Bible Discussion and Reflection Thread

[Tranquil Bondservant]

I thought it would be a good idea to start a thread about the Bible where we can post some verses or reflection on Scripture. Feel free to do it in whatever manner you like, whether it just be free form mediation on the truth of God found in His Word or posting the parts of the Bible you've been reading and some reflections on them.

Need an idea or not sure what to talk about? Check out:

GodJesusAndChocolate's Bible Verses thread

YankeeGirl's Goodness of God thread

God bless .

"Let the words of my mouth and the meditation of my heart be acceptable in your sight, O LORD, my rock and my redeemer." -Psalm 19:14

 

[Tranquil Bondservant]

"I have made you exceedingly fruitful, and I will make nations of you, and kings will come forth from you." -Genesis 17:6
"I will bless her, and indeed I will give you a son by her. Then I will bless her, and she shall be a mother of nations; kings of peoples will come from her." -Genesis 17:16

God prophesied here to Abraham that kings will come forth from Abraham even though it was His desire that Israel would be ruled by Him as their king (1 Samuel 8:7-8). God’s so amazing that He even has patience & endurance in His foreknowledge. What a God; there is nothing or nobody like Him. Nothing remotely close.

 

[Tranquil Bondservant]

"In those days Hezekiah became mortally ill. And Isaiah the prophet the son of Amoz came to him and said to him, “Thus says the LORD, ‘Set your house in order, for you shall die and not live.’ ” Then he turned his face to the wall and prayed to the LORD, saying, “Remember now, O LORD, I beseech You, how I have walked before You in truth and with a whole heart and have done what is good in Your sight.” And Hezekiah wept bitterly." -2 Kings 20:1-3

Hezekiah does well here and does in fact realise that he relies upon The Lord for all things, including his life. Hezekiah turned to the only being who is not only able to help him but also does so through His love, compassion and the outworking of His faithfulness and for His name’s sake. This passage shows that while Hezekiah does succumb to pride, he is like all of us in that he is a broken and splintered man. We mistake the things The Lord has given us as gifts for things that we have acquired on our own power. When in actuality no good thing happens apart from Him (John 15:5).

In the fullness of 2 kings 20 we are to see ourselves in Hezekiah, suffering from the same weakness and committing the same mistakes. That next time it occurs we may avoid the pitfall and instead give all the glory to The One who has established the works of our hands (Psalm 90:17).

"I have walked before You in truth and with a whole heart and have done what is good in Your sight." I might be wrong here and this actually might be pride in that Hezekiah is appealing to his works, but I think it’s more an appeal to love. Otherwise he would not have mentioned a whole heart (NET: “wholehearted devotion”). I don’t think that the mention of doing what is good in The Lord’s sight is to prove to God that Hezekiah himself is good and therefore The Lord should answer Him, but that his life has been one of dedication to God and that Hezekiah has done what The Lord determines to be good (though not always as later on in the passage demonstrates).

"In those days Hezekiah became mortally ill; and he prayed to the LORD, and the LORD spoke to him and gave him a sign. But Hezekiah gave no return for the benefit he received, because his heart was proud; therefore wrath came on him and on Judah and Jerusalem." -2 Chronicles 32:24–25
It’s worth keeping in mind that here it states that Hezekiah’s heart was proud, so it might actually be an appeal to God based on his works (on the basis of the Old Covenant). Nevertheless, repentance and appealing to The Lord for His grace and mercy is the only right thing to do.

 

[Tranquil Bondservant]

"The sons of Israel served Eglon the king of Moab eighteen years. But when the sons of Israel cried to the LORD, the LORD raised up a deliverer for them, Ehud the son of Gera, the Benjamite, a left-handed man. And the sons of Israel sent tribute by him to Eglon the king of Moab. Ehud made himself a sword which had two edges, a cubit in length, and he bound it on his right thigh under his cloak. He presented the tribute to Eglon king of Moab. Now Eglon was a very fat man. It came about when he had finished presenting the tribute, that he sent away the people who had carried the tribute. But he himself turned back from the idols which were at Gilgal, and said, “I have a secret message for you, O king.” And he said, “Keep silence.” And all who attended him left him. Ehud came to him while he was sitting alone in his cool roof chamber. And Ehud said, “I have a message from God for you.” And he arose from his seat. Ehud stretched out his left hand, took the sword from his right thigh and thrust it into his belly. The handle also went in after the blade, and the fat closed over the blade, for he did not draw the sword out of his belly; and the refuse came out." -Judges 13:14-22

In regards to the secret meeting, is it possible that Eglon having conquered the peoples who are giving tribute (Jdg 3:14) would have desired to hear of any information and might have suspected that Ehud was going to tell him of sedition? or another possibility is that he thought Ehud may have been seeking to gain favour. Either way the secret meeting would have an array of potential benefits or upsides. Eglon, thinking Ehud was unarmed (Jdg 3:16) felt completely safe.

Being left handed let him hide the sword on the opposite side as to where it would normally be. I suppose when the Eglon’s guards checked to see if he had a weapon Ehud must have shown them the traditional side and there would have been nothing there. Given that Ehud was also giving tribute for either his people or city/town/area (Jdg 3:17) after having being conquered for 18 years (Jdg 3:14), there would be little reason as to why this tribute would be any different than the last. Thus being left handed he was able to sneak a weapon into the secret meeting in Judges 3:19 and then also surprise him without any fighting back in Judges 3:21-22. The defencelessness of Eglon also may have come about through thinking Ehud was unarmed (Jdg 3:16), thus leaving Eglon to feel completely safe.

"A cubit in length":
"The Hebrew word 'gomed' is used, in this verse, to apply to a double-edged dagger which is about a foot long. The NLT suggests it is about 12 inches long, whereas the NIV suggests 18 inches. The point is (sorry, no pun intended) this dagger could be strapped to a man's thigh. A dagger between 12 and 18 inches in length might work. Certainly, nothing longer. (Source: New Living Translation Study Bible notes (page 424).")

A hefty dagger. Given the size I wonder what weight Eglon was (Jdg 3:22). The height to weight ratio would also have an impact.

 

[Plenipotent]

God’s so amazing that He even has patience & endurance in His foreknowledge.

Oh, that's a beautiful sentence right there!

We mistake the things The Lord has given us as gifts for things that we have acquired on our own power. When in actuality no good thing happens apart from Him (John 15:5).

This has been something that I have been trying to keep in my mind lately. Trying to remind myself that all the good I do comes from Him, all the good I accomplish comes from Him. It's very humbling.

I don’t think that the mention of doing what is good in The Lord’s sight is to prove to God that Hezekiah himself is good and therefore The Lord should answer Him, but that his life has been one of dedication to God and that Hezekiah has done what The Lord determines to be good (though not always as later on in the passage demonstrates).

So you see it as more like a heartfelt plea for God to respond? It seems to me that it definitely carries an undertone of, "God, I've accomplished all of these things, am I not worthy?" which could be seen as somewhat arrogant. However, I can see your point as well. Maybe it started as a sincere plea, but after God's response, it might have shifted into a sense of pride, like, "That's right, God answered me, I'm truly remarkable."... Hmm, something to ponder on for myself.

"The sons of Israel served Eglon the king of Moab eighteen years. But when the sons of Israel cried to the LORD, the LORD raised up a deliverer for them, Ehud the son of Gera, the Benjamite, a left-handed man. And the sons of Israel sent tribute by him to Eglon the king of Moab. Ehud made himself a sword which had two edges, a cubit in length, and he bound it on his right thigh under his cloak. He presented the tribute to Eglon king of Moab. Now Eglon was a very fat man. It came about when he had finished presenting the tribute, that he sent away the people who had carried the tribute. But he himself turned back from the idols which were at Gilgal, and said, “I have a secret message for you, O king.” And he said, “Keep silence.” And all who attended him left him. Ehud came to him while he was sitting alone in his cool roof chamber. And Ehud said, “I have a message from God for you.” And he arose from his seat. Ehud stretched out his left hand, took the sword from his right thigh and thrust it into his belly. The handle also went in after the blade, and the fat closed over the blade, for he did not draw the sword out of his belly; and the refuse came out." -Judges 13:14-22

In regards to the secret meeting, is it possible that Eglon having conquered the peoples who are giving tribute (Jdg 3:14) would have desired to hear of any information and might have suspected that Ehud was going to tell him of sedition? or another possibility is that he thought Ehud may have been seeking to gain favour. Either way the secret meeting would have an array of potential benefits or upsides. Eglon, thinking Ehud was unarmed (Jdg 3:16) felt completely safe.

Being left handed let him hide the sword on the opposite side as to where it would normally be. I suppose when the Eglon’s guards checked to see if he had a weapon Ehud must have shown them the traditional side and there would have been nothing there. Given that Ehud was also giving tribute for either his people or city/town/area (Jdg 3:17) after having being conquered for 18 years (Jdg 3:14), there would be little reason as to why this tribute would be any different than the last. Thus being left handed he was able to sneak a weapon into the secret meeting in Judges 3:19 and then also surprise him without any fighting back in Judges 3:21-22. The defencelessness of Eglon also may have come about through thinking Ehud was unarmed (Jdg 3:16), thus leaving Eglon to feel completely safe.

"A cubit in length":
"The Hebrew word 'gomed' is used, in this verse, to apply to a double-edged dagger which is about a foot long. The NLT suggests it is about 12 inches long, whereas the NIV suggests 18 inches. The point is (sorry, no pun intended) this dagger could be strapped to a man's thigh. A dagger between 12 and 18 inches in length might work. Certainly, nothing longer. (Source: New Living Translation Study Bible notes (page 424).")

A hefty dagger. Given the size I wonder what weight Eglon was (Jdg 3:22). The height to weight ratio would also have an impact.

I'll need to read this more thoroughly, but I'm going to keep your questions and perspectives in mind.

 

[Tranquil Bondservant]

Thanks for your perspective and comments .

So you see it as more like a heartfelt plea for God to respond? It seems to me that it definitely carries an undertone of, "God, I've accomplished all of these things, am I not worthy?" which could be seen as somewhat arrogant. However, I can see your point as well. Maybe it started as a sincere plea, but after God's response, it might have shifted into a sense of pride, like, "That's right, God answered me, I'm truly remarkable."... Hmm, something to ponder on for myself.

I was 50/50 because Hezekiah was a great king who did follow the Lord but he was also proud so it's hard to separate. I do think that it's hard for somebody to be struck with a terminal illness and not be humbled and rely on God, however, right after The Lord delivered him from Sennacherib and the Assyrians he did end up showing the Babylonians (Israel's future conquerors) all the the wares of his house in a proud manner. So it can be hard to know with him. It's why I included the line from Chronicles because I'm not 100% if he did appeal to his works or if the heart felt devotion was true. Maybe it was a mix of both like you said?

Also the Judges comments were just fun to think about which is why I posted them. They have no real significance haha. I don't think picturing how large and in charge Eglon was will have an impact on somebodies Theological views .

 

[Plenipotent]

Thanks for your perspective and comments .

I was 50/50 because Hezekiah was a great king who did follow the Lord but he was also proud so it's hard to separate. I do think that it's hard for somebody to be struck with a terminal illness and not be humbled and rely on God, however, right after The Lord delivered him from Sennacherib and the Assyrians he did end up showing the Babylonians (Israel's future conquerors) all the the wares of his house in a proud manner. So it can be hard to know with him. It's why I included the line from Chronicles because I'm not 100% if he did appeal to his works or if the heart felt devotion was true. Maybe it was a mix of both like you said?

Well I'm definitely going to be keeping what you said in mind for future reading. I think it might be important to speculate on it further and get to the meat of it... Might not be super important, but you never know!

Also the Judges comments were just fun to think about which is why I posted them. They have no real significance haha. I don't think picturing how large and in charge Eglon was will have an impact on somebodies Theological views .

HEY! You never know!

 

[LoveDivine]

As a kid, I really loved the story of Ehud stabbing King Eglon. It was a favorite haha. I used to watch the Superbook cartoons and they did that story. The fact that the Bible mentions how large he is has always amused me. I don't have anything of significance to add to this haha. I just always thought that was a cool story. Ehud is really gutsy too. What he did took a lot of courage and faith. He could have so easily been killed. Judges is fascinating, because you do almost have a book of superheros. Samson being the ultimate.

 

[OldAbramBrown]

Ask God that you will always have a Mamre, an Aner, and an Eshcol in your life. (And look how many other people they did good to at the same time) Genesis ch 14

 

[DragonFox91]

The book I’m reading is discussing how Jonah didn’t want to preach to Nineveh b/c he didn’t want God to show them compassion, not because he was scared of preaching to incredibly wicked pagans. He knew God was asking him to preach to Ninveveh b/c it was going to get saved.
It talks about how he sat on the hill ready to watch it burn & got upset God said no b/c he shows patience to all people - the righteous & the unrighteous both.
I never picked up on Jonah’s motivations, but it makes sense.

The book believes the Ninevites genuinely repented b/c Jesus cites them as judges later on. It theorizes the next generation of Ninevites chose to forget, influenced by the rest of the surrounding country. & judgement eventually came. That's all it takes: a little bit of time & outside influence, & it's wrecked. My friend says it's b/c you can see the false gods.

 

[Tranquil Bondservant]

"that his heart may not be lifted up above his countrymen and that he may not turn aside from the commandment, to the right or the left, so that he and his sons may continue long in his kingdom in the midst of Israel." (Deuteronomy 17:20)

This is completely and utterly unique for this time and following times. The idea that the ruler is equal to every other civilian is not something that would occur until a kind of democracy (roughly 750-1000 years later) or republic came about. It was the nature of kings to lord it over their countrymen and elevate themselves above them all; often claiming divine descent. It was not to be so with God’s king, for God Himself is king of Israel.

"and strip Aaron of his garments and put them on his son Eleazar. So Aaron will be gathered to his people, and will die there.” (Numbers 20:26)

When someone needed to be clean for a specific thing, someone else could offer to become unclean in their place so they can fulfill the specific thing. E.g., if someone needed to offer sacrifice but also needed to remove an animal carcass from their land, one of their friends could remove the carcass for them and become unclean so that the person who needed to offer sacrifice can be clean and not become cut off from among their people when offering said sacrifice. Christ then became unclean for us so that we may be made clean in the sight of The Lord. According to His loving grace and mercy He removed our filthy garments and put on us His beautiful clean garments.

 

[Tranquil Bondservant]

The book I’m reading is discussing how Jonah didn’t want to preach to Nineveh b/c he didn’t want God to show them compassion, not because he was scared of preaching to incredibly wicked pagans. He knew God was asking him to preach to Ninveveh b/c it was going to get saved.
It talks about how he sat on the hill ready to watch it burn & got upset God said no b/c he shows patience to all people - the righteous & the unrighteous both.
I never picked up on Jonah’s motivations, but it makes sense.

The book believes the Ninevites genuinely repented b/c Jesus cites them as judges later on. It theorizes the next generation of Ninevites chose to forget, influenced by the rest of the surrounding country. & judgement eventually came. That's all it takes: a little bit of time & outside influence, & it's wrecked. My friend says it's b/c you can see the false gods.

Those are awesome points. I've always liked how the book of Jonah ends; how it ends on a question that is essentially a cliff hanger. It feels directed towards the person reading it and that it's holding out our own inward motivations and comparing them to Jonah's.

Do you mind me asking (if you remember that is) what book it was? I remember reading "The Prodigal Prophet" by Tim Keller and really enjoying it.

 

[Tranquil Bondservant]

"there is nothing outside the man which can defile him if it goes into him; but the things which proceed out of the man are what defile the man." (Mark 7:15)
"And He was saying, “That which proceeds out of the man, that is what defiles the man." (Mark 7:20)

The act of becoming unclean is because of disobedience to the command of God, not that the thing is unclean in of itself. I.e., if a man of the time touches a corpse he is defiled not because the corpse is unclean, but because he has disobeyed God. The defilement thereby proceeds out of him.

"The Pharisees came out and began to argue with Him, seeking from Him a sign from heaven, to test Him. Sighing deeply in His spirit, He said, “Why does this generation seek for a sign? Truly I say to you, no sign will be given to this generation.” (Mark 8:11-12)

Only someone who was aware of previous generations and their motives would say something like this. Christ is unique and can say this because He is God.

 

[Tranquil Bondservant]

"Jesus gave them permission. And coming out, the unclean spirits entered the swine; and the herd rushed down the steep bank into the sea, about two thousand of them; and they were drowned in the sea." (Mark 5:13)
"And they began to implore Him to leave their region." (Mark 5:17)

This might seem like a lot, and it is, but animal husbandry was much more common and prevalent back then. One can make this plain by asking a simple question; how many pigs would have been killed or taken (i.e., as part of the baggage train) with a single Roman legion? The number would be similar to the amount driven off the cliff here. Obviously the one who owned the herd (or multiple people owning it) was on the wealthy end, but still, this number is not outrageous at all and was probably more common than most people think.

You also have people preferring to send away their salvation both out of fear of The One who performed the miracle and also assumedly because of the amount of wealth lost. I wonder if part of the fear came from the fact that they did indeed lose so much money? I can't imagine that the town would have been a popular place to graze animals near after this event, which would mean a decrease in trade and etc.

Additionally, I don't know if it's worth noting or not, but an interesting point is that the unclean spirits went into an unclean animal.

 

[DragonFox91]

Those are awesome points. I've always liked how the book of Jonah ends; how it ends on a question that is essentially a cliff hanger. It feels directed towards the person reading it and that it's holding out our own inward motivations and comparing them to Jonah's.

Do you mind me asking (if you remember that is) what book it was? I remember reading "The Prodigal Prophet" by Tim Keller and really enjoying it.

It was The Love of God by John McArthur

(I was just reading another thread someone really criticizing John McArthur, so if you don't like him, I've only read a couple of his books, but I find his teachings pretty sound)

 

[Tranquil Bondservant]

It was The Love of God by John McArthur

(I was just reading another thread someone really criticizing John McArthur, so if you don't like him, I've only read a couple of his books. I find his teaching pretty sound)

I used to be a Calvinist and liked him a lot then, however after I came out of that system and I've matured in faith I've come to be averse to a lot of his stuff. I really do like his teachings on Alcohol and other topics, but he goes way too far with his condemnation of Pentecostals (ignore my SDA tag I need to change it) and gifts of the Spirit that it's very, very off-putting and I can't bring myself to engage with any of his material anymore. I do get why people like him and if they don't feel the same way I do then he can be very helpful.

 

[DragonFox91]

I used to be a Calvinist and liked him a lot then, however after I came out of that system and I've matured in faith I've come to be averse to a lot of his stuff. I really do like his teachings on Alcohol and other topics, but he goes way too far with his condemnation of Pentecostals (ignore my SDA tag I need to change it) and gifts of the Spirit that it's very, very off-putting and I can't bring myself to engage with any of his material anymore. I do get why people like him and if they don't feel the same way I do then he can be very helpful.

I think some churches are too closed-minded about the gifts of the Spirit. He doesn't talk about it in that book, but it is Calvinist, yes.

 

[Tranquil Bondservant]

I think some churches are too closed-minded about the gifts of the Spirit. He doesn't talk about it in that book, but it is Calvinist, yes.

He hosts a conference called "strange fire" which is specifically against what Continuationists would call "the gifts of the Spirit" and often uses the abuses of some Charismatics as a strawman against all who believe in it. I think it wouldn't be an understatement to say he's hostile to those who are Continuationists as he views the view as a perversion of God. I used to be able to listen to him and just simply disagree, however I no longer can. But like I said, if people get something from him then more power to them as I used to as well when I was a Calvinist and for some time after.

 

[Tranquil Bondservant]

"Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewal of your mind" -Romans 12:2

I always have found it interesting how we as Christians are able to be transformed by the renewing of our mind. The ability to have renewal be a source of transformation is something that is unique to God's children, for that which is renewed outside of the influence of The Holy Spirit remains the same. For example, when someone wakes up after a good sleep or rest feeling renewed they are still the same person who went to sleep but more of themselves (through having increased energy). Whereas our renewal means progress in our sanctification and in being conformed to the image of Christ. As Christians, meditating on the truth of The Lord and His holy Scripture is something that brings transformation through putting off our old self and it's something that can't replicated by any process in the world. For any other religion which claims this doesn't have the truth of Christ nor The Holy Spirit indwelling them, and their method of transformation doesn't actually transform but only conforms to the desires of the person seeking it (i.e., seeking transformation) or participating in it. Whereas our fleshly desires are not something which guides or provokes our desire for transformation, but instead are the target to be crucified and put to death. And if we keep walking steadfastly in the light of our God, hopefully they never become a source of sin again.

 

[Tranquil Bondservant]

"Obed-edom and Jeiel, the gatekeepers." -1 Chronicles 15:18
"Berechiah and Elkanah were gatekeepers for the ark." -1 Chronicles 15:23
"Obed-edom and Jehiah also were gatekeepers for the ark." -1 Chronicles 15:24

This is incredibly important as it shows how a skeptic would force their lens onto Scripture. If a Skeptic ended their reading at 1 Chronicles 15:23 they would say here that there is a contradiction in the text because it says there are assigned two different people that are gatekeepers of the ark, however, in v24 we’re told that the original two cited “also were gatekeepers for the ark”. If we are to remove the aforementioned statement in v24 a skeptic would claim that there exists a contradiction between the two. However, even if it were removed this proves that it wouldn’t be a contradiction, it would only prove that it was not mentioned that there were more than one pair/set of gatekeepers. Using an uncharitable lens will force an uncharitable reading; if we were to say that John Howard and Kevin Rudd were Prime Minister that wouldn’t be a contradiction, it just leaves out the detail of a change of office or party. The way the Skeptic’s lens is imposed on Scripture is unnatural and they do not treat any other form of facts this way, nor any other material they read.

Another example of this is 1 Chronicles 22:8 where we’re told by David “But the word of the LORD came to me, saying, ‘You have shed much blood and have waged great wars; you shall not build a house to My name, because you have shed so much blood on the earth before Me.”. Whereas earlier in 1 Chronicles 17:4-11 we’re told that The Lord said to David “Go and tell David My servant, ‘Thus says the LORD, “You shall not build a house for Me to dwell in;” (1 Chron 17:4). Both statements are concurrently true/correct. One just omits one of the reasons (i.e., the bloodshed) for David not being permitted to build The House of The Lord. The same way how when a person speaks about the same event multiple times they may omit specific things that happened for either their purposes in telling others about said event, or some other reasons. Leaving out specific events is not lying, nor even concealing; it’s just omitting something that happened. This is not contradiction, it’s just part of speech and expression.