Believers Armed and Dangerous

Lord of the Sabbath

Mark 2:23-28 (ESV)  ²³ One Sabbath he was going through the grainfields, and as they made their way, his disciples began to pluck heads of grain. ²⁴ And the Pharisees were saying to him, “Look, why are they doing what is not lawful on the Sabbath?” ²⁵ And he said to them, “Have you never read what David did, when he was in need and was hungry, he and those who were with him: ²⁶ how he entered the house of God, in the time of Abiathar the high priest, and ate the bread of the Presence, which it is not lawful for any but the priests to eat, and also gave it to those who were with him?” ²⁷ And he said to them, “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. ²⁸ So the Son of Man is lord even of the Sabbath.”

Jesus’ title as Lord of the Sabbath only appears three times in the Bible, all occurrences are in the New Testament, only in the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke), and only at one common event: the disciples picking heads of grain on the Sabbath.

The Complete Word Study Dictionary: New Testament tells us what the Greek word here for Lord means: “kurios: As the main possessor, owner, master, e.g., of property.” So, as Lord of the Sabbath , the Sabbath was Jesus’ to do with as He wished, to define as it was originally written by Him.

Mark is telling us as Lord of the Sabbath Jesus has total control over how the Sabbath is to be observed and interpreted, yet the Pharisees accused Him and His disciples of working on the Sabbath. 

They were taking grain from a field, though.  Isn’t that work?  About Matt. 12:8, where the same occurrence is recorded, Albert Barnes says the following in his Barnes’ Notes on the Old and New Testaments: “To crown all, Christ says that he was Lord of the Sabbath. He had a right to direct the manner of its observance—undoubted proof that he is divine.”

How is Barnes jumping to the conclusion that Jesus is claiming to be God here?  It was God who gave us the Sabbath, and the Sabbath Law predates the very Ten Commandments of Exodus chapter 20. Right after escaping Egypt, when Moses spoke to the Israelites concerning collection of the Manna, the Sabbath Law was to be observed: Ex. 16:29 (ESV)  See! The Lord has given you the Sabbath.  And breaking the Sabbath was punishable by death:  Ex. 35:2 (ESV)  Six days work shall be done, but on the seventh day you shall have a Sabbath of solemn rest, holy to the Lord. Whoever does any work on it shall be put to death. 

Did Jesus and His disciples really break the Sabbath Law God Himself gave to Moses?  Deut. 5:12-14  “ ‘Observe the Sabbath day, to keep it holy, as the Lord your God commanded you. ¹³ Six days you shall labor and do all your work, ¹⁴ but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the Lord your God. On it you shall not do any work, you or your son or your daughter or your male servant or your female servant, or your ox or your donkey or any of your livestock, or the sojourner who is within your gates, that your male servant and your female servant may rest as well as you.

It all seems pretty plain, the disciples were not to “work” on the Sabbath, and Deut. 5 says they must not do any work.  So, maybe this was enough to get into trouble, but the supreme authority on the Sabbath, the Lord of the Sabbath, interpreted it just as plainly.

Maybe the Apostle John had this event in mind when He wrote John 5:18, This was why the Jews were seeking all the more to kill him, because not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.

Why is this important?

So much of Scripture either points to the deity of Jesus or implies it.  This passage in Mark and the parallel passages in both Matthew and Luke support His deity.  Jesus is Lord not just of the Sabbath but all including the Sabbath: “even of the Sabbath,” as Mark tells us.

In our world, there are many who would deny Jesus is God and tell us He was just a great moral teacher.  I don’t think that option is open to us as C. S. Lewis says in his book, Mere Christianity:

“I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him [that is, Christ]: ‘I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept His claim to be God.’ That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic–on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg–or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse…. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come up with any patronising nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.”

*** Just a personal note: Monday, July 1, 2024 will mark seven years this blog has been online and has offered 368 posts. God is good!

Matt. 3:7 (ESV)  But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to his baptism, he said to them, “You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come?

We looked at the Pharisees a while back.  Now let’s look at the Sadducees, another party of Jews at the time of Jesus.  John the Baptist certainly didn’t think highly of them as we can see from Matt. 3:7, but just who were they?

The Sadducees may have derived their name from Zadok, the High Priest during King David’s reign.  This has some merit since the High Priests were chosen from their ranks.  However, our information is sketchy at best.  The main sources of information we have on the Sadducees are the New Testament documents and the first century Jewish historian, Josephus.  Josephus, himself, was a Pharisee, so his description of the Sadducees should be taken with a grain of salt.  In the New Testament, we see the Sadducees as antagonists and very little of any benefit they provided.  So neither source was directed at understanding them.

We often see the Pharisees and Sadducees mentioned together in the New Testament, yet there were several differences, some major.  The Pharisees were strict in their adherence to the Law and other restrictions they has forced upon the people.  The Sadducees were more the sort of “go along to get along” party leaning toward Hellenism and often cooperating with their Roman oppressors. 

Josephus’s first mention of the Sadducees is in the fourth century b.c., but nothing much is known of them until the century before Jesus when they supported the Romans in the appointment of Hyrcanus as High Priest.

It seems the fact Jesus was preaching was of little interest to the Sadducees until He claimed to be the Messiah and a threat to Roman rule.  It was at that time Jesus’s troubles with the Sadducees began and continued until His crucifixion. 

After the resurrection of Christ, the Pharisees lost most of their interest in the followers of Jesus, but the Sadducees continued to see them as a threat to their Roman friends. It was the Sadducees who arrested many in the early church:

Acts 4:1-3 (ESV)  And as they were speaking to the people, the priests and the captain of the temple and the Sadducees came upon them, ² greatly annoyed because they were teaching the people and proclaiming in Jesus the resurrection from the dead. ³ And they arrested them and put them in custody until the next day, for it was already evening.

When the Pharisees are mentioned in the book of Acts, we see them arguing with the Sadducees and Paul getting the best of them both:

Acts 23:6-10 (ESV)  ⁶ Now when Paul perceived that one part were Sadducees and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, “Brothers, I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees. It is with respect to the hope and the resurrection of the dead that I am on trial.” ⁷ And when he had said this, a dissension arose between the Pharisees and the Sadducees, and the assembly was divided. ⁸ For the Sadducees say that there is no resurrection, nor angel, nor spirit, but the Pharisees acknowledge them all. ⁹ Then a great clamor arose, and some of the scribes of the Pharisees’ party stood up and contended sharply, “We find nothing wrong in this man. What if a spirit or an angel spoke to him?” ¹⁰ And when the dissension became violent, the tribune, afraid that Paul would be torn to pieces by them, commanded the soldiers to go down and take him away from among them by force and bring him into the barracks.

Notice we see here some differences in beliefs between the Pharisees and Sadducees. The Sadducees didn’t believe in angels, spirits, or their own bodily resurrection but the Pharisees did.

Even among the Jewish Christians at the Jerusalem Council, there were some Pharisees who continued to push for the Law to be observed:

Acts 15:5 (ESV)  But some believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees rose up and said, “It is necessary to circumcise them and to order them to keep the law of Moses.”

People are people.  It’s part of the human condition to resist change from what you know, and this was true of the converted Pharisees, Sadducees, and all within the new faith.  So much changed for them including even the day they worshiped, no animal sacrifices, no circumcision, so many things.  I feel sorry for those first century Jews having to feel their way through what is still kept from their old faith and what has changed.

By 200 a.d., the Sadducees had disappeared.  For the most part, the Pharisees became the Jews we see today.  

Why is this important?

We need to see those outside our faith often have no clue at all of what we believe.  We had dinner this week with some neighbors who are Bahai, a Persian monotheistic religion.  My wife and I have very little exposure or understanding of the Bahai faith, so we were curious.  Our neighbors were just as curious about our faith as we were about theirs.  As Christians we need to talk with folks outside our faith to gain a better understanding of how little many of them understand or misunderstand about Christianity and to familiarize ourselves with the faiths of others.

Ever wonder why Paul, the apostle to the Gentiles, spent so much time in synagogues?  There were  Greeks who attended synagogue services in the cities he visited, and Paul was able to evangelize them along with the Jews there:

Acts 14:1 (ESV)  Now at Iconium [Paul and Barnabas] entered together into the Jewish synagogue and spoke in such a way that a great number of both Jews and Greeks believed.

These Greeks were called “God-Fearers.”  Why did they attend Jewish services?  There were some personal drawbacks to worshiping their pagan gods: there was legalized (and endorsed) adultery in their culture which damaged families, gods were prayed to without corresponding answers, and there was a plethora of gods for various purposes to keep track of.  Judaism offered a much more moral and stable faith with a God who was there, who listened, who answered prayer, and the Jews seemed happier and more confident in their faith.  So, we see Greeks attending synagogues.  It turns out the God-Fearers became very important in the development of the early church.

These Greeks learned from the teachings at the synagogues and as a result lived lives similar in many respects to the Jews.  Many of the women became Jewish converts but only a few of the men did due to the required circumcision.  Men didn’t want to submit themselves to the pain and possible infection of the ritual.

So, since most synagogues had Gentile attenders, they were a perfect source for converts to the new Christian faith.  Christianity carried the same moral values, prayed to the same God, but did not have the requirement of circumcision.

A problem arose, however, when the Jewish converts would not eat with the newly converted Greeks.  Jewish dietary rules were stricter than those of the pagan culture, and Jews would not eat at the same table as the Greeks who ate strangled animals.  James’ church in Jerusalem was still very Jewish in its culture and much of it’s practices, so when they heard the Gentile converts were still eating food which was strangled, they sent representatives who reacted very poorly.  This is described in Paul’s letter to the Galatian churches some of which are mentioned in Acts 14: Lystra, Antioch, and Iconium.

In Paul’s letter to the Galatian church, he describes this problem in which even Peter was involved:

Gal. 2:11-14 (ESV)  But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. For before certain men came from James, he was eating with the Gentiles; but when they came he drew back and separated himself, fearing the circumcision party. And the rest of the Jews acted hypocritically along with him, so that even Barnabas was led astray by their hypocrisy. But when I saw that their conduct was not in step with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas before them all, “If you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews?”

Since the church could not continue on as one body if some refused to eat with others within the assembly, a decision needed to be made.  This brought on the Jerusalem Council of Acts 15.  The verdict of the apostles and elders there was this:

Acts. 15:28-29 (ESV)  “For it has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay on you no greater burden than these requirements: that you abstain from what has been sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from what has been strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell.”

This decision told James’ parishioners and the Judaizers who believed one must become Jewish to be saved, that they were in the wrong to require the Mosaic Law be placed on the Gentile converts. It also kept the very moral standards which attracted the God-Fearers to begin with.

Another problem with the Greek converts was they didn’t understand much of the Jewish terminology and practices mentioned in church sermons.  The church made an attempt to teach them, and some set up a three year “school” to do this.  This only opened the door to the Judaizers once again to push their views on these converts.

Why is this important?

I think we can learn a couple of things from this.  First we need to understand the mindset of those entering into a church for the first time or hearing the gospel clearly presented for the first time.  This must seem foreign to them.

A friend of mine was so unfamiliar with Christianity after first accepting Christ she called her Bible “the Book the pastor gave me.”

It is our job to make Christianity understandable even to those least informed about it.  The other side of the coin is that we must understand the culture and mindset of those who have entered our churches, our spheres of influence, and those we’ve met in society.  Our Christianity must include understanding and to be understandable.  I have a saying when I teach: “If you don’t understand something well enough to explain it to someone else, then you don’t really understand it.” We need to understand our faith and those with whom we share it.

Matt. 10:4  (ESV)  Simon the Zealot, and Judas Iscariot, who betrayed him.

We’ve all heard of Simon the Zealot, one of Jesus’ disciples, but who were the Zealots exactly?

The Zealots were one of five major Jewish Sects of the first century Flavius Josephus lists in his histories: Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes, Sicarii, and, of course, the Zealots.

F. F. Bruce, in his New Testament History (p. 93), says the term zealot, “ may denote not only a zeal in the common sense but a religious jealousy for the exclusive honour of Israel’s God against anyone or anything that threatened to diminish his honor.”

About 167 b.c., the Greek king, Antiochus IV Epiphanes, robbed the Jewish temple of its wealth, outlawed the Jewish religion, and ordered only pagan sacrifices would be allowed.  In 1 Maccabees, we are told how the Maccabean Revolt in 167 b.c. against Antiochus Epiphanes was started by Mattathias Maccabaeus, a man zealous for God: 

1 Maccabees 2:23-28  “. . . there came one of the Jews in the sight of all to sacrifice on the altar which was at Modin, according to the king’s commandment. ²⁴ Which thing when Mattathias saw, he was inflamed with zeal, and his reins trembled, neither could he forbear to shew his anger according to judgment: wherefore he ran, and slew him upon the altar. ²⁵ Also the king’s commissioner, who compelled men to sacrifice, he killed at that time, and the altar he pulled down. ²⁶ Thus dealt he zealously for the law of God like as Phinees did unto Zambri the son of Salom.

“²⁷ And Mattathias cried throughout the city with a loud voice, saying, Whosoever is zealous of the law, and maintaineth the covenant, let him follow me. ²⁸ So he and his sons fled into the mountains, and left all that ever they had in the city.” (KJV with Apocrypha)

The Maccabeans defeated King Antiochus IV and eventually gained their independence (and semi-independence under the Hasmonean Dynasty 140-63 b.c.) until the Romans annexed Israel in 63 b.c.

The Zealots of the time of Jesus traced their movement directly back to Mattathias Maccabaeus, but Israel has had people zealous for the purity of the faith since Zimri and his Midianite wife were killed by Phinehas (Num. 25:6-6) to forestall the wrath of God and return the Israelite faith to it’s purity.

The Zealots swore to protect the faith at all costs.  One faction strove to accomplish this by peaceful means while others saw their duty to also include violence to gain the freedom of the nation of Israel against the occupying Romans.

Pilate offered to free either Jesus or a “robber” named Barabbas at the time of Jesus’ sentencing to crucifixion.  The crowd chose to save Barabbas.  Since he was found guilty not just of robbery but also of sedition, many scholars believe Barabbas may well have been one of these nationalistic zealots.

It  should be mentioned it was a group of Zealots who bravely gave their lives at the last stand against the Romans at Masada in 72 a.d.

Why is this important?

Our own zeal for the Lord is commended throughout the Bible.  Paul tells the church in Corinth:

2 Cor. 9:1-2 (ESV)  Now it is superfluous for me to write to you about the ministry for the saints, ² for I know your readiness, of which I boast about you to the people of Macedonia, saying that Achaia has been ready since last year. And your zeal has stirred up most of them.

Jude 3 tells us,  (NASB)  Beloved, while I was making every effort to write you about our common salvation, I felt the necessity to write to you appealing that you contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints.  

In many churches all over the world, the world has crept into the message.  Sermons are about current events leaving out our need for zeal toward the purity and accuracy of the biblical faith God commands.  Let us never turn from our zealousness for God and for His Word.

When I read the New Testament in general and the epistles in particular, I often find statements that are made without examples to give us the feel of what is being said.  As a result, these statements stick in my head rather than moving to my heart for understanding.  I’ve found the Old Testament often can give me those examples and give the feel of the New Testament claims:

Eph 2:8-9 (ESV)  For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.

If you’ve read this blog for a long time, you’ve seen at least three posts dedicated to grace, and I don’t think any of them describe it well.  It’s not the sort of thing cold words can portray.  Grace is much more a first person sort of thing. We need to experience it to understand it.  This can be done through personal familiarity or example, story-telling.  Hebrew is an excellent language for narratives, and we can better understand the principles laid out in the New Testament statements by looking at Old Testament stories.

In the New Testament, we are called joint heirs, brothers, children of God, etc.  What that means is hard to fully explain as well.  What I’d like to do is look at a story from the Old Testament that demonstrates these principles for us from 2 Samuel chapter 9:

9:1 (NASB) Then David said, “Is there yet anyone left of the house of Saul, that I may show him kindness for Jonathan’s sake?” 2 Now there was a servant of the house of Saul whose name was Ziba, and they called him to David; and the king said to him, “Are you Ziba?” And he said, “I am your servant.” 3 And the king said, “Is there not yet anyone of the house of Saul to whom I may show the kindness of God?” And Ziba said to the king, “There is still a son of Jonathan who is crippled in both feet.” 4 So the king said to him, “Where is he?” And Ziba said to the king, “Behold, he is in the house of Machir the son of Ammiel in Lo-debar.” 5 Then King David sent and brought him from the house of Machir the son of Ammiel, from Lo-debar. 6 And Mephibosheth, the son of Jonathan the son of Saul, came to David and fell on his face and prostrated himself. And David said, “Mephibosheth.” And he said, “Here is your servant!” 7 And David said to him, “Do not fear, for I will surely show kindness to you for the sake of your father Jonathan, and will restore to you all the land of your grandfather Saul; and you shall eat at my table regularly.” 8 Again he prostrated himself and said, “What is your servant, that you should regard a dead dog like me?”

9 Then the king called Saul’s servant Ziba, and said to him, “All that belonged to Saul and to all his house I have given to your master’s grandson. 10 “And you and your sons and your servants shall cultivate the land for him, and you shall bring in the produce so that your master’s grandson may have food; nevertheless Mephibosheth your master’s grandson shall eat at my table regularly.” Now Ziba had fifteen sons and twenty servants. 11 Then Ziba said to the king, “According to all that my lord the king commands his servant so your servant will do.” So Mephibosheth ate at David’s table as one of the king’s sons. 12 And Mephibosheth had a young son whose name was Mica. And all who lived in the house of Ziba were servants to Mephibosheth. 13 So Mephibosheth lived in Jerusalem, for he ate at the king’s table regularly. Now he was lame in both feet.

This passage takes place just after David has settled in as king.  The fighting is pretty much over, and he can take the time to contemplate what to do next.  The first thing he asks is the same as all new kings asked at that time: “Is there any family left of the previous king who might still have a claim on my throne?”

David didn’t ask this question because he wanted to kill the descendants of Saul but to reward them.  David had made a promise to Jonathan not to harm his descendants: 

1 Sam. 20:15 (NASB) “And you shall not cut off your lovingkindness from my house forever, not even when the Lord cuts off every one of the enemies of David from the face of the earth.”

So, to honor his promise, David sought out Jonathan’s descendents, and Mephibosheth was found.  Now he was lame in both feet.  This is mentioned twice in the passage.  Kings didn’t have handicapped people in their entourage.  It would make the king look weak.  However, inclusion of a handicapped man only made David look gracious.

There are two main conversations in the passage: the conversation the King had with Ziba and the conversation he had with Mephibosheth.  Note David is called “the king” when talking with Ziba but is called by his name when talking with Mephibosheth.  I think this implies a familiarity, a “welcome to the family” attitude on David’s part.

Why is this important?

There are a lot of parallels with this story and the Christian’s relationship with our King.  Mephibosheth had nothing to do with the event that brought him to David’s court.  The deal had been made years earlier and far from David’s court.  When I see Jesus, I think my reaction will be much like Mephibosheth’s, to lie prostrate asking what such a great King would have to do with me. According to Jude 24, He will rejoice at our being there.

Mephibosheth was flawed as are we.  We are handicapped with sin, but the King doesn’t see that in His children, only His love for us.  It is the grace we see in David’s treatment of Mephibosheth that points to the even greater grace with which God treats us.

A friend and I were talking generally about the countless sins of which God has forgiven us and about the trials He has guided us through and comforted us during.  When trying to recall those specific sins and trials, few come to mind.  What we remember is God’s grace, and His faithfulness in all things.  Even the outcast, the infirm, the unworthy, can have a place at the King’s table forever.

John 20:17 (ESV)  Jesus said to her, “Do not cling to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to my brothers and say to them, ‘I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.’ ”

If Jesus is God, how can He have a God?  I hear this quite a bit, and the question really just comes down to the nature(s) of Jesus.  Is Jesus a man?  Of course He is:

Rom. 5:15-17 (ESV)  But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if many died through one man’s trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many. ¹⁶ And the free gift is not like the result of that one man’s sin. For the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses brought justification. ¹⁷ For if, because of one man’s trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ.

From this passage, we see Jesus is as much a man as Adam was.  Paul equates their humanity in a corresponding way: “A man got us into this, and it was a man who got us out.”

So, when we see Jesus praying to God (the Father) from the cross in Luke 23:34 it is the man Jesus praying to His God. 

Another indication of Jesus’ humanity is to the man, Jesus, the Father is greater than He:

John 14:28 (ESV)  You have heard Me say to you, ‘I am going away and coming back to you.’ If you loved Me, you would rejoice because I said, ‘I am going to the Father,’ for My Father is greater than I.

Of course the Father is greater than the man, Jesus.  He is greater than all men, angels, and all the heavenly host. Note the word is “greater” and not “better.” “Greater” indicates rank. “Better” indicates nature.

The Bible also says Jesus is God as well as man, so how does that work?  There are quite a few passages in Scripture which point out Jesus is God.  For instance, He claims to be equal to the Father in John 5:18  (ESV)  This was why the Jews were seeking all the more to kill him, because not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.

Some other verses which point to the deity of Christ are Matt. 1:23; John 1:1, 14, 20:28; Rom. 9:5; 1 Cor. 8:6; Titus 2:13; 2 Peter 1:1 and many others.

Let’s not misunderstand this.  Jesus is both God and man: 100% God and 100% man.  He is not a blend like cards shuffled in a deck.  He is both God and man in nature.  These are not mutually exclusive.  Think of a ball bearing.  It is 100% spherical and 100% stainless steel.  There is no conflict in nature.  In the same way, Jesus is all man and all God. 

We cannot reduce one nature to emphasize the other.  When faced with questions like “How can God have a God,” we are often tempted to limit one or another of Jesus’ natures.  Maybe He’s more man than God and needs to pray to His father.  After all, Phil. 2:7 (ESV) says “[He] emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men.  He must have emptied Himself of something.  Maybe it was His divinity.

Or maybe He is more God than man and forgive sins, work miracles, speak the will of God.

Why is this important?

It turns out the Greek word for emptied in the ESV translation in Phil. 5:7 is kenoo and is translated very differently in other translations.  The NIV says Jesus “made himself nothing.”  The New King James says Jesus “made himself of no reputation.”  The ESV translates the same word where it appears in 1 Cor. 8:15 as “deprive.”  These aren’t really actions of Jesus emptying Himself of His deity but of stepping down from the position equal with the Father in order to accomplish the will of the Father.  We see this in verse 6 of Philippians 2.

So, I think the problem is with us, with our understanding.  The Bible plainly says Jesus is both God and man.  How exactly that works is for the theologians to argue – and believe me they have lots of theories on this.  It needs to be enough for us to accept what the Bible clearly states and accept it as written.  We can be assured however it works, it is the Father’s will which is accomplished by Jesus taking on human form.

We must conclude from the direct statements of Scripture.  The person, Jesus, has a God, but He is not the God He is praying to.  He is God the Son, the second person of the Trinity who prays to the Father, the first person of the Trinity.

Habakkuk 1:13 (ESV)  You [GOD] who are of purer eyes than to see evil and cannot look at wrong, why do you idly look at traitors and remain silent when the wicked swallows up the man more righteous than he?

A friend of mine asked me the other day: “If God cannot look upon evil, how can Satan stand in His presence” (Job 1:6)?

This got me thinking and bugged me enough to look into it.  The primary verse used to say God cannot even look upon evil is Habakkuk 1:13 (see above). 

The interesting thing about this passage, is a few verses earlier, Habakkuk seems to reverse himself and says God is actually looking at wrong.  So, the claim of the prophet is not that God cannot look at evil. It must mean something else:

Habakkuk 1:3 (ESV)  Why do you make me see iniquity, and why do you idly look at wrong? Destruction and violence are before me; strife and contention arise.

Looking at the big picture, Habakkuk’s prophecy is that God will use Assyria to punish Israel.  This prophecy was given around 640-615 b.c. and was fulfilled in 586 b.c.  Habakkuk is saying “How can an infinitely holy God stand by and allow this evil done to His people?”

The phrase “look at wrong” in both verses 3 and 13 of the first chapter of Habakkuk mean to look and tolerate wrong.  God can look at evil and have evil in His presence.  He just will not tolerate it forever.

In his Systematic Theology, Dr. Norman Geisler says,” God is so holy that He cannot look upon sin with approval (Hab. 1:13). Thus, He cannot overlook sin forever – it must eventually be punished.” (p. 601)

So, Geisler says the meaning of God’s “looking at wrong” is fuller than it seems.  It means looking with acceptance or tolerance.

Psalm 5:4-5 (ESV) also says God cannot dwell with evil:  For you are not a God who delights in wickedness; evil may not dwell with you.     The boastful shall not stand before your eyes; you hate all evildoers. You destroy those who speak lies; the Lord abhors the bloodthirsty and deceitful man.

This is another passage that addresses God’s non-acceptance of evil.  The Hebrew word here for dwell is gur and means to sojourn with or to greet with hospitality.  Again, it does not prohibit the existence of evil or sin near God but that it will be dealt with and not accepted or tolerated.

Why is this important?

To understand Scripture is an adventure we all enter into.  When we see what seems like a contradiction in God’s Word, we must dig deeper to settle it in our minds and settle it well enough to explain it to others.  When we are asked how Satan can stand in the presence of God when Habakkuk says God cannot so much as look upon evil, we have an apparent contradiction to resolve:

Job 1:6 (ESV)  Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan also came among them.

This verse and the passage in 2 Chronicles 18:18-22, where there is an evil spirit among the host of heaven who speaks to God and is used by Him to bring about the fall of Ahab, show us God will allow sin and evil in His midst but not accept it or tolerate it for long.

Lately, I’ve felt like God’s favored child, that God is paying special attention to me and blessing me greatly, but this is a common feeling among Christians.  We base this on the direct command in 1 John 1:9 (ESV)  If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.  We Christians have stood before God while deep in our sins and asked forgiveness.  Praise Him He forgave us and has forgiven the plethora of sins we have confessed since that day. 

That first day when we stood before God, we stood before Him as sinners, as sinful, yet due to His grace, we were allowed to stand before an absolutely holy God and plead the blood of Jesus as our payment for those sins. If God did not allow sin in His presence, how could we be forgiven?

Exodus 3:13-15   Then Moses said to God, “If I come to the people of Israel and say to them, ‘The God of your fathers has sent me to you,’ and they ask me, ‘What is his name?’ what shall I say to them?” ¹⁴ God said to Moses, “I am who I am.” And he said, “Say this to the people of Israel: ‘I am has sent me to you.’ ” ¹⁵ God also said to Moses, “Say this to the people of Israel: ‘[YHWH], the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, has sent me to you.’ This is my name forever, and thus I am to be remembered throughout all generations.

Last week, we looked at how God’s name is more than just a label: it can include His authority and power.  This week, we’re going to look at how God’s name is abused, misapplied, for instance.

Years ago I spoke with a Jehovah’s Witness and asked him how he knew his organization was God’s organization.  “Because we carry Jehovah’s name throughout the earth today,” he said.  My next question was “What if you have the wrong Jehovah?”  He said “There is only one Jehovah.”  So, I posed this series of questions: 1.  If a pagan worships, a tree is he worshiping Jehovah?”  “No.” was his response.  2.  “If the pagan cut down a part of that tree and brought it into his home and worshiped it, is he worshiping Jehovah?”  Again, the answer was “no.”  3.  What if he carved it into an idol and worshiped it?”  Not seeing where this was going, my JW friend was getting bored with the questions but again answered “No, he wouldn’t be worshiping Jehovah.”  4.  Then I asked “What if the pagan named the idol ‘Jehovah’?”  My friend got very agitated and angrily responded “No!  That’s not Jehovah!”  5.  “So, we can have the wrong Jehovah but believe we have the right one?”  I said.  “Your God, Jehovah, is as far from the true God of the Bible as that pagan’s idol.”

Mormons will often give similar support to the question “How do I know if you are Christians?”  They often will say “It’s right there in our name – The Church of Jesus Christ Latter Day Saints” when their Jesus is the physical offspring of God the Father and Jesus’ mother Mary through physical sexual relations.  That’s hardly the biblical Jesus.  Theirs is another Jesus.

2 Cor. 11:4 For if someone comes and proclaims another Jesus than the one we proclaimed, or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received, or if you accept a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it readily enough.

We need to be careful not to accept claims simply by believing their labels. Like Grape Nuts, which are neither grapes nor nuts, they may not be what they claim.

Christian Science would be a good example of this.  It’s neither Christian nor science.  Christian Science denies the church’s historical beliefs.  Their trinity, for instance, is “God the Father-Mother, Christ the spiritual idea of sonship, the Holy Comforter which is the divine Science” (Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures, pp. 331-332).

Why is this important?

As with Grape Nuts, we shouldn’t be deceived by labels.  Look at the contents.  We need to be careful.  Sometimes even the use of “Church” might throw some.  The Local Church, the Unification Church, the Church of Scientology or the United Pentacostal Church are cults which often will present themselves as a apart the Christian community.  Even the Watchtower has begun to lighten up on some of the restrictions placed on their Jehovah’s Witness so members might blend in better to the general community.  They are now allowed to wear beards and the women to wear pants when they go out “in service.”  For quite some time, they were calling themselves “Jehovah’s Christian Witnesses.”  The Mormon’s informational website is now called “thechurchofJesusChrist.org” skipping the identifying “Latter Day Saints” label.

Names are important but can be misused and abused.  There are people out there who would, knowingly or not, love to part us from our money but most of all from our Lord.  Unfortunately, this is true even within the church.  There are plenty of people who have slipped into less guarded, less careful, organizations and used the organization’s name to give themselves authority.  There is more heft, now,  to claim what they say is biblical then tell you you must send them “God’s money.” 

Jesus is the one Truth (John 14:6), but there are but a million lies all around us.  It is our responsibility to make sure we’re not tricked into believing any of these lies.  How can we recognize the counterfeits?  There’s no need.  If we know the genuine gospel well, the lies are easy to detect if needs be.

Ever notice how often the solution to error, false teaching, life’s problems, spiritual stagnation, etc. is to study God’s Word?  That’s why God gave it to us:

2 Tim. 3:16-17 (ESV)  All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.

So, even if an organization calls themselves “Christian,” has “Christian” in their name, or tries to align with Christian organizations to gain reputation, our job is to look to the contents of that organization.  What do they really teach and dies it align with Scripture?

In God’s Name

What does it exactly mean when someone says they will do something “in God’s Name?”  Is this some sort of Christian magic word: if we use God’s name everything we say and do will be successful?  David used God’s name when he stood up against Goliath:

1 Sam. 17:45 (ESV) Then David said to the Philistine, “You come to me with a sword and with a spear and with a javelin, but I come to you in the name of the Lord of hosts, the God of the armies of Israel, whom you have defied.

Did David mean He not only could use God’s holy name to be successful but also must mention His name?  I don’t think so. He was warning Goliath he had the power and authority of the God of the universe behind him.

As in English, the word “name” has several meanings in both Hebrew and Greek.  In Hebrew, it can mean reputation as when Nimrod and his followers decided to build the Tower of Babel:

Gen. 11:4  (ESV)  Then they said, “Come, let us build ourselves a city and a tower with its top in the heavens, and let us make a name for ourselves, lest we be dispersed over the face of the whole earth.”

These guys wanted to become famous, to make a name for themselves.  So name can just mean fame or reputation in Hebrew.

The same is true of Greek. The word name can mean power and authority as when we hear “in the name of the law.”

Acts 4:7 (ESV)  And when they had set them in the midst, they inquired, “By what power or by what name did you do this?

I want to pause here for a moment and make it clear that, of course, name in the Bible usually means just what we use it for most often, to identify a person, place, or thing:

Gen. 3:20 (ESV)  The man called his wife’s name Eve, because she was the mother of all living.

The problem is when some folks believe a word must have only one meaning, one definition.  When we pray, we rightfully usually end with “In the name of Jesus” because Jesus told us to in John 14:14:

If you ask me anything in my name, I will do it.

Even here, asking in Jesus name is simply asking using the authority and power of Christ in our prayers.  It’s not some lucky token to assure our prayers.  We are praying to Jesus, the Father, the Holy Spirit asking for their power and authority to act on our behalf, so in effect, we are praying in the name of the Lord.

In the New Testament, God’s personal name, Yahweh, doesn’t appear in any of the more than 5,500 Greek manuscripts we’ve found.  God’s personal name wasn’t important for the early church, just His power and authority in the person of Jesus Christ.  Jesus taught us to pray to the Father or to Himself (Matt. 6:9; John 14:14).  So, those who believe we must pray in the actual personal name of “Jehovah” don’t have a leg to stand on. 

Jehovah’s Witnesses, being one of these groups for instance, have inserted the name “Jehovah” 237 times into the New Testament in order to uphold their claim they speak for Jehovah God.  Even though Jehovah’s Witnesses have done this arbitrarily, their New World Translation has Jesus mentioning “Jehovah” only 22 times.  20 of these are Old Testament quotes which contain God’s name and 2 times in Mark but never in prayer.  Even when Jesus taught us to pray, as mentioned earlier, He told us to pray using “Father” to address God the Father (Matt. 6:9).

Why is this important?

Knowing God’s name is not as necessary as knowing God.  If we understand doing things in the name of Jesus Christ or the name of the Lord, we are just asking God to give His power and authority to us to accomplish the task He has given us to do. 

Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were great men of God yet never knew God’s personal name, and they seemed to get along just fine:

Exodus 6:2-3 (ESV) God spoke to Moses and said to him, “I am the LORD. 3 I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as God Almighty, but by my name the LORD I did not make myself known to them.

There’s no magic in the name.  In fact, the name “Jehovah,” for instance, isn’t really God’s name.  It was invented by a Catholic monk named Martini in the 13^th century.  God’s personal name is four Hebrew Letters, all consonants and no vowels: YHVH or YHWH are as close as we get to it in English.  The commonly used “Yaweh” is these four consonants with the vowels added to make pronunciation easier.

God’s name was considered too holy to be pronounced by the Old Testament Jews and by many Jews today, so it was never pronounced, only written.  The correct pronunciation was lost over the years.  Some think it was lost when the Roman general, Titus, destroyed the Temple at Jerusalem in 70 a.d.

So, we know to Whom we should pray: the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit, or just use the general term “God.”  We can use the name Yahweh or Jehovah if we like.  The point is God wants to hear from us and wants to include us in His work.  Joining with Him to minister to others is to work in the name of the Lord.

Does God Use Evil Spirits?

I came across a passage in 1 Kings this week while researching something entirely different and have been intrigued by it since:

1 Kings 22:19-23 (ESV)  And Micaiah said, “Therefore hear the word of the Lord: I saw the Lord sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing beside him on his right hand and on his left; ²⁰ and the Lord said, ‘Who will entice Ahab, that he may go up and fall at Ramoth-gilead?’ And one said one thing, and another said another. ²¹ Then a spirit came forward and stood before the Lord, saying, ‘I will entice him.’ ²² And the Lord said to him, ‘By what means?’ And he said, ‘I will go out, and will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.’ And he said, ‘You are to entice him, and you shall succeed; go out and do so.’ ²³ Now therefore behold, the Lord has put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these your prophets; the Lord has declared disaster for you.”

It looks like “all the host of heaven” includes demons or evil spirits.  One of these spirits came before God to volunteer his malevolent service in the employment of God as the evil spirit he was – a lying spirit in the mouths of false prophets but still under God’s authority and to do His will.

Now, anyone who has read the book of Job knows even Satan is under God’s authority.  It’s the fact here in 1 Kings that someone volunteered to do evil and that God okayed it in the interest of His plan to overthrow King Ahab.

So I got to wondering about God sending evil spirits like this to do His work.  If God is omnibenevolent – infinitely good – and His plan is just and good, then why use an evil spirit to accomplish it?  “On top of this,” I thought, “what’s in it for the spirit?” 

I don’t have a clue what’s in it for the spirit unless he gets some unmentioned benefit or it’s just part of his nature he must favor God’s will.

I’m convinced the spirit God used in the above text is evil because it does something evil.  It speaks lies through the false prophets.  As Eddie, a friend of mine, likes to quote his mom: “Sinners sin.  That’s what sinners do.”  Well, I think that can be applied here.  Evil spirits lie.  That’s what lying spirits do.

Then I thought about why God might send an evil spirit.  Certainly in the above case, He wanted Ahab to believe the lies he so desperately wanted to believe and lose the battle.  I started to think God could use evil spirits in other ways as well.

So, I started to think of who else God might have sent evil spirits to.  “Well,” I thought, “There was the evil spirit God sent to torment Saul.”

1 Sam. 16:14-15 (NASB)  14 Now the Spirit of the Lord departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the Lord terrorized him. 15 Saul’s servants then said to him, “Behold now, an evil spirit from God is terrorizing you.

This has always been an important passage personally to me.  In October of 1975, God sent an evil spirit to me.  That night, after my wife fell asleep, the spirit stood at the foot of our bed.  I couldn’t see anything, but I could certainly sense the evil that was present.  It stayed there for about an hour and scared me to death.

During the previous six months, I had fought God’s attempts at getting me to turn control of my life over to Him.  I had someone in control of my life when I was a child, and it was terrible.  I didn’t want to enter into a similar relationship with God in case I couldn’t trust Him.

The arrival of the evil spirit in my room allowed God to show me where my choice would take me if I made the wrong one.  It was clear a decision needed to be made. I had to choose eternity with either this guy or God.  I chose God as a result, and have never been happier.  So, sometimes God sends an evil spirit for good.  Perhaps He did this with Saul, but Saul “chose poorly.”

Why is this important?

There are things God does that seem out of place to us but are well within His character.  Evil is ungodliness, and God cannot be both godly and ungodly.  Being ungodly is not in His nature, of course.  Yet, evil speaks to many where godliness does not.  God may well allow evil to accomplish His purposes here on earth. As in my case and others, in fact, it may be necessary.

The Nazi’s murder of six million Jews during WWII is the epitome of evil, yet without it I doubt the nation of Israel would exist today.  God may well have used the Nazi evil to bring about His fulfilled prophecy.

As I’ve said in the past, I’m not sure exactly how much our lives here on earth rate in importance in God’s plan.  We are here to represent Him to others, to share His gospel, to live in a way that attracts the lost to His kingdom, but I’m not convinced outside of those exceptions whether it’s important to God that I die quietly in my bed on my one hundredth birthday or in an automobile accident at age fifty.  It is our next life that greatly concerns Him: whether I die as a believer and have accomplished my assigned tasks.

This is something for us all to think about.  God cannot sin, He can’t do evil things, but it seems He can allow evil things to take place under His control in order to further His divine plan.