man

Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. – 1 Corinthians 11:9

As mentioned in the beginning of this post, I believe the apostle addresses two traditions for the church in this chapter, and since I am a bit long in the tooth with this post, will defer to the next one to discuss the Lord’s Supper as a tradition

Thanks again for coming to visit. I hope you found something of interest in this post and would appreciate a comment, to begin a discussion. If you would like to receive daily posts from Considering the Bible, click on the “Follow” link below
Go back
Your message has been sent
Name
Warning

Email
Warning

Website
Warning

Comment
Warning

Warning.

Δ
Follow Considering the Bible on WordPress.com
Share this:
Email
Print
Telegram
Like Loading…
Traditions – 2

2022-07-24
In our last post we looked at Matthew 15:1-9 and shared a personal story that brought the concept of conflicting authority to the fore front. As we mentioned, traditions have two core components, that of an authority establishing the practice, and followers faithfully following the practice, of handing the practice down to the next generation.

Now when the Pharisees gathered to him, with some of the scribes who had come from Jerusalem, they saw that some of his disciples ate with hands that were defiled, that is, unwashed. (For the Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they wash their hands properly, holding to the tradition of the elders, and when they come from the marketplace, they do not eat unless they wash. And there are many other traditions that they observe, such as the washing of cups and pots and copper vessels and dining couches.) And the Pharisees and the scribes asked him, “Why do your disciples not walk according to the tradition of the elders, but eat with defiled hands?”
And he said to them, “Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written, “‘This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’ You leave the commandment of God and hold to the tradition of men.” And he said to them, “You have a fine way of rejecting the commandment of God in order to establish your tradition! For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘Whoever reviles father or mother must surely die.’ 11 But you say, ‘If a man tells his father or his mother, “Whatever you would have gained from me is Corban”’ (that is, given to God) — 12 then you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or mother, 13 thus making void the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And many such things you do.”- Mark 7:1-13 ESV

Mark spends a bit of time explaining the traditions of the elders, since his audience is Greek, and not Jewish as Matthew’s. The two quotes of Exodus Jesus uses are identical, and Mark also directs our attention to Jesus recitation of Isaiah 29:13

And the Lord said: “Because this people draw near with their mouth and honor me with their lips, while their hearts are far from me, and their fear of me is a commandment taught by men, – Isaiah 29:13 ESV

Traditions are based on two foundations, that of an authority and of consistency. Authority was addressed under Matthew 15, where as this passage, this passage actually speaks of both, especially the last phrase.

Their fear of me is a commandment taught by men

Whatever fear the masses had of God was based on the elders teaching, of the elders slight twist on the command, that muddied the water and nullified God’s intent. The elders claimed the authority, rejecting the command of God, and the tradition was replaced with vain worship. Empty worship. No one was practicing the original tradition, and it had effectively been replaced by the error of well-meaning(?) elders.

The last phrase of this passage has intrigued me, not necessarily as a summary statement, but that I hear a bit of sarcasm in Jesus voice.

You have a fine way….

Is Jesus speaking with a bit of sarcasm in His voice? He is the Master Teacher, and effectively uses multiple manners of teaching. Is He commending them in their sin? As if saying … You have expertly performed the duties of nullifying the commandment of God in order to gain for yourselves. You are practiced and skilled teachers, you are very good at rejecting the commandment of God!

Can you imagine an itinerant preacher silencing the religious professionals in such a way? He is so awesome.

Mark continues with his recitation of the discourse and it seems to be harsher, as if he is not pulling any punches. Notice that while Matthew speaks of “not needing to honor his father”, Mark has it as “you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or mother”

Both Matthew and Mark give us Jesus teaching on traditions, at least a teaching on the corruption of a tradition that was established by God, but had been hi-jacked by others.

It is instructive that this passage, along the the Matthew recounting, speaks of the dangers of simply following religious traditions without going to the foundation, the original authority and intent of that authority. Religious professionals provide revisions and refinements to the original command in order to assist us, and in turn, actually assist us in turning away from God. (As if we need any help in turning away!)

Take some time during your busy day today, to ask the Lord to expose an area of your religious life, just one area or teaching that may be distracting you from following God’s commands. As mentioned in the previous post, one area of authority conflict opened my eyes to many other areas, and has revolutionized my understanding of faith, love and walking properly before God.

Please join me in our next post where we begin to look at traditions that have been established for the church. I am looking forward to learning with you.

May God bless you and keep you in the love of Jesus and the fellowship of His Spirit.

Thanks again for coming to visit. I hope you found something of interest in this post and would appreciate a comment, to begin a discussion. If you would like to receive daily posts from Considering the Bible, click on the “Follow” link below
Go back
Your message has been sent
Name
Warning

Email
Warning

Website
Warning

Comment
Warning

Warning.

Δ
Follow Considering the Bible on WordPress.com
Share this:
Email
Print
Telegram
Like Loading…
Traditions – 1

2022-07-17
In our introductory post, we spoke of our families traditional Christmas celebrations in order to establish an understanding of what a tradition is, and to offer my understanding of a traditions flexibility. Some of my readers may have read of our historical changes during the traditional gift giving in our home as an unwillingness to maintain a tradition, to create a tradition that would be longstanding and annually honored. This may be true.

But we all must agree that traditions start at a point in time, and are handed down to the next generation, and so on until they become “traditional”. Think of the many nations in this world and each nation having distinct traditions. Every tradition is started by an authority, possibly based on a historical happening.

For some practice to become a tradition, it must originate from an authority, who establishes the practice as worthy of repeating, and by a group of followers who consistently exercise that practice through a period of time. Within the Bible, the authority usually is God of course (there are exceptions), and the repeating of the practice is dependent on the faithful.

Traditions, based on the instruction of an authority and if practiced accurately, are worthy of maintaining. Traditions based on the instruction of an authority but not practiced accurately, are worthy or rejecting, and to return to practicing per the original intent of the instruction. Unless of course the authority repeals the practice.

Given this basis of understanding a “tradition”, lets consider Matthew 15:1-9, where Jesus is questioned by the Pharisees and scribes concerning His disciples breaking of a tradition.

Then Pharisees and scribes came to Jesus from Jerusalem and said, “Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat.” He answered them, “And why do you break the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition? For God commanded, ‘Honor your father and your mother,’ and, ‘Whoever reviles father or mother must surely die.’ But you say, ‘If anyone tells his father or his mother, “What you would have gained from me is given to God,” he need not honor his father.’ So for the sake of your tradition you have made void the word of God. You hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy of you, when he said: “‘This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’” – Mat 15:1-9 ESV

First off, let’s establish the authority of the tradition. In this passage, the Pharisees tell us the authority over this tradition of washing hands is that of the elders. The religious leaders readily admit the source of authority is mankind and not God.

Jesus cuts to the heart of the matter by returning to the ultimate authority, and also informs us of the conflict that human authority creates when introduced to assist in obeying the commandments of the true Authority. Jesus asks one tough question, centered on the authority giving the command.

Why do you break the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition?

The Pharisees are whining about clean hands. Jesus goes for the jugular, and focuses on the fifth commandment of God, (without the resultant blessing if obeyed.)

Exodus 20:12 “Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long in the land that the LORD your God is giving you.

No blessing is included in the passage Jesus quotes, yet Exodus provides the promise of long days in the land. No promise, but He does include Exodus 21:17, defining the judgement if the commandment is broken.

Exodus 21:17 Whoever reviles father or mother must surely die.

Jesus then describes the elders efforts to “clarify the commandment” for the masses, but masterfully brings to the Pharisees (and any who may listen) the effect of modifying Gods commandments with a human tradition.

If the believer sought to honor their parents with a gift, the elders allowed that believer an exception, in order to receive the funds themselves. I am of the opinion that Jesus is actually quoting the elders instructions in the 6th verse, where the allowance to disobey is clearly offered.

he need not honor his father.’ So for the sake of your tradition you have made void the word of God. – Mat 15:6 ESV

Are clean hands an issue in your life? Is outward appearance a priority for you? Do you watch for insignificant rule breaking of others? In your rule keeping, do you dishonor God?

A quick story that brought this passage to life for my wife and I.

We were attending a church years ago, when a close friend and his family were seeking to enter into missionary work. I informed the leadership of our desire to divert our giving’s to this family. This was acceptable to the leadership, although they did ask for a period of time to be defined, so that the funds would begin returning to their coffers. This I gladly provided and we rejoiced in giving to this family on their way to Indonesia with the gospel.

Not long after this, my father-in-law passed away, leaving my mother-in-law a widow. Things became desperate for this sweet woman and we needed/wanted to help. This did not go over well with the church leadership, with their counsel being that we should give above and beyond the tithe to the church in order to help mom. But the tithe was to take a priority.

Eventually, after prayer one morning I landed on the passage above, and it became crystal clear as to what we were to do. Honor our parent.

Eventually this decision became a point of tension with the religious leadership. This authority conflict between the Word and the religious leaders counsel led me to study the teaching of tithing in the church, and a believers responsibility in giving. Eventually, the religious leadership asked us to leave.

Friends – religious organizations have many ways of twisting a believers obligation that negate a commandment of God. Traditions are one way these obligations are nullified. Though many traditions are established with good intentions, it seems it is inevitable that the tradition is followed without thinking, and sometimes becomes a stumbling stones for the believer.

Traditions of men, or in other words, religious requirements to “please God”, beyond the Word either become a conflict and needs to be rejected, or a repetition of the commandment in a different context.

It is safe to consider the Word only as our final authority, since the One who saved us lived and died under it’s authority and provided the church the full orbed teaching of grace and truth for us to understand.

Our next post will consider the same incident with the Pharisees, but from Mark’s perspective. Hope you can join me.

Thanks again for coming to visit. I hope you found something of interest in this post and would appreciate a comment, to begin a discussion. If you would like to receive daily posts from Considering the Bible, click on the “Follow” link below
Go back
Your message has been sent
Name
Warning

Email
Warning

Website
Warning

Comment
Warning

Warning.

Δ
Follow Considering the Bible on WordPress.com
Share this:
Email
Print
Telegram
Like Loading…
Traditions – Introduction

2022-07-10
What is a tradition?

Do traditions help or hinder us?

Traditions give us a sense of community, of belonging and expectations, a certain rhythm in life.

Consider the tradition of opening gifts on Christmas day. This tradition in our home has went through a number of iterations, which to be honest, argues against the “expectations” concept above. But nevertheless, as our children grew, we introduced different methods of celebrating the Christmas gift opening event.

First it was a conventional delegated gift giver at the base of the tree, picking gifts for each child and waiting as we all watched them receive it and express their gratitude. Soon, the tradition became more of a game, with my wife and I staying up Christmas night and hiding all the gifts, writing out a list of riddles for each gift and which child the gift was meant for. This extended the celebration, and we found that the chillun actually worked together for the hunting. In my opinion, it was a hit with the kids. (Mom and dad were a bit tired, but hey – memories were made!)

Lately, we have considered the materialism of Christmas, and as the children matured into adults, considered the intent of the gifts in the celebration. We tended to pull away from material gifting, and moved over to creating memories for us as a family.

Suffice it to say, traditions such our gift giving at Christmas (fluid as it was), birthday parties, wedding customs and even sports events have been woven into our lives.

This short series on traditions will consider what the Word provides as guidance in the believers life. We will follow the primary Greek word “paradosis” the New Testament writers used that we understand as “tradition”. Below, find the proverbial Vines Expository definition of the term we will be looking into during our time together. Sure hope to see you at our next post as we dive into Matthew 15.

Thanks again for coming to visit. I hope you found something of interest in this post and would appreciate a comment, to begin a discussion. If you would like to receive daily posts from Considering the Bible, click on the “Follow” link below
Go back
Your message has been sent
Name
Warning

Email
Warning

Website
Warning

Comment
Warning

Warning.

Δ
Follow Considering the Bible on WordPress.com
Share this:
Email
Print
Telegram
Like Loading…
Ezekiel 34 – Shepherds as Rulers – 9

2020-08-27
Good Shepherds Rule the Flock?

with force and harshness you have ruled them

Two leadership characteristics define the shepherds that tick off Ezekiel

Ezek 34 :4
The weak you have not strengthened, the sick you have not healed, the injured you have not bound up, the strayed you have not brought back, the lost you have not sought, and with force and harshness you have ruled them.

First off lets define the characteristics Ezekiel accuses the shepherds of.

Force

חׇזְקָה chozqâh, khoz-kaw’; feminine of H2392; vehemence (usually in a bad sense):—force, mightily, repair, sharply.

Harshness

פֶּרֶךְ perek, peh’-rek; from an unused root meaning to break apart; fracture, i.e. severity:—cruelty, rigour.

Seems these shepherds were being kinda nasty with the way they were shepherding the flock. Descriptions such as force, cruelty, rigour – these are simply negative terms. These shepherds were ‘ruling” as a king, or in my mind, like the typical worldly minded boss that has authority issues in his life (Those type were probably bullied in thier childhood, if you ask me.)

As always, there are exceptions to the “rule” – The New Testament freely revises the method of shepherding, since Hebrews 13:17, (at least in the ol’ KJV), allows for shepherds to rule over thier flock. (Hellooo – I am being waggish here!!!)

I have addressed the ruling of shepherds discussed in Hebrews 13:17 in five posts, called “Christian Accountability” Check it out when you have a chance.

Let’s look at the definition for rule in the Ezekiel passage

Rule

רָדָה râdâh, raw-daw’; a primitive root; to tread down, i.e. subjugate; specifically, to crumble off:—(come to, make to) have dominion, prevail against, reign, (bear, make to) rule,(-r, over), take.

Wow – these shepherds were actings as kings! Ruling with dominion, prevailing against the sheep, reigning!

No wonder the shepherds crucified the good Shepherd. He was atypical, and the light of His life shone on the bad shepherds, exposing thier cruel manner of shepherding.

The rub comes when I look around today. Do we see Ezekiel’s type of shepherd still reigning over God’s people? Of course.

Superiority of the Professional Shepherd

There are many instances of the superiority of the Shepherd in this culture, those who demand respect from thier flock. Fellowship of the Spirit has been replaced with faithfulness to the Pastor/Priest/Minister. Submission to the will of God has been replaced with subservience to the vision of the Pastor/Priest/Minister.

Don’t get me wrong – We are to submit to one another. That is clear from the book of Ephesians 5:21 .. submitting to one another out of reverence for Christ.

My concern is the superiority of the professional christian, and the desire of christendom to have it so.

We want a man (or woman) to tell us what God wants. But He has given the Spirit of God to believers for (subjective) guidance, and the Word of God for (objective) guidance. What a blessing to have both the Spirit and the Word. The Spirit of God will not guide you where the Word of God restricts! (Is that news to anyone out there?)

The Apostle Paul’s Superiority

Let’s check out the superiority of the Apostle Paul. Surely if any believer could demand obedience and respect, it would be the apostle Paul. But this concept took a hit in my thinking when I came across 1 Corinthians 16:12.

1 Corinthians 16:12

Now concerning our brother Apollos, I strongly urged him to visit you with the other brothers, but it was not at all his will to come now. He will come when he has opportunity.

Did you catch that? How audacious is that Apollos?!
First off, this is the urging of the Apostle Paul, a man who has seen the Lord, and been given revelations he isn’t allowed to speak of. How dare Apollos refuse a request, a strong urging of the Apostle.

OK – here comes one of my rants!
I tell you, if I was the Apostle, I would have strictly censored Apollos, brought him before the church leadership, stripped him of all fellowship, taken him to the middle of the town and placed him in stocks, with a sign over his head “CONTUMACIOUS” (a wee bit waggish don’t you know!)

What did Paul do? The Apostle of the Gentiles submitted(?) to Apollos’ will – Apollos will come when he has opportunity. How outrageous! How can Paul’s ministry withstand such an insult, such a shaming of authority?

Secondly, I myself wouldn’t have informed the Corinthians of the lack of influence I had over Apollos. Such weakness on Paul’s part. Doesn’t leadership demand obedience?

Unless there was a greater lesson. Hmmmmm.

Self Appointed Apostles & Prophets

The superiority of the professional christian seems to be in full bloom in my neck of the woods. A current fad that has erupted recently in my city is the self proclaimed apostle or prophet. Signs (I mean advertising signs) are all over the city touting of the glorious ministry these apostles and prophets are displaying. Thier billboards and signs have glossy pics of thier person, with crowds feigning at thier presence, with airbrushed highlights and endorsements from other self proclaimed apostles or prophets.

For some reason I fear these “great” christians may never discuss thier weakness and frailty, or the time they had to escape the city in a basket. (Read the last post if this makes no sense)

My friend, if you are under a professional christian that is forcing his way on your life with harshness, run away. Save your soul from the destruction he or she is inflicting on you.

On the other hand, if you currently have found a shepherd that exhibits the humility of the Lord Jesus, and is a man of like passions as yourself, honouring God in his weakness, you have found a blessing. A rare blessing. Let him know, and he just might blush.

Give thanks to the Good Shepherd for your human shepherd.
Go back
Your message has been sent
Name
Warning

Email
Warning

Website
Warning

Comment
Warning

Warning.

Δ
Follow Considering the Bible on WordPress.com

Thanks again for coming to visit. I hope you found something of interest in this post and would appreciate a comment, to begin a discussion.
Share this:
Email
Print
Telegram
Like Loading…
Ezekiel 34 – Shepherds & The Lost – 8

2020-08-20
True Shepherds Seek the Flock

the lost you have not sought

In our last post, that is on those sheep that were straying, we found that the shepherds were acting on the sheep, forcing them out, banishing them, thrusting the sheep away. The sheep were straying away from the flock due to the active work of the shepherds.

No so in this instance. But first, lets read the passage.

Ezek 34 :4
The weak you have not strengthened, the sick you have not healed, the injured you have not bound up, the strayed you have not brought back, the lost you have not sought, and with force and harshness you have ruled them.

Let’s define the term “sought” first. The Hebrew word is baqash. The definition is as follows
בָּקַשׁ bâqash, baw-kash’;
- to search out (by any method, specifically in worship or prayer); by implication, to strive after:
  - ask,
  - beg,
  - beseech,
  - desire,
  - enquire,
  - get,
  - make inquisition,
  - procure,
  - (make) request,
  - require,
  - seek (for).
I hope you get the impression that this seeking represents a drawing action on the part of the shepherd, a rescuing effort.
It may seem I am laboring an obvious point, but these last two terms represent a duality that the bad shepherds were getting completely backwards.
The previous blog described the shepherds as actively rejecting the sheep. Not so in this phrase. The shepherds were simply indifferent. The shepherds were acting passively in regards to the sheep they were responsible for.

True Shepherds Seek the Flock

Luke is the gospel that displays the seeking heart of the Messiah. His life and character stand in stark contrast to the shepherds Ezekiel is describing

Luke 5:31 – 32

31 And Jesus answered them, “Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick.
32 I have not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance.”

Again, the Master is describing His heart, and the extent of effort and risk He will undergo to find that one sheep, and to rescue it, bring it home and celebrate with His loved ones.

Luke 15:4 – 74 “What man of you, having a hundred sheep, if he has lost one of them, does not leave the ninety-nine in the open country, and go after the one that is lost, until he finds it?
5 And when he has found it, he lays it on his shoulders, rejoicing.
6 And when he comes home, he calls together his friends and his neighbors, saying to them, ‘Rejoice with me, for I have found my sheep that was lost.’
7 Just so, I tell you, there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous persons who need no repentance.

Note that the shepherd lays the sheep on His shoulders. I have heard that shepherds, when finding a lost sheep, will break one of the sheeps legs, to dissuade the sheep of ever leaving again. I don’t know if this was common practice in Jesus day. No matter, it is the Shepherds perogative to disciplinie His sheep, and He does so with our benefit in mind.

The truth that stands out for me, is that the Shepherd carried the sheep, the wandering sheep that caused ths shepherd to leave the comfort of His home, and to search, search search. He carries the sheep, and that with rejoicing, not anger or resentment over having to search all day, possibly missing the football game after church, or loosing out on the bbq over at Sally’s home.

One of the first Bible verses I memorized speaks of this intent of the Messiah. His desire to not only save the lost, but to seek them. He is actively searching.

Luke 19:10For the Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost.

This verse actually confused me for many years. I was considering a popular teaching of how Jesus’ mission was to save only those He knew would trust Him, those that, from the foundation of the world, would be destined to believe and be saved.

In my opinion, seeking them seemed to be unneccessary since they would come to faith no matter. Currently, I understand the seeking is the first step, an effort independant of the saving effort. He seeks. And He saves.

Back to Ezekiel 34. From verse 5 – 6, the Lord describes the current condition of the sheep. And what is that condition? The sheep were scattered, dispersed, strewn about.

Ezekiel 34:5-6

5 So they were scattered, because there was no shepherd, and they became food for all the wild beasts.

6 My sheep were scattered; they wandered over all the mountains and on every high hill. My sheep were scattered over all the face of the earth, with none to search or seek for them.

The sheep were scattered due to the shepherds actions (or inactions)!

Verses 7-10, the Lord speaks of the sheep becoming prey for beasts, while the shepherds lived a life of self indulgence.

The Lord states He is against the shepherds. The shepherds are the enemy. He will rescue the sheep from these shepherds. Rescuing speaks of danger, danger at the hands of the shepherds that the Lord has declared to be the enemy.

He is against the shepherds, and will no longer allow the sheep to be food for the shepherds.

Current Conditions

Times have not changed. During the apostle Paul’s ministry, false apostles in the Corinthian church brought believers into bondage, exalting themselves, taking advantage of the sheep, and speaking of how important they were as shepherds.

2 Corinthians 11:19-20

19 For you gladly bear with fools, being wise yourselves!

20 For you bear it if someone makes slaves of you, or devours you, or takes advantage of you, or puts on airs, or strikes you in the face.

Does this not smack of the same attitude, the same superiority, and abuse that Ezekiel was confronting? Is not this an all too common condition of the western church?

Don’t get me started!

Paul tries to shame the believers in this passage, but it also reveals that false teachers/shepherds are a constant problem for the people of God, no matter what time we live in!

How did Paul exhibit his authority? By the shameful (cowardly?) escape from Damascus.

Paul was a man of like passions, with fear and weakness. He regretfully boasted of the sufferings for the Lord in the previous verses – he was forced to speak of it.

He would rather have “boasted” of his humanity and exalted the Lord in his life.

Strange credentials to say the least!

Lets get back to Ezekiel, and end this post on a positive note!

Ezekiel 34:15-16

15 I myself will be the shepherd of my sheep, and I myself will make them lie down, declares the Lord GOD.

16 I will seek the lost, and I will bring back the strayed, and I will bind up the injured, and I will strengthen the weak, and the fat and the strong I will destroy. I will feed them in justice.

The Lord Himself, in the person of the Lord Jesus Christ
- will make them (the sheep) lie down
- will seek the lost
- will bring back the strayed
- will bind up the injured
- will strengthen the weak
He is the Good Shepherd!
Go back
Your message has been sent
Name
Warning

Email
Warning

Website
Warning

Comment
Warning

Warning.

Δ
Follow Considering the Bible on WordPress.com

Thanks again for coming to visit. I hope you found something of interest in this post and would appreciate a comment, to begin a discussion.
Share this:
Email
Print
Telegram
Like Loading…
Ezekiel 34 – Shepherds & The Strayed – 7

2020-08-13
True Shepherds Retrieve the Flock

the strayed you have not brought back

Notice a difference between the next two phrases we find in our study. The reason the sheep are not with the flock is twofold and God addresses both reasons.

The first reason is that the sheep were driven away – the second is that the sheep wandered away or got lost.

God is addressing the bad shepherds and rebuking them for their lack of concern for His flock. I am assuming that both the lost and the strayed are those that are (or were) in covenant with God.

Let’s read the passage first..

Ezek 34 :4
The weak you have not strengthened, the sick you have not healed, the injured you have not bound up, the strayed you have not brought back, the lost you have not sought, and with force and harshness you have ruled them.

For this post, let’s consider the shepherds relationship to those who strayed, and lets define the term first. The Hebrew term is nadach.
נָדַח nâdach, naw-dakh’;

to push off; used in a great variety of applications, literally and figuratively (to expel, mislead, strike, inflict, etc.):—banish, bring, cast down (out), chase, compel, draw away, drive (away, out, quite), fetch a stroke, force, go away, outcast, thrust away (out), withdraw.

Notice this term generally speaks of outside forces acting on the one straying. A few of the translated terms seem almost violent – thrust away, banish, force, drive out.

True Shepherds Pull the Flock Together

Consider the prophet Jeremiah’s burden in Jerusalem at approximately the same time Ezekiel is prophesying

Jeremiah 23:1-2

1 “Woe to the shepherds who destroy and scatter the sheep of my pasture!” declares the LORD.

2 Therefore thus says the LORD, the God of Israel, concerning the shepherds who care for my people: “You have scattered my flock and have driven them away, and you have not attended to them. Behold, I will attend to you for your evil deeds, declares the LORD.

Also consider Zechariah’s complaint of the foolish shepherd.

Zechariah 11:15-17

15 Then the LORD said to me, “Take once more the equipment of a foolish shepherd.

16 For behold, I am raising up in the land a shepherd who does not care for those being destroyed, or seek the young or heal the maimed or nourish the healthy, but devours the flesh of the fat ones, tearing off even their hoofs.

17 “Woe to my worthless shepherd,

who deserts the flock!
May the sword strike his arm
and his right eye!
Let his arm be wholly withered,
his right eye utterly blinded!”

Is Jeremiah repeating the same concerns of Ezekiel? Are the shepherds of Israel driving the flock away?

Old Testament / New Testament Shepherds

Let’s think about something for a minute.

Is it the ministry of the shepherd to visit the flock? Or should the flock “minister” to the minister, by attending to the shepherds availability, needs and vision for the flock?

Although I do not seek to draw an exact parallel between the OT shepherds of Israel and the NT equivalent elders, I can’t help but see some recurring similarities. I have been a part of the body of Christ for close to 40 yrs, and I cannot remember one time when an elder/pastor visited with me simply to visit with me. Of course when a death or marriage requires their service, it is appreciated. But something tells me that caring for the flock, simply for the flocks sake might make a tremendous impact.

When I lost my job a few years back, the ministerial staff decided to also ask us to leave the church. It was simply coincidental to an issue that we were discussing with leadership (see below), but in my mind, this emphasized a “business” aspect of the institutional church.

In the separate circumstance referred to above, they asked us to submit to three wishes of the church staff. Two out the three could be defended Biblically, and we would gladly submit, but the third was arbitrary, and in good conscience we decided against the request. Therefore the church staff “requested that we leave”. They actually said submit or step down from all teaching/leadership ministries.

It was a few weeks later that one of the deacons told us privately that we should just leave – we had stepped down from all teaching by this time. – no discussion or desire to converse about the situation – just do as we say! I don’t get it. It was obvious we would have to move out of the area to seek other work, but the staff had it in their mind to “let us leave”.

By the way, due to losing my job, my entire family was at risk of being deported from the United States. It was a good thing that no one on the church staff took the time to know our situation, or this may have been a burden that was too heavy for my brothers. (At least I hope no one on the church staff knew of the implications of me loosing my position!)

Does this make me think that I am one who is “driven away”? At one time I may have thought that, but I have to consider what I have been driven away from, that is an institution that found it to be advantageous to follow rules instead of seeking relationship.

You know, if they had some authority to defend their decision to “let us leave”, it would be a different story. I would gladly defer to Scripture. All through the years we had attended this congregation, I had constantly deferred to leadership decisions, asking the Senior Pastor for permission for each action I was taking.

When asked about the reason for this ultimatum, it was simply stated that they were the authority – of course not in so many words, but there was no Biblical considerations discussed.

So am I “driven away”?

I guess, but I am not convinced that Ezekiel would consider this particular instance to be of any concern.

You see, I think I have been “driven” into a better place, where the Spirit of the Lord is allowing more freedom to see His Church as compared to my previously myopic perspective.
Go back
Your message has been sent
Name
Warning

Email
Warning

Website
Warning

Comment
Warning

Warning.

Δ
Follow Considering the Bible on WordPress.com

Thanks again for coming to visit. I hope you found something of interest in this post and would appreciate a comment, to begin a discussion.
Share this:
Email
Print
Telegram
Like Loading…
Ezekiel 34 – Shepherds & The Injured – 6

2020-08-06
Good Shepherds Bind up the Flock

the injured you have not bound up

In the following post, we will be discussing the third clause in this verse.

Ezekiel addresses the failings of the shepherds of his day, and the application to today’s environment is uncanny.

Ezekiel 34 :4
The weak you have not strengthened, the sick you have not healed, the injured you have not bound up, the strayed you have not brought back, the lost you have not sought, and with force and harshness you have ruled them.

True Shepherds Bind up the Broken

This portion of the verse we are considering needs to have some terms defined.

Binding

Binding speaks of bandaging, or restraining. Throughout the book of Ezekiel, this term pictures a tying or fastening. See below for Strong’s definitions.

Broken

Broken defines many types of damage, such as rupturing, crippling, rending violently, being wrecked, crushed or quenched. See below for Strong’s definitions.

True Shepherds Mend the Flock

Ezekiel is describing a very damaged and hurting flock. He is also describing a flock that is being ignored by those who have a calling to minister to them.

In the New Testament, Jesus mentioned the binding the shepherds of Israel were performing. It has changed somewhat since the days of Ezekiel, but only for the worse.

Instead of ignoring the flock the shepherds seem to be taking advantage of the flock. The flock was hurting, and the shepherds loaded them down with burdens, and refused to help them.

Matt 23 :4

4 They tie up heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on people’s shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to move them with their finger.

Story Time

Recently, I was sitting in a McDonald’s trying to enjoy a cup of java, watching those about me. Things have not changed much about the flock of God. Many in this place seem (only God knows) to be aimless and placing their trust in empty promises.

Just this weekend many folks trusted in the hope of a Mega Millions lottery, where the jackpot was over $640,000,000.

Did you hope in this?

Winning the lottery is a proven recipe for disaster, yet so many hope in the chance of winning more money than they need.

Prov 23 :5

When your eyes light on it, it is gone,
for suddenly it sprouts wings,
flying like an eagle toward heaven.

Prov 11 :4

Riches do not profit in the day of wrath,
but righteousness delivers from death.

Prov 11 :28

Whoever trusts in his riches will fall,
but the righteous will flourish like a green leaf.

The sad thing is that many shepherds in the church would encourage seeking this worlds goods. Simply to live in opulence or to find comfort and safety. They would say that He died so that we might live (in comfort)! He became poor that we might have (physical) riches. These dear folk need to read the Bible instead of their imaginations.

Some shepherds in the church would allow (encourage?) the chasing of the wind (seeking wealth), with justifications such as

If you win you could support the poor
If you win you could help your children
If you win, you could build a church
If you win you could help missionaries…..

It is a rare person that can steward earned wealth properly. Earned wealth is a trust that is granted from the Lord and it is a responsibility to be faithful in the correct distribution of it, to honor the One who bought us.

I can’t imagine the burden and distraction of “found” money, and the emotional turmoil it would cause.

Keep it away! Father, help me understand that riches are a false hope. May You bind up our brokenness, and in that binding, give us the desire and wisdom to help others find Your mercy and kindness.
Go back
Your message has been sent
Name
Warning

Email
Warning

Website
Warning

Comment
Warning

Warning.

Δ
Follow Considering the Bible on WordPress.com

Thanks again for coming to visit. I hope you found something of interest in this post and would appreciate a comment, to begin a discussion.

Strong’s definition “Bind”
– Transliteration: Chabash – Phonetic: khaw-bash’ – Definition: 1. to tie, bind, bind on, bind up, saddle, restrain, bandage, govern a. (Qal) 1. to bind, bind on 2. to bind up b. (Piel) to bind, restrain c. (Pual) to be bound up – Origin: a primitive root – TWOT entry: 599 Part(s) of speech: Verb
Strong’s definition “Broken”
– Transliteration: Shabar – Phonetic: shaw-bar’ – Definition: 1. to break, break in pieces a. (Qal) 1. break, break in or down, rend violently, wreck, crush, quench 2. to break, rupture (fig) b. (Niphal) 1. to be broken, be maimed, be crippled, be wrecked 2. to be broken, be crushed (fig) c. (Piel) to shatter, break d. (Hiphil) to cause to break out, bring to the birth e. (Hophal) to be broken, be shattered – Origin: a primitive root – TWOT entry: 2321 – Part(s) of speech: Verb
Share this:
Email
Print
Telegram
Like Loading…
Ezekiel 34 – Shepherds & The Sick – 5

2020-07-30
Good Shepherds Heal the Flock.

the sick you have not healed

We are going to continue in Ezekiel 34:4, and with this blog, we will look at the second clause of Ezekiel 34:4.

Good shepherds heal their flock, seek the flocks health, look for signs of life and pray for the best for the flock.

Ezekiel 34 :4
The weak you have not strengthened, the sick you have not healed, the injured you have not bound up, the strayed you have not brought back, the lost you have not sought, and with force and harshness you have ruled them.

Remember that the principle complaint against the shepherds of Israel in Ezekiel’s day was that they did not feed the sheep. The following clauses show how their utter disregard for the sheep, (typified by their not feeding the sheep) was expressed in other ways. The issue in this blog is that the shepherds were not healing the sheep.

True Shepherds Heal the Flock Spiritually

Luke 4 :18

“The Spirit of the Lord is upon me,
because he has anointed me
to proclaim good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim liberty to the captives
and recovering of sight to the blind,
to set at liberty those who are oppressed,

I have placed the passage in Luke 4:18 as a primary reference due to the clarification it gives me about what is being healed. Jesus healed physical sickness when He was on earth (and He still does) but the emphasis of His healing ministry is spiritual.

True Shepherds Prioritize the Healing

If I get healed of a sickness today, tomorrow I may die. Healing of sickness is a wonderful gift of God, something that is granted to the believer and non-believer based solely on the mercy of God.

Spiritual healing is a potentially eternal condition, that has ramifications in this life and the one to come. His ministry is to heal the sheep of a greater sickness than mere cancer, heart disease or a brain tumor.

Of course the very verse I am referring to above may speak of physical healing (recovering of sight to the blind), but considering how Jesus spiritualized various promises in the Old Testament (see previous blog “A Literal Bible”) the recovering of sight may be referring to spiritual understanding.

Luke 9 :11

When the crowds learned it, they followed him, and he welcomed them and spoke to them of the kingdom of God and cured those who had need of healing.

This verse is definitely speaking of physical healing, but the point I would like to draw your attention to is that He healed them that realized they needed healing!

He came to call the sick so that He might heal them. To find healing, one must admit to their illness. This admission of illness (spiritual) may seem counter-intuitive, even fearful, but this verse teaches me of the desire of the Good Shepherd – He will heal all those that need healing.

Is it too much to say that He is anxious (I speak foolishly) to heal those who seek Him.

A True Shepherds Motivation for Healing

Lets consider the motivation for the two types of healing (physical and spiritual) from the perspective of the Great Healer.

1 Peter 2 :24

24 He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. By his wounds you have been healed.

Of the many verses that speak of healing, the passage in 1 Peter draws me in. Did the atonement grant physical healing to those who have enough faith?

Story Time

A while back I was chatting with a Word of Faith preacher concerning physical healing and the miracles that his church regularly experiences. I asked him about a couple of issues that concern me.

My first question was “Does 1 John 1:9 describe forgiveness as an act of mercy on God’s part?” He agreed, yet I drew his attention to the phrase “faithful and just” in the verse. This phrase tells me that the reason God forgives His people of the accidental sins they commit is due to His faithfulness to the righteous (just) conditions His people are under, not an emotional response based on our strong(?) faith.

When we confess our sins, HE FORGIVES.

In other words, God forgives His people because of the “covenant/contract” He has entered into with His Son, due to His Son’s obedient sacrifice, and our relationship in Him.

It is not an act of mercy that motivates God primarily, but His faithfulness and justness that motivates Him to forgive His people, if we confess our sins to Him.

The second concern was logical. I pictured what I imagined as a typical gathering at his young preachers church. Say one person gets a healing due to their faith. What about the “99” others. Granted some may not need healing. Some may, but do not receive. What does that say about their status of being a believer?

It seems that if I were in the crowd, and listening to the teaching that the death of Christ afforded all believers (who had enough faith) to claim their physical healing, and yet not receive a healing, I would begin to question my salvation.

After all, if God won’t heal a temporal sickness, what makes me think He will heal my eternal sickness.

This young preacher admitted to not having considered these topics. He seemed to be an honest man and I appreciated his willingness to discuss these issues. I believe he has a sincere desire to be healing the flock, but his zeal for God may not be according to knowledge.

The important issue is that God has supplied a Good Shepherd to the church and that Good Shepherd heals His flock.

If you are associated with a group that is abusive or harmful, and not reflective of the Good Shepherds character, it may be wise to consider the Master and listen to His voice.

His sheep hear His voice
Go back
Your message has been sent
Name
Warning

Email
Warning

Website
Warning

Comment
Warning

Warning.

Δ
Follow Considering the Bible on WordPress.com

Thanks again for coming to visit. I hope you found something of interest in this post and would appreciate a comment, to begin a discussion.
Share this:
Email
Print
Telegram
Like Loading…
Ezekiel 34 – Shepherds & The Weak – 4

2020-07-23
A Good Shepherd Strengthens the Flock.

The weak you have not strengthened

Verse 4 has a number of clauses that define the actions of the evil shepherds.

The Good Shepherd is described in the New Testament as fulfilling each of the activities God addresses when He rebukes the evil shepherds.

I loved seeing this – how that the Good Shepherd supplies the very needs of the sheep as opposed to those who simply abuse the flock for self-gratification.

Ezekiel 34 :4

The weak you have not strengthened,

the sick you have not healed,

the injured you have not bound up,

the strayed you have not brought back,

the lost you have not sought,

and with force and harshness you have ruled them.

Strengthening Shepherds are Gentle

Remember that the principle complaint against the shepherds of Israel in Ezekiel’s day was that they did not feed the sheep. The following clauses show how their utter disregard for the sheep, (typified by their not feeding the sheep) was expressed in other ways. The issue in this post is that the shepherds were not strengthening the sheep.

Matt 12 :17-21

17 This was to fulfill what was spoken by the prophet Isaiah:

18 “Behold, my servant whom I have chosen,
my beloved with whom my soul is well pleased.
I will put my Spirit upon him,
and he will proclaim justice to the Gentiles.

19 He will not quarrel or cry aloud,

nor will anyone hear his voice in the streets;

20 a bruised reed he will not break,

and a smoldering wick he will not quench,
until he brings justice to victory;

21 and in his name the Gentiles will hope.”

The Good Shepherd will be gentle with the flock, seeking to encourage some, as one would encourage a smoking flax to reignite, and refusing to damage a bruised reed.

This truth has been very refreshing to me, teaching me that the Lord’s attitude toward a weak child is not that of sneering at them, or despising them or ridiculing them. He will strengthen them, even at the point of their greatest weakness.

A bruised reed has no structural strength. It is literally useless. So often, I consider those that are damaged to be useless, but this seems so anti-Christlike. His attitude is to strengthen the flock, and the verse above exhibits His attitude towards the weakest and most hopeless condition. Ever try to get smoking flax to reignite?

Strengthening Shepherds Supply Strength to Others

Luke 22 :32

32 but I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned again, strengthen your brothers.”

The true Shepherd strengthens His people, sometimes through very unexpected methods. This passage is reflecting the time of Jesus speaking with Peter after his denial. How small Peter must have felt, how unworthy! Yet Jesus, in giving the command to strengthen the brethren, strengthened Peter. Peter needed to know how Jesus felt about him and Jesus trusts him with caring for the flock.

This is something wonderful!

The Spirit of the Good Shepherd will be reflected in mutual encouragement among His people, in their communion with each other.

Who is your Good Shepherd? Your Pastor, Priest, Minister?

His sheep hear His voice and they follow Him. But if you are in a religious system that does not allow you to obey your Lord, either through your conscience, the written Word or otherwise, it may be profitable to compare your earthly shepherd with the Good Shepherd.

As we venture through the remaining parts of the verse, it will become obvious that Jesus is the perfect anti-type of these wicked shepherds.

The sheep hear His voice and they follow.
Go back
Your message has been sent
Name
Warning

Email
Warning

Website
Warning

Comment
Warning

Warning.

Δ
Follow Considering the Bible on WordPress.com

Thanks again for coming to visit. I hope you found something of interest in this post and would appreciate a comment, to begin a discussion.
Share this:
Email
Print
Telegram
Like Loading…
Ezekiel 34 – Shepherds Compared – 3

2020-07-16
Shepherds Compared

In an earlier blog, I mentioned how the passage describing shepherds in Ezekiel 34 seems so very modern.

Many times I have come across men (and women) who say they are shepherds and yet might not like to consider what Ezekiel says. Some may say they have had a calling, a vision, a dream.

Ezekiel doesn’t seem to care about stories. He is looking at the impact of the shepherd’s shepherding on the sheep.

Stories are fun and lately have become outlandish as to how some are “called” to be His shepherds. But in the end, they are simply stories, stories that the gullible or (too) trusting want to believe, because of dry skin on thier ears (itchy ears – get it?).

Lets consider what Ezekiel is trying to teach us. In the following blogs on Ezekiel 34, I would like to settle on the 4th verse for a bit.

Ezekiel 34 :4
The weak you have not strengthened, the sick you have not healed, the injured you have not bound up, the strayed you have not brought back, the lost you have not sought, and with force and harshness you have ruled them.

This verse defines the failures of the shepherds of Israel during Ezekiel’s time. Instead of simply finding fault, (due as it may be), I would rather contrast these shepherds with the Good Shepherd that we seek to follow.

The Good Shepherd Is Against The Bad Shepherds.

Ezekiel 34 :9-10a

9 therefore, you shepherds, hear the word of the LORD:

10 Thus says the Lord GOD, Behold, I am against the shepherds, and I will require my sheep at their hand and put a stop to their feeding the sheep. No longer shall the shepherds feed themselves. I will rescue my sheep from their mouths, that they may not be food for them.

God will put a stop to these bad shepherds from feeding His flock. The food these shepherds were feeding the sheep must have been bad food, food that might be described as “leavenous” in a few hundred years after Ezekiel preached! (Jesus ofter warned His disciples of the leaven of the….)

The Good Shepherd God Has Placed Over Us.

Ezekiel 34 :23-24

23 And I will set up over them one shepherd, my servant David, and he shall feed them: he shall feed them and be their shepherd.

24 And I, the LORD, will be their God, and my servant David shall be prince among them. I am the LORD; I have spoken.

God’s servant David, otherwise known as the King of Glory, Jesus Christ the Messiah, the Great and Good Shepherd, He shall feed us.

Are you being fed by the Master? Are you in communion with Him? Do you hear His voice? He is teaching us, are we listening?

By the way – I didn’t ask if you are going to church regularily, or doing good things in the sight of men, or obeying some preachers wishes.

Is He teaching you?

In the next few posts, let’s look at each of the complaints against the bad shepherds. Hope to visit with you again.

May God bless you and your loved ones!

He is Good.
Go back
Your message has been sent
Name
Warning

Email
Warning

Website
Warning

Comment
Warning

Warning.

Δ
Follow Considering the Bible on WordPress.com

Thanks again for coming to visit. I hope you found something of interest in this post and would appreciate a comment, to begin a discussion.
Share this:
Email
Print
Telegram
Like Loading…
Ezekiel 34 – A Good Shepherd Described – 2

2020-07-09
A Good Shepherd Feeds the Flock

Recalling the previous verses in Ezekiel 34, the emphasis of God’s complaint against the shepherds is that they are not feeding the sheep.

Lets read the verses again and consider a key characteristic of a good Shepherd.

Ezekiel 34 :1-3

1 The word of the LORD came to me:

2 “Son of man, prophesy against the shepherds of Israel; prophesy, and say to them, even to the shepherds, Thus says the Lord GOD: Ah, shepherds of Israel who have been feeding yourselves! Should not shepherds feed the sheep?

3 You eat the fat, you clothe yourselves with the wool, you slaughter the fat ones, but you do not feed the sheep.

The key characteristic of a true shepherd is to feed the flock.

The Good Shepherd Fed His Flock

When Jesus was restoring Peter, He reiterated three times to feed the flock.

John 21 :15-17

15 When they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon, son of John, do you love me more than these?” He said to him, “Yes, Lord; you know that I love you.” He said to him, “Feed my lambs.”

16 He said to him a second time, “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” He said to him, “Yes, Lord; you know that I love you.” He said to him, “Tend my sheep.”

17 He said to him the third time, “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” Peter was grieved because he said to him the third time, “Do you love me?” and he said to him, “Lord, you know everything; you know that I love you.” Jesus said to him, “Feed my sheep.

It is instructive to remember that the last words Jesus told His apostles was to be “teaching them to observe all that I command”

Peter Fed the Flock as a Faithful Shepherd

Peter got it! I think he really got it! He understood a shepherd’s responsibility and passed on this key characteristic to his readers.

1 Peter 5 :2

2 shepherd the flock of God that is among you, exercising oversight, not under compulsion, but willingly, as God would have you; not for shameful gain, but eagerly;

Paul Fed the Flock as a Faithful Shepherd

Paul got it too, and he passed it on to his readers!

2 Timothy 2:24

24 And the Lord’s servant must not be quarrelsome but kind to everyone, able to teach, patiently enduring evil,

Paul Expects His Converts to Shepherd by Feeding the Flock

Interesting that Paul expects to get some milk from the flock. This is even described as a right for apostles to expect some milk from the flock (see verse 12). Paul teaches this, but relinquishes that right in order for the gospel to have one less obstacle (Paul’s word not mine).

Notice that in the next two passages, Paul expected his converts to continue to feed the flock, to pass truth on, since the truth is the very lifeblood of the church, and by it we are able to stand.

Acts 20 :28

28 Pay careful attention to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to care for the church of God, which he obtained with his own blood.

2 Timothy 2:2

2 and what you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also.

The Chief Shepherd Feeds His Flock

Golly – the very passage in Ezekiel 34 speaks of the priority of teaching within the Shepherds ministry to His flock. God will set up the Shepherd, and the first activity He is seen to perform is to feed the sheep.

Ezekiel 34:23

23 And I will set up over them one shepherd, my servant David, and he shall feed them: he shall feed them and be their shepherd.

God has set up His One Shepherd to feed His flock. Are you receiving sustenance from the One Good Shepherd?

It is obvious that God is feeding His sheep, and that He has supplied the Good Shepherd to perform this ministry. Feeding His sheep is the emphasis of the Good Shepherd, but God wants to express His all-encompassing concern for His sheep by describing the various other activities of the Shepherd that pleases God.

Although only One Shepherd fits this description perfectly, it is very instructive to consider the characteristics Ezekiel descibes in this passage, in order to understand God’s will for men who would call themselves shepherds of God’s flock.

(P.S. – Continually reminding someone they are a shepherd may be a clue!!)

This we will do in the following posts. Hope you can join me.
Go back
Your message has been sent
Name
Warning

Email
Warning

Website
Warning

Comment
Warning

Warning.

Δ
Follow Considering the Bible on WordPress.com

Thanks again for coming to visit. I hope you found something of interest in this post and would appreciate a comment, to begin a discussion.
Share this:
Email
Print
Telegram
Like Loading…
Ezekiel 34 – Introduction -1

2020-07-02
My wife and I were reading in Ezekiel 34 a few nights ago.

During the reading, it occurred to me that this passage is very New Testamental.

By that I mean, many phrases within this passage are directly addressed in the New Testament.

You know, I would consider this passage to be very modern, dare I say it – even applicable to us today.

Lets read the first three verses to get a gist of the passage, and then let me know what you think!

Ezekiel 34:1-3

1 The word of the LORD came to me:
2 “Son of man, prophesy against the shepherds of Israel; prophesy, and say to them, even to the shepherds, Thus says the Lord GOD: Ah, shepherds of Israel who have been feeding yourselves! Should not shepherds feed the sheep?
3 You eat the fat, you clothe yourselves with the wool, you slaughter the fat ones, but you do not feed the sheep.

It seems the Lord is using the picture of the shepherd/sheep to describe the spiritual relationships between the leaders of Israel (both political and religious) and the “rank and file” of Israel – what we might call “the laity” in today’s Christian environment.

The principle complaint against the shepherds was that they fed themselves, to the exclusion of feeding the flock. Of course the leaders fed some of the flock, but as we will see, it wasn’t an enviable condition to be in if you were a sheep!

The shepherds of Israel ate the fat.

It seems that the word fat in the first phrase of the charge may be translated as milk (some translations use “curds”). This would show a progression of abuse on the part of the shepherds as to what they demand from the sheep. Since the milk of the sheep was not restricted from the shepherds, the Lords complaint must be regarding the abuse of this privilege.

Excessive taxation and the demand of religious obligations was “milking the flock”, in a very real manner. Today when we talk of “milking it”, I think we are using the term in a similar manner.

The shepherds of Israel clothed themselves with wool.

Sheep are to supply wool. It is one of their principal functions. So again, the issue must be the abuse of the privilege. In the same way that the milk supplied a temporary need, the wool supplied a more permanent benefit to the shearers. But the next phrase seems to indicate that those that were giving the benefits of milk and wool were not being fed, which reinforces the original charge against the shepherds. They (the spiritual leaders of Israel) were taking from the flock, but not feeding them!

The shepherds of Israel slaughter the fat ones.

The final function of a sheep is to supply food to the owner. It seems the shepherds fed these particular sheep. Please understand this is not an enviable position to be in.

If you were starving, at least the shepherds of Israel were just using you (taking milk and wool), instead of intending to kill you.

I suppose a number of questions rise in my mind. Fellow blogger Gerry Palermo suggested I build a survey of the questions. Check out Ezekiel 34 – Introduction -1 – Survey for a chance to respond to the following questions.
- How do you see the Good Shepherd?
- Does the Good Shepherd require milk, wool and meat from His flock? Selah.
- Is He demanding more than you can supply?
- Do you feel that you are not able to satisfy the demands of the Master?
- Do you worry about His intentions?
- When things are going well, do you worry that you are being set up?
By asking these questions to the sheperds of Isreal, Ezekiel is condemning these actions. The character of God in not such, that His intent is to simply take take take.

He does expect fruit from His followers, which is simply the natural outgrowth of abiding in Him. He feeds us, clothes us and provides life, that we might produce fruit for His glory.

Consider the difference. The true Shepherd is fundamentally different than the shepherds Ezekiel is preaching about in this passage. In the following posts, I hope we will find the contrast to be obvious!

Let us give thanks for our Good Shepherd!
Go back
Your message has been sent
Name
Warning

Email
Warning

Website
Warning

Comment
Warning

Warning.

Δ
Follow Considering the Bible on WordPress.com

Thanks again for coming to visit. I hope you found something of interest in this post and would appreciate a comment, to begin a discussion.
Share this:
Email
Print
Telegram
Like Loading…
Local Church Membership Q&A – 20 – Epilogue

2020-06-11
Previous posts in this series were based on a pamphlet provided to me in my search for direction regarding local church membership.

Since my discussion with Cody, I tripped over a blog that discusses the dangers of signing a church covenant, a very fitting epilogue to our discussion on membership

Take a few minutes to visit Istoria Ministries Blog.

This is our final post on this instance of local church membership. If you have followed the posts through to this one, I would love to hear from you. Please drop me a line. As always, if you read something in this discussion that concerns you, please take the time to send me your comments or reply within the post. I look forward to hearing from you.
Go back
Your message has been sent

Name
Warning

Email
Warning

Website
Warning

Comment
Warning

Warning.

Δ
Follow Considering the Bible on WordPress.com
Share this:
Email
Print
Telegram
Like Loading…
Local Church Membership Q&A – 19

2020-06-10
Previous posts in this series were based on a pamphlet provided to me in my search for direction regarding local church membership. A brother named Cody sought to help me and I wish him well.

When I replied with the previous responses, I did not hear from him for a period of time. Of course, I feared I may have come off a bit strong, and in the interest of maintaining communication, reached out to him again.

Cody – As I watched you lead the study the other night, I saw a young man who wants to follow the Lord and disciple those he has a chance to. I would challenge you to consider what you are teaching, that is, that you focus on the Word of God and not some man’s teaching about the Word of God. (We spent less than 10 minutes reading the Word that night and the remaining time referring to a booklet.)

In my own studies recently, I have been in Mark 7. In that chapter, the Lord rebukes the religious leaders of the nation. I have to ask myself – How is the requirement for a believer to enter in to church membership any different than the Pharisees requirement for the disciples to wash their hands prior to eating. Both teachings are obviously constructed out of good intentions to protect the “layman”, but the Lord didn’t seem to accept this teaching.

Mark 7:1-13

1 Now when the Pharisees gathered to him, with some of the scribes who had come from Jerusalem,

2 they saw that some of his disciples ate with hands that were defiled, that is, unwashed.

3 (For the Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they wash their hands, holding to the tradition of the elders,

4 and when they come from the marketplace, they do not eat unless they wash. And there are many other traditions that they observe, such as the washing of cups and pots and copper vessels and dining couches.)

5 And the Pharisees and the scribes asked him, “Why do your disciples not walk according to the tradition of the elders, but eat with defiled hands?”

6 And he said to them, “Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written, “‘This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me;

7 in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’

8 You leave the commandment of God and hold to the tradition of men.”

9 And he said to them, “You have a fine way of rejecting the commandment of God in order to establish your tradition!

10 For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘Whoever reviles father or mother must surely die.’

11 But you say, ‘If a man tells his father or his mother, “Whatever you would have gained from me is Corban”‘ (that is, given to God)–

12 then you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or mother,

13 thus making void the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And many such things you do.”

Jesus referred to the Word of God in His defense for the disciples. As a proponent of church membership, I would ask you to do the same. Either refer to the Word of God for your teaching, or admit that your teaching considers the Word of God to be insufficient for the needs of this time.

If you have followed the posts through to this one, I would love to hear from you. Please drop me a line. As always, if you read something in this discussion that concerns you, please take the time to send me your comments or reply within the post. I look forward to hearing from you.
Go back
Your message has been sent

Name
Warning

Email
Warning

Website
Warning

Comment
Warning

Warning.

Δ
Follow Considering the Bible on WordPress.com
Share this:
Email
Print
Telegram
Like Loading…
Local Church Membership Q&A – 18

2020-06-03
Previous posts in this series were based on a pamphlet provided to me in my search for direction regarding local church membership. A brother named Cody sought to help me and I wish him well.

When I replied with the previous responses, I did not hear from him for a period of time. Of course, I feared I may have come off a bit strong, and in the interest of maintaining communication, reached out to him again.

As I have been thinking on this topic, I have considered 9 questions.

One question will be offered for comment in the following posts

Consider and respond, or again, if you want to discuss just let me know.

Does Local Church Membership facilitate church discipline effectively?

This might be the most convincing argument for local church membership, if the church is modeled after an organizational structure, but the church is modeled after a family, so this argument is only effective if the premise of organizational church life is considered to be the norm.

Since this is not what the New Testament models the church after, we have to reconsider our thinking.

An example is always helpful for me.

As I have sought to be involved in local churches, being members for many many years, I have seen many families leave the fellowship and move onto other churches. Not so often, I have seen individuals leave on bad terms, (whether under formal discipline or not, I don’t know, even though the Lord says the final step in discipline is to bring the offender before the whole church) These disciplined folk usually end up in either another local fellowship, or end up wandering aimlessly. In my opinion, it seems that the discipline did not have it’s intended effect, that is, the restoration of the believer to the church.

What is the answer?

Make the offender miss the group – that is, reach into the offenders life (prior to any offense) and invest time and effort so that the offender will miss the group. Having a name taken off a list is not that effective!

Most, if not all offenders would admit that the reason they may have considered coming back to the original fellowship is because they missed the people, not the fact that their name was off a list.

So I have to ask you – What is the purpose of the list in relation to the act of discipline?

Matthew 16:18

18 And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Our next post will address a final question concerning the teaching of local church membership. I do hope you will join me in my discussion with Cody, and supply comment or correction from the Word for our mutual edification.

If you read something in this discussion that concerns you, please take the time to send me your comments or reply within the post. I look forward to hearing from you.
Go back
Your message has been sent

Name
Warning

Email
Warning

Website
Warning

Comment
Warning

Warning.

Δ
Follow Considering the Bible on WordPress.com
Share this:
Email
Print
Telegram
Like Loading…
Local Church Membership Q&A – 17

2020-05-27
Previous posts in this series were based on a pamphlet provided to me in my search for direction regarding local church membership. A brother named Cody sought to help me and I wish him well.

When I replied with the previous responses, I did not hear from him for a period of time. Of course, I feared I may have come off a bit strong, and in the interest of maintaining communication, reached out to him again.

As I have been thinking on this topic, I have considered 9 questions.

One question will be offered for comment in the following posts Consider and respond, or again, if you want to discuss just let me know.

Does Local Church Membership assist in performing the work of the Body?

In one discussion with a brother, (he calls himself a pastor – I tell you this so you may understand the dilemma my question poses -) I asked the following question.

Would you rather have a faithful believer that is not a formal member of your church, or a formal member that is not necessarily faithful?

I don’t remember him answering.

Since I cannot find any place in the Scriptures that clearly demands this practice, the Body of Christ must be able to perform all of it’s duties without the imposition of this practice. Not only does the New Testament teach this, Christian history affirms the same.

The imposition of a formal church membership is associated more often than not with religious organizations that persecute believers. Thankfully as believers in the west, we do not live in this condition today!

In the passages that specifically describe the working of the Body of Christ, (universally or locally), local church membership teaching or instruction is painfully absent.

It seems the Lord will build His church.

Matthew 16:18

18 And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Our next post will address another question concerning the teaching of local church membership. I do hope you will join me in my discussion with Cody, and supply comment or correction from the Word for our mutual edification.

If you read something in this discussion that concerns you, please take the time to send me your comments or reply within the post. I look forward to hearing from you.
Go back
Your message has been sent

Name
Warning

Email
Warning

Website
Warning

Comment
Warning

Warning.

Δ
Follow Considering the Bible on WordPress.com
Share this:
Email
Print
Telegram
Like Loading…
Local Church Membership Q&A – 16

2020-05-20
Previous posts in this series were based on a pamphlet provided to me in my search for direction regarding local church membership. A brother named Cody sought to help me and I wish him well.

When I replied with the previous responses, I did not hear from him for a period of time. Of course, I feared I may have come off a bit strong, and in the interest of maintaining communication, reached out to him again.

As I have been thinking on this topic, I have considered 9 questions.

One question will be offered for comment in the following posts Consider and respond, or again, if you want to discuss just let me know.

Does Local Church Membership foster an “us vs them” mentality?

By this I mean among believers.

How many times have you heard those under your care speak of other believers as “those over there” or “that other church on the corner”? I understand that we live in a fallen world, but creating or maintaining a system that fosters this attitude is counter-productive in my opinion.

Notice Paul’s method of teaching the Corinthian body, by using the practices of other groups of Christians to “shame them” into conformity with the rest of the Body of Christ.

1 Corinthians 11:16

16 If anyone is inclined to be contentious, we have no such practice, nor do the churches of God.

How often does a local church seek to be different from the rest of the Body, and by that activity, miss out on many blessings. Of course, this should not apply in individual personal holiness, for we are all called to follow the Lord and not others, but the expression of that life in Christ should be to be at peace with others.

Our next post will address another question concerning the teaching of loacal church membership. I do hope you will join me in my discussion with Cody, and supply comment or correction from the Word for our mutual edification.

If you read something in this discussion that concerns you, please take the time to send me your comments or reply within the post. I look forward to hearing from you.
Go back
Your message has been sent

Name
Warning

Email
Warning

Website
Warning

Comment
Warning

Warning.

Δ
Follow Considering the Bible on WordPress.com
Share this:
Email
Print
Telegram
Like Loading…
Local Church Membership Q&A – 15

2020-05-13
Previous posts in this series were based on a pamphlet provided to me in my search for direction regarding local church membership. A brother named Cody sought to help me and I wish him well.

When I replied with the previous responses, I did not hear from him for a period of time. Of course, I feared I may have come off a bit strong, and in the interest of maintaining communication, reached out to him again.

As I have been thinking on this topic, I have considered 9 questions.

One question will be offered for comment in the following posts Consider and respond, or again, if you want to discuss just let me know.

Does Local Church Membership follow after pragmatism or edification?

By that, I would refer to the following.

1 Corinthians 10:23

23 “All things are lawful,” but not all things are helpful. “All things are lawful,” but not all things build up.

If, for the sake of argument, the local church is “allowed” to have membership rolls, how is this beneficial to the average Christian? Remember, permissible actions do not equate to be pleasing actions!

Membership could be seen as a method of allowing or restricting a believer from christian activities or “full fellowship” This seems to be hurtful to the believer outside and create a sense of “arrival” for the one who is in “the club”.

It would seem that the benefit goes to those who might boast about the members. Although the principle topic is circumcision in Galations, could the attitude of Paul toward the judaizers be similar in regard to those who require local church membership from a believer?

Consider the following very loose paraphrase of Gal 6:12-13 (My apologies to Paul!)

Galations 6:12 – 13

As many as desire to make a fair shew in the flesh, they constrain you to be members; only lest they should suffer persecution for the cross of Christ.

For neither they themselves who are members keep the membership agreement they signed; but desire to have you sign up for membership, that they may glory in your potential attendance.

Our next post will address another question concerning the teaching of local church membership. I do hope you will join me in my discussion with Cody, and supply comment or correction from the Word for our mutual edification.

If you read something in this discussion that concerns you, please take the time to send me your comments or reply within the post. I look forward to hearing from you.
Go back
Your message has been sent

Name
Warning

Email
Warning

Website
Warning

Comment
Warning

Warning.

Δ
Follow Considering the Bible on WordPress.com
Share this:
Email
Print
Telegram
Like Loading…
A Study of Eternal / Everlasting

2020-05-08
Everlasting – It boggles the mind – at least my mind!

How can I grasp this concept?

I remember laying in bed at night when I was a young’n and thinking about the eternal, and just when I thought I had it figger’d out, some extra years would appear in my thoughts. I felt like a dog chasing my tail!

“Everlasting” in the Bible

When I was a dog chasing my tail, I didn’t have the desire or will power to go to the source to research this concept. Now that I am a Christian, I have the Word of God to search for answers.

So lets Consider the Bible and search for answers.

First off, lets find out the words, in the Old and New Testament, that the inspired writers used to describe this concept!

Four Old Testament Hebrew words and three New Testament Greek words are translated to describe the concept of eternal/everlasting .

OLAM – Old Testament “Eternal”
The most common word in the Old Testament is “OLAM”. The following table analyzes this word in describing various eternal/everlasting things.

You might be asking by this time – What’s your point Carl?

My point is that we cannot interpret the Word of God in a strictly literal, “technically accurate” manner. Some folk have complained that this makes the Bible an unreadable document, that is, they could not simply pick up a Bible and understand it correctly.

When was the last time you considered the Bible to be a cartoon? When I pick up a Blondie or Garfield cartoon, I don’t intend to spend more than a few seconds (at most) in understanding the message being conveyed. I think the attitude towards the Word should be somewhat different.

The Bible was written in a completely different culture, time and place than what we live in. To assume that we have the right to simply understand the message in a 20th century North American context is foolishness. Unless, of course, we see the Bible as a magic talisman, instead of a message from the living God.

In the case of this particular study, I find it amazing that some things that are described as eternal and everlasting (in our mindset) are not!

Does this take away from the core definition of eternal/everlasting? No – the core meaning is the core meaning! What I think I have tripped over is how the overall context can affect the specific message of a particular word.

What do I mean?

Consider

Gen 9:16

And the bow shall be in the cloud; and I will look upon it, that I may remember the everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh that is upon the earth.

What will happen to this covenant when there is no living creatures on the earth? (BTW – that will happen!) It is eternal between the two parties that enter into the covenant, so the default message is that although the term everlasting is used, it is not everlasting/eternal. The everlasting condition of this covenant is dependent on the existence of “every living creature of all flesh that is upon the earth”.

How about this one. The land of Canaan is to be an everlasting possession for the seed of Abraham.

Gen 17:8

And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God.

Two issues erupt in this verse.
1. Who is the seed of Abraham?
2. Is this promise or it’s reaffirmations unconditional?
The first point is simple to answer. Paul labors the point of describing who the seed is in the book of Galations.

Gal 3:29

And if ye be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.

Then two more issues occur to me. – (Come on Carl – gimme a break!!)

Was this promise or it’s reaffirmations unconditional? Or did the Jewish people misunderstand this verse and “literally” interpret the promise, assuming the land was theirs unconditionally forever?

The very next verse after the great promise to Abraham, the Lord stated…

… Thou shalt keep my covenant therefore, thou, and thy seed after thee in their generations.

Unconditional promise? Could the Jewish nation survive if they were disobedient and rebellious? (Did they?) Could they assume upon verse 8 and ignore verse 9? (What about the nation of Israel today? Are they presently keeping “my covenant”? ) The everlasting possession was dependent on the Jewish nation’s keeping of “my covenant”. It is very interesting to me that the covenant being referred to here was the Abrahamic covenant and that the nation’s allegience to the Siniatic covenant revealed the heart of the people towards God. Additional examples of how the eternal/everlasting concept is modified by the context, can be found above and I would encourage you to consider them.

Does this contextual effect on the concept of eternal/everlasting continue into the New Testament? I will leave that for you to study out. Get back to me when you find something out, eh?

I gotta go study some Garfield!
Go back
Your message has been sent
Name
Warning

Email
Warning

Website
Warning

Comment
Warning

Warning.

Δ
Follow Considering the Bible on WordPress.com

Thanks again for coming to visit. I hope you found something of interest in this post and would appreciate a comment, to begin a discussion.
Share this:
Email
Print
Telegram
Like Loading…