Sunday Morning Greek Blog

July 22, 2013

A Tale of Two Brothers (In Memoriam)

Filed under: Grace,Psalms — Scott Stocking @ 10:03 pm

Reposting this from 2013. My uncle passed away this past week, so this is my tribute to him.

—————

I’m not sure exactly how to write this post. It’s going to be more of a stream of consciousness, I think, but I hope you appreciate the story I’m about to tell.

The Accident

My reflection process began about three weeks ago. Just before the Fourth of July, my dad was fishing on the Missouri River up by Fort Calhoun with my uncle on his pontoon boat. He was casting his line, when it got stuck close to shore. Instead of cutting the line and putting another hook on, my 73-year old dad, who never learned to swim, decided to get out of the boat and walk up the shore to free the line. Evidently, they were close enough to a shallow part of the river for him to do that. As he was walking along the shore, his foot slipped on a rock, his heel caught between two other rocks, and he fell and broke both bones in his lower leg, one of them in two places. My uncle called 911, and the ambulance came and took him to the hospital, where they fixed him up. He’s recovering nicely now, but he’ll be using a walker or cane for some time yet. That’s the happy ending.

The Relationship

Now I said my dad was with my uncle, but my Uncle Larry is not my dad’s brother. He’s dad’s ex-brother-in-law, my mom’s youngest sibling and only brother. My mom has two other sisters; one died a few years ago, and she still has a close relationship with the other. For reasons I don’t know and that aren’t really relevant to this story, the family dynamics changed over 25 years ago when my mom and dad divorced. The bottom line is that a rift developed between my mom and her little brother such that they haven’t had any meaningful contact, except perhaps at a couple funerals, for over 25 years. (I love my mom deeply, and I understand her pain. She and her husband have been a huge support to me in getting back on my feet after my divorce, and I will never be able to repay her for that. I have no ill-will toward anyone.) Yet my dad, himself the youngest of two and the only boy, has maintained a friendship with him all these years. They’ve gone fishing together quite often; he’s attended my uncle’s Fourth of July fish fry celebration almost every year (he missed it this year, obviously); and he even helped my uncle build a huge garage on his country property.

The accident on the river gave me a lot of time to reflect, especially since my dad was in the Blair hospital, and I had plenty of time to think driving back and forth. Why did my dad and uncle click and maintain that friendship all this years in spite of my mom’s rift with him? Here’s my theory. I have no objective way of knowing if this is true, but it makes sense for me, and as it began to make sense for me while I was driving, I got all teary-eyed. I got the sense that God had given me insight into a situation that might help bring healing to all involved.

The Theory

My dad and uncle are both the youngest and only boys in their respective families. My dad had lots of male cousins growing up that he could hang out with, but most were a bit younger than he was. I’m sure my uncle had plenty of male friends too, and I never knew too many of my mom’s cousins, because most of them had moved away from Nebraska. So when my dad married into my mom’s family, dad got his first “brother.” Now when Larry got married, he married a woman who had brothers only for siblings. Culturally, her family was very much like my dad’s side of the family, and my dad clicked almost immediately with my uncle’s wife’s family. Dad had also maintained a friendship with my uncle’s wife’s brother for several years, so he was no stranger to that family.

What I think is significant here is that my dad had found the brothers he never had as a kid, and my uncle and his wife’s family never blinked twice about considering my dad family. When I realized the power of that bond, that’s when I got all teary-eyed. It brought some healing to me in my own situation. I hope it brings healing to the rest of my family as well.

(I should add that my mom’s sister married, and is still married to, a pastor. He’s a great man, and my dad has no animosity toward him, but since my dad wasn’t the religious type, he never clicked with my mom’s brother-in-law like he clicked with her brother, my Uncle Larry.)

My Own Story

The more I reflected, the more I saw how this might influence my own life and the life of my kids. My son is the oldest of my three and the only boy, and he has two girl cousins who live nearby in Illinois. My siblings all had boys, and they all had them before my now-ex and I started having kids. Add to that one of them lived in Arkansas and the other two in Nebraska, and Alec rarely had any interaction with them. This past Father’s Day was an absolute blast for all of us. My dad and I and my three kids went to Rushmore and to my dad’s sister’s cabin in Wyoming. All of my kids had a blast, but my son really impressed me on so many levels. We connected in a way we hadn’t in a quite a while. I’m proud of my kids, I’m proud of my parents, and I’m proud of their families too. I can only wonder if this insight is part of the reason why God called me back to Nebraska three years ago. There’s still work to do in my family.

And now, a word from Psalms 126–127 to wrap this up:

126:1 When the Lord restored the fortunes of Zion,

we were like those who dreamed.

2 Our mouths were filled with laughter,

our tongues with songs of joy.

Then it was said among the nations,

“The Lord has done great things for them.”

3 The Lord has done great things for us,

and we are filled with joy.

4 Restore our fortunes, Lord,

like streams in the Negev.

5 Those who sow with tears

will reap with songs of joy.

6 Those who go out weeping,

carrying seed to sow,

will return with songs of joy,

carrying sheaves with them.

127:1 Unless the Lord builds the house,

the builders labor in vain.

Unless the Lord watches over the city,

the guards stand watch in vain.

2 In vain you rise early

and stay up late,

toiling for food to eat—

for he grants sleep to those he loves.

3 Children are a heritage from the Lord,

offspring a reward from him.

4 Like arrows in the hands of a warrior

are children born in one’s youth.

5 Blessed is the man

whose quiver is full of them.

They will not be put to shame

when they contend with their opponents in court.

Peace to all,

Pastor Scott Stocking, M.Div.

June 9, 2013

εὐθύς in Mark’s Gospel (Mark 1:3; Isaiah 40:3)

Filed under: Authorship,Christology,Eschatology,Evangelism,Faith, Faithfulness,Greek,Isaiah,Life of Christ,Mark Gospel of,New Testament,Septuagint — Scott Stocking @ 6:08 pm
Tags: , , ,

In this post:

  • The prophetic quotes in Mark 1:2–3
  • Thematic use of εὐθύς
  • Summary of the projects I’ve been working on
  • A personal note on my hiatus (moved to end 1/3/26)

Prophecy in Mark 1

As I started through Mark’s Gospel last week, looking at it in English and Greek, I noticed a few things worth mentioning. Mark opens his Gospel with quotes from Malachi 3:1 and Isaiah 40:3. I want to put the Isaiah and Mark passages side by side in Table 1 so you can see some interesting but relatively benign punctuation differences. Keep in mind that punctuation is a much later addition to the biblical text. The ancients didn’t waste papyrus and parchment with commas, dashes, quotation marks, or spaces between words!

Table 1

Isaiah 40:3 (NIV) Mark 1:3 (NIV)

3 A voice of one calling:

“In the wilderness prepare

the way for the Lord;

make straight in the desert

a highway for our God.

3 “a voice of one calling
in the wilderness,

‘Prepare the way for the Lord,

make straight paths for him.'”

Notice, for example, that the Isaiah quote has the one calling saying, “In the wilderness prepare the way for the Lord,” while the editors of Mark obviously see a reference to John the Baptizer here: “a voice of one calling in the wilderness.” The punctuation in the Isaiah passage is consistent with the accenting and format of the printed BHS text but again keep in mind that these are editorial decisions, not a part of the original text.

The Septuagint (LXX, Greek translation of OT which is the source of all OT quotes in the NT) has the quotation beginning at “Prepare,” but again, an editorial decision, since the beginning of a quotation in Greek is marked by a capital letter in the modern text, and the original Greek text was in all capital letters!

I don’t really perceive a significant difference in the meaning of the text one way or the other. In the Isaiah version, “wilderness” is probably figurative for any place or person who needs to be revived by God. In the LXX/Mark version, “wilderness” is a literal reference to the place where John was preaching. The important part of this verse in my mind is the last half: “Prepare the way for the Lord, make straight in the desert a highway for our God.”

εὐθύς

In one of my earliest blog posts, I made a passing reference to the fact that Mark uses the Greek adverb εὐθύς 41 times in his Gospel (by contrast, the word is used only 17 times in the rest of the New Testament). [NOTE: Strong’s has the adverb form as εὐθέως from the textus receptus, but modern eclectic texts use εὐθυς.) The word means “immediately” or “at once” as an adverb. However, the word is also an adjective that means “straight,” which is found in Mark 1:3 and the LXX translation of Isaiah 40:3. The Hebrew word in Isaiah 40:3 (ישׁר) has the idea of no turning to the left or right, and perhaps even making something level (see Prov. 4:25–27; cf. Heb. 12:13).

So what’s the big deal? Here it is: Mark is using the adverb form as thematic connection to the prophecy with which he opens his Gospel. Many probably think John the Baptizer is the one “preparing the way of the Lord,” but Mark’s repeated use of εὐθύς suggests that he’s portraying Jesus as the one “making straight” the way of the Lord. In Mark’s Gospel, then, εὐθύς represents the urgency with which Jesus went about his ministry. Aside from Jesus’s miracles, the fact that he was clearing the way of the legalism and unreasonable rules of the religious elite shows that Jesus was making the path to God more direct; he was making “straight paths” in wilderness of Jewish legalism. That was ultimately symbolized when the veil of the temple was rent at Jesus’s crucifixion. Man no longer needed an intermediary to get to God because of what Jesus had accomplished on the cross.

Conclusion

Mark, in all its simplicity as the shortest Gospel, seems to have a singular focus on making “straight paths” for the Lord. Matthew has a definite emphasis on the broad view of prophecy in his Gospel, while Luke is concerned more with historical accuracy and detail. But Mark’s Gospel should not be ignored just because it is short or abridged. He shows a sophistication in style comparable to Matthew and Luke.

A Personal Note on My Hiatus

I’ve been on a hiatus from the blog because my schedule got bogged down last summer. I took on an assignment in addition to my full-time job to edit and comment on Greek-English lexicon/concordance that is in the works (I can’t say anything more than that at this point, at least not until there’s a release date publicized). The concordance part was actually built into the lexical entries, which made for time-consuming reading. The author would list all occurrences of a word, often without the context lines. Add to that the extra time it takes to read numbers relative to words of the same character length on the page. Consider the difference between the following:

A reference would appear like this:

Mt. 22:36–38

As I was editing, I would read:

Matthew twenty-two, thirty-six through thirty-eight

Now imagine 600+ pages filled with a couple hundred references like that on each page, and the reading time per page nearly triples! Needless to say, I had to take a break after almost every page just to maintain my sanity! Fortunately, it was not my job to check the accuracy of each reference (although I did find the occasional error there on familiar passages), otherwise, I’d still be at it. The other challenging part of the edit was that the author’s preferred texts for the English translations were the King James Version and Darby’s translation, which resulted in some interesting entries (I had never heard or seen the word “dropsical” until I saw this dictionary).

The other project that came up is a new study Bible [1/1/26 Author’s Note: I realized I never returned to this post let you know I am listed as a Contributing Writer in three versions of The Jeremiah Study Bible (NKJV, ESV, NIV)]. It’s been challenging, rewarding, and even a little fun reviewing the notes, primarily for Old Testament books, and making suggestions and comments. I’m learning a great deal more about the OT and translation in general. I’m collaborating with a team of other reviewers; I even used one reviewer’s book on Bible study methods early in my teaching career. When that study Bible gets published, I’ll let you know.

I did finish reading through the Greek New Testament a second time in the process, but I’ve taken a break from a stringent schedule and had turned again to reading the Old Testament (in English, but still consulting the Hebrew) until I started participating in a men’s discipleship group. I set up a reading schedule for the guys that starts us in Mark’s Gospel. I also asked them to hold me accountable for getting back into the blogosphere, and rereading Mark 1 provided the perfect occasion for doing so.

April 22, 2012

Sing a New Song (Psalm 98; Ephesians 5:18–21)

Filed under: Biblical Studies,Ecclesiology,Ephesians,New Testament,Old Testament,Psalms — Scott Stocking @ 7:34 am

NOTE: The following is revised and expanded from an article I wrote that appeared in the February 4, 2001, edition of Christian Standard.

Sports fans are passionate people. They love their favorite teams and cheer them on with great enthusiasm. But sometimes their passion gets out of control, and violence erupts. We have seen this on a number of occasions, especially when a favorite team wins a big game or a national championship. Revelry and carousing take place in the streets, some even firing guns into the air, while others are hurt or injured from brawls that break out.

Don’t Get Drunk on Wine. . .

The country witnessed this behavior in 2000 when Los Angeles residents rioted after the Lakers won the NBA title. No doubt in many of these incidents of individuals or crowds getting out of hand, alcohol was a major contributing factor. Alcohol breaks down our inhibitions and our sense of self-control and leads to all kinds of misbehavior. Although Midwesterners are a little more subdued in their celebrations, I have no doubt that St. Louisans lined Busch Brewery’s pockets after Games 6 and 7 of the 2011 World Series.

Expressing passion for a sports team can be turned into a positive model of worship. After all, the word “fan” comes from the word “fanatic.” Do we love God and express our praise for him as much as we do our favorite teams? Hasn’t God done much more than win a World Series or an NBA title? Now granted, I don’t want us going out and getting drunk for Jesus. Eph 5:18 provides a good balance for us when celebrating what God has done in our lives: “Do not get drunk on wine, which leads to debauchery. Instead, be filled with the Spirit.” Paul warns that controlled substances and uncontrolled behaviors are not the proper way to celebrate or to let off steam at the extremes of life. These only lead to trouble, hardship, and sin.

Instead, Be Filled with the Spirit

Instead, Paul exhorts his readers to “be filled with the Spirit.” The similarity here with the negative command against alcohol may escape some: with alcohol, we give up control of our faculties to a mindless substance, and our corrupt flesh nature rises to the surface. If you’ve ever had too much to drink, you know what I mean. You say things when you’re tipsy that you wouldn’t say when you’re sober. Your ability to drive and walk is impaired. Being filled with the Spirit, however, implies that we are giving up control to “the mind of Christ” and to the God who created us for his purposes—our “new man” shines forth.

Understanding this truth is one key to getting a handle on the “worship wars” that many congregations have experienced in the past twenty years. Many in the older generations (“the builders” and to a certain extent, the “boomers”) fuss at the younger generation because of the latter’s desire to have more contemporary choruses and the additional accompaniment of guitars, drums, and so on. At the same time the younger generations (“busters,” “X,” and “2K”) complain about the slow tempo of some traditional hymns and the unpopularity (from their perspective) of the piano or church organ, or both. (One is hard pressed to find a successful radio station today that plays only piano and organ music!) When I moved back to Nebraska in 2010, I got reconnected with the congregation that sent me off to seminary. The sermon series that first Sunday I was back was “I Love the 80s.” Each week, the worship team performed a different (secular) hit song from the 80s, and the pastor used Scripture to highlight the significant themes of the song.

The one who is critical of the worship style a congregation uses is equally as guilty as the one who condemns another for not jumping on board a congregation’s preferred worship style, or a congregation’s desire to establish a more culturally relevant style. Neither group is filled with the Spirit. Neither group is more holy or righteous than the other is simply because of what its preferred style of music is. If we are filled with the Spirit when we come to worship, we allow the Holy Spirit to break down our inhibitions about style, while he directs our attention to the substance of the hymn or chorus.

Psalms, Hymns, and Spiritual Songs

When we get beyond our personal preferences about style, only then can we truly appreciate the command to “sing a new song” to our Lord. Paul goes on in Eph 5:19–20 to explain what he means by being filled with the Spirit. The first aspect is “speaking to one another with psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs, singing and making music in your hearts to the Lord, always giving thanks to God the Father for everything.” Paul here seems to bring the old (psalms, hymns) and the new (spiritual songs) together for the mutual edification of the body, and for the purpose of expressing thanks to our God. In fact, the five verbs that come after “be filled with the Spirit” are all subordinate to that command in some way, because they are all participles. Here is my outline for the organization of those verses:

Be filled (πληρόω) with the Spirit

    Speaking (λαλέω) to one another with psalms (ψαλμός), hymns (ὕμνος), and spiritual songs (ᾠδή)

        Singing (ᾄδω) and

        Making music (ψάλλω) in your hearts to the Lord,

        Always giving thanks (εὐχαριστέω) to God the Father…

    Submitting (ὑποτάσσω) to one another out of reverence for Christ.

The passion in that exhortation is self-evident. The musical expression of God’s Word was a vital part of the fellowship experience of first century Christians. This has been true throughout the centuries in the Christian faith, and still holds true today. Passionate worship is one of the signs of a living, growing, fruit-bearing congregation. Passionate worship shows the world that we really do love our Lord with all our heart, soul, strength, and mind.

The second aspect of being filled with the Spirit is that we “Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ” (Eph 5:21). Like the Fifth Commandment (Ex 20:12), this command serves as general statement of transition between our spiritual relationships (worship of God within the body) and our earthly relationships (family and work). In the context of the former (worship), submitting to one another implies that we show mutual respect for each other’s preferred styles. If the Spirit is present, style is at best a secondary concern. What matters is keeping the unity of the Spirit with the bond of peace (Eph 4:3).

The New Song

The most common hymnbook in the pews of the churches I served in the past twenty years was Favorite Hymns of Praise (Tabernacle Publishing, Wheaton, IL) copyrighted in 1967. One day while preparing a sermon on the topic of the “new song,” I thumbed through the hymns and browsed an Internet site with hymn histories. I discovered that most of the hymns were in the public domain or the copyright had expired. In other words, they were written before copyright laws went into effect in the early 1920s. Although many of these hymns contain important, timeless truths about God and our faith, they are nonetheless “old.” The fact that they are old does not detract from their value, but it may detract from their appeal to younger generations.

The command to “sing to the Lord a new song” (Psalm 98:1) is not one which was negated by the New Covenant. All nine occurrences of the phrase “new song” in the NIV are connected with the victory, salvation, and justice of God.

God is still winning victories today, every time someone professes faith in him and receives baptism by immersion. In Luke 15, we see that the angels throw a heavenly party over each sinner who repents. Each soul has a unique story of how he or she came to know Christ, and each story is worthy of a “new song.”

Psalm 98

Psalm 98 is by far the most vivid statement of the “new song” in Scripture. The psalm consists of three stanzas of three verses each. In each of the first three verses, God’s salvation is mentioned. Verses 2–3 are particularly prophetic: the word for “salvation” (יְשׁוּעָה) is related to the word translated elsewhere as “Joshua,” or to the Greeks, “Jesus.”

Verses 4–6 make it clear that enthusiasm and passion are important, if not necessary, elements of worship. This second stanza begins and ends with the command to “shout for joy” (רוע). Verse 4 in the NIV is rendered “burst into jubilant song with music,” but the KJV reveals that the phrase is actually made up of only three verbs. “Burst” (KJV has “make a loud noise”; פצח) has the image of flood waters built up behind a dam or levee that suddenly break through clearing out everything in its path. “Jubilant song” (KJV has “rejoice”; רנן) is used of the mountains in vs. 8. “Music” (KJV has “sing praise”; זמר) is actually the root word for “psalm” (see the Ephesians passage above), which is a song sung to musical accompaniment.

God as Audience

Verse 6 is the crux of the entire psalm. The word “before” can also be translated “in the presence of.” When we “shout for joy in the presence of the Lord, the King,” the obvious conclusion here is that God is the audience. Those of us who worship, then, are the performers. The condition in Psalm 33:3 makes a great deal of sense, then: “play skillfully.” God wants us to give our best. Our best may not win us any recording contracts, but he does want us to worship with all that we are.

God wants us to praise him even when we do not feel like praising him, or even when we do not think our talents are good enough to contribute to the body. Jehoshaphat placed the choir out in front of the troops, and ultimately they did not have to lift a finger in violence against their enemies. God won the victory. Praise has a power that goes far beyond our ability and our comprehension. The point is: “SING!”

The final three stanzas reveal that worship is for all of God’s creation, not just his chosen people. In part, it is evangelistic. 1 Corinthians 14 indicates that orderly, comprehensible worship is a powerful tool for reaching the unsaved. If our forms of worship are foreign to the culture around us, we will not have a significant impact on our culture.

A Bold Example

One congregation I served in had a “talent” night. Two high school freshmen boys “rapped” Will Smith’s song “Just the Two of Us.” The “rap” is about Will Smith’s desire to be a good father to his son, in spite of his divorce from the boy’s mother. Nothing in the song is offensive to the Christian values of parenthood. I know some of our elderly members were squirming, if not fuming, from allowing that song to be performed in the sanctuary. But neither of these two young men has significant contact with their biological fathers. I interpreted that song as a heartfelt prayer of those two young men for a relationship like the one Will Smith sang about.

Conclusion

In worship, we long to draw near to our heavenly Father, just as those two teenagers longed to have a close relationship with their earthly fathers. Singing a new song to the Lord is one way to praise God for his victories in our lives, both past and future. If we are not singing new songs to the Lord, the rocks themselves will cry out declaring the righteous rule of our Savior and Lord.

Peace!

Pastor Scott Stocking, M.Div.

NOTE: On 1/16/26, I posted a link to the archived copy of the Christian Standard issue in which this article appears, not realizing I already a version of it posted here.

Christian Standard | February 4, 2001 by Christian Standard Media – Issuu Pages 10–12

April 19, 2012

Work: The “Rest” of the Story (Ecclesiastes 3)

Filed under: Biblical Studies,Ecclesiastes,Genesis,Old Testament,Work — Scott Stocking @ 6:04 am

I was catching up on my Men’s Fraternity videos the other day when Robert Lewis said something that kind of shocked me: Most people never hear a sermon on the theology of work. He went back through his church’s tape catalog for 27 years worth of sermons and found only one sermon devoted to the topic of work. I had wrestled with that subject several times and have come to my own conclusions, but I’ve never really devoted a blog post to it. Our Dave Ramsey FPU session a couple weeks ago was about work as well, so the topic is fresh on my mind. Since I’ve been in a bit of a dry spell lately, I thought this topic would be just the thing to break my writer’s block.

The Genesis of Work

God himself originated the idea of work when he decided to create all that exists. “The earth was tohu webohu,” says Genesis 1:2, “formless and empty,” “nothing but chaos.” The creation account is one of bringing order to that chaos. The account itself reflects a definite order to it, as I show in Table 1.

Day 0: “In the beginning”—Chaos

Day 1: Light

Day 4: The lighted bodies

Day 2: Sky and water

Day 5: Air and water creatures

Day 3: Dry ground

Day 6: Land-dwelling creatures; Man

Day 7: “God rested from his work.”—Order

 

This reveals, then, one of God’s purposes for work, even though it is not expressly stated in the Genesis account: Work brings order out of chaos. You don’t have to think about that too long to realize it’s true. Look at a mechanic’s garage when he’s rebuilding an engine. All of the parts—pistons, heads, crankshaft, gaskets, bolts, etc.—are (to the untrained eye) scattered, and the unlearned don’t have a clue how it all goes together. But the mechanic has the ability to bring order to that apparent chaos. The mechanic, however, does not have the ability to “speak” order to those parts as God did, but through hard work, he can reassemble the engine into a functional device. This is not to say that God’s speech isn’t “work”, either. When God spoke the universe into existence, he also, by default, spoke into existence all the laws of physics, chemistry, geology, plate tectonics, etc. You and I just can’t create, alter, or suspend natural laws. We have to work within those foundational laws.

The Work of Freedom

When God finished the work of creation, he rested on the seventh day. Here’s the irony in my mind. Not only does God create work, he also creates rest. Work and rest are both good aspects of God’s creation. That concept of rest became so important that God included it in the Ten Commandments. Not only couldn’t the Israelites work, but they couldn’t make their servants work either. It was a day of rest initially, but Jesus turned the conventional view of the Sabbath on it’s head. In Luke 13, he healed a crippled woman on the Sabbath. The synagogue ruler complained that Jesus healed on the Sabbath, but Jesus put him and his opponents in their place. Jesus brought “rest” to this woman on the Sabbath, freeing her from her bondage.

So here, I think, is another principle of work, and a seemingly paradoxical one at that: work brings freedom. Jesus ignored a long-held myth about the Sabbath in order to bring physical freedom to this woman. I think that’s also behind Dave Ramsey’s oft-repeated maxim: “If you will live like no one else, later you can live like no one else.”™ I know the pain of being “slave to the lender,” and it is not pleasant. Some days I was burning the candle at both ends, and I still have trouble shaking that exhaustion. But God has been faithful to see me through it.

The Old Testament Concept

The Old Testament has what seems to be a radically different concept of “work” than what we are used to in the modern day. But a closer look reveals that perhaps the differences aren’t so stark. In the OT, you had your land, and you worked it to grow your food, raise your animals, and provide for your family. The male often had a trade and could barter his services for things his family needed that he couldn’t produce himself. However, if someone got to a point where he couldn’t provide for himself or his family, he had to sell himself (and possibly his family) to the lender. Back then, they called that slavery. Today, we call it “employment.” Think about it: Unless you’re an entrepreneur and can create or contract for your own work, you have to go to someone who can pay you to help with their work. You have to follow their rules, their procedures, their codes of conduct. You’re a “slave” to the “man” (or in my case, the “woman” J).

Sadly, I think we’ve come to rely too much on companies to hire us or even worse, for the government to send us a monthly check (unless we’re otherwise disabled or retired), and we’ve lost much of the entrepreneurial spirit that made America the great land of opportunity. I spent years piecing together a meager income at odd jobs (mostly teaching in various venues and editing, my strengths) so I could be at home with the kids when they were younger. But now that life has forced me, or rather, God has led me, to a regular 8–5 (or now 7–4) job, I have seen work from a different perspective. Sure, I still have an independent spirit that wants to break free and branch out on my own, but I’m kind of sold on the benefits that go along with working for someone who can actually provide benefits!

I think the hardest lesson for me so far is that of teamwork. Setting aside my independence was a difficult thing to do, but I’ve reaped great rewards. I have the added benefit of an employer who has allowed me to work in my strengths and try new things that have both expanded my skill set and produced success I’ve never experienced before. I think this is where the “rest” of work is most evident: Satisfaction in a job well done. Solomon sums it up nicely in Ecclesiastes 3:9–13 (NIV):

What do workers gain from their toil? I have seen the burden God has laid on the human race. He has made everything beautiful in its time. He has also set eternity in the human heart; yet no one can fathom what God has done from beginning to end. I know that there is nothing better for people than to be happy and to do good while they live. That each of them may eat and drink, and find satisfaction in all their toil—this is the gift of God.

Whatever you do, I pray that you do it for the glory of God. I wish you wild success in the things you put your hands and minds to.

Peace!

Scott Stocking

March 31, 2012

When Iron Sharpens Iron, Sparks Fly (Proverbs 27:17)

Filed under: Biblical Studies,Hebrew,Old Testament,Proverbs,Spiritual Warfare — Scott Stocking @ 6:55 am
Tags: , , ,

One of my favorite sections of Proverbs is 27:14–21. Here it is from the newest version of the NIV:

14 If anyone loudly blesses their neighbor early in the morning,

it will be taken as a curse.

15 A quarrelsome wife is like the dripping

of a leaky roof in a rainstorm;

16 restraining her is like restraining the wind

or grasping oil with the hand.

17 As iron sharpens iron,

so one person sharpens another.

18 The one who guards a fig tree will eat its fruit,

and whoever protects their master will be honored.

19 As water reflects the face,

so one’s life reflects the heart.

20 Death and Destruction are never satisfied,

and neither are human eyes.

21 The crucible for silver and the furnace for gold,

but people are tested by their praise.

Good Morning?

I’ve always been a morning person. I get up daily by 5:30 to get my Bible study in and get ready for work. But many years ago, when I came across Proverbs 27:14, I was in utter disbelief that such a verse would be in the Bible. Morning people are a curse to their neighbors! Now admittedly, I’m dealing with this a little tongue-in-cheek. I think most of us know what this verse is really talking about. You know the type, the one who sees you dragging into work before the coffee or other caffeinated beverage kicks in and decides to have a little fun at your expense. “Hi, Scott! Beautiful morning, isn’t it? Just breathe in that fresh morning air!” You want to turn around and smack the guy silly, right? Now of course, I’m not advocating that.

Keep in mind that Proverbs is not a book of commands, but a book of pithy generalities about life. They are statements that ring true to us about the way things are, but they were never intended to be transformed into commands. If you’re obnoxious early in the morning, some people just aren’t going to like that. In fact, the next two verses seem to have a similar theme: being obnoxious doesn’t win you any friends.

Good Wife?

The imagery Solomon applies to quarrelsome wives is even more striking. If you’ve ever had a leaky roof, you know exactly what he’s talking about. About a year ago, the same week I was moving out of my mom’s basement and into my own place, their upstairs toilet started leaking pretty bad into what had been my bedroom. It was a mess, to say the least, and a pain to keep up with. And trying to reason with a quarrelsome wife? Forget about it! Not only is it difficult to hold oil in your hand, but it’s also hard to get off unless you use some hot water and soap. Your hands feel slimy until you can get the oil off of them.

Good Men?

This brings me to Proverbs 27:17, a verse that is at the heart of nearly every men’s ministry message and program that’s ever been published. But as I’m prone to do, I’m about to shatter that long-held belief that the verse refers to positive male camaraderie. A look at the Hebrew of the verse and a little common sense about metallurgy will help make the point.

Have you ever watched someone forge a sword? First of all, you have to get the metal hot enough to melt into the basic shape of the sword. Then once the sword has its basic shape, it’s repeatedly subjected to the hot fire and hammered on an anvil to refine its shape and give it its edge. Once it has the length and temper it needs to be a good sword, the smith gives it its sharp edge by grinding and polishing. It is at that step of the process that we see the true nature of Proverbs 27:17.

When iron strikes iron, or even when iron sharpens iron, sparks fly. The Hebrew word for “sharpen” (חָדַד, ḥā∙ḏǎḏ) here is only used six times in the Old Testament: twice in Proverbs 27:17, three times in Ezekiel 21:9–11, and once in Habakkuk 1:8. Solomon’s use of the word in Proverbs 27:17 seems rather innocuous if we fail to look past the popular modern interpretation, but it is the second half of the verse that really got me thinking that this might not be the comfortable camaraderie often portrayed: “one man sharpens the face of a friend.” Now I ask you, does that sound like mutual encouragement? Does that sound like a slap on the back? NO! The passages in Ezekiel speak of the sword being sharpened for the slayer going out to slaughter. Habakkuk uses it to describe the fierceness of horsemen going out to battle. It sounds more like two guys battling each other just to stay ahead. It sounds like they might be getting on each other’s nerves. Granted, that could be for the better, but I think the context may suggest otherwise.

You still don’t believe me? An obnoxious morning person? A quarrelsome wife? She’s compared to oil, wind, a dripping faucet. But two men going at it? Iron on iron. Sparks are flying, baby. No holds barred. Hear the clank of hammer and steel on the anvil. Feel the crushing pain of missing the anvil and striking your thumb, times ten! And what about the verses that come after? Guarding, protecting: sounds like dangerous guy stuff. Death and Destruction never being satisfied: ’nuff said. Crucibles: subjected to the heat of purifying fire.

I think verse 19 is the crux verse here: “As water reflects the face, so one’s life reflects the heart.” I’ve been reading John Eldredge lately (Wild at Heart; Beautiful Outlaw), so I’m kind of pumped on guy stuff right now. I’m rediscovering what he calls the deep heart of a man: “a battle to fight, an adventure to live, and a beauty to rescue.” I’ve been asking myself what my life shows about my heart. Has it shown that I’m a warrior or a wimp? I’ve certainly picked my fights like William Wallace. They didn’t involve guns or swords, however. But they did often attack issues of the heart, especially greed and corruption. Those can be just as ugly as any battle scene from Braveheart. The trouble was, my “beauty” at the time didn’t want anything to do with my battle. That struck at the core of my manhood, and I’ve been climbing back ever since.

Guys, what does your life reflect about your heart? Are you the man’s man that Eldredge talks about in Wild at Heart? Or have you become a restrained Mr. Incredible, forced to keep your super powers in check behind an office desk because society is afraid of the inherent threat you pose to their comfort? If you haven’t read anything by John Eldredge, I would encourage you to get hold of a copy of Wild at Heart. The principles in there have taken me to a new level of manhood in my life, but I can still see that I have a long way to go. And if you’re in Omaha, beginning April 21, 2012, at StoneBridge Christian Church, 8:00 a.m., our men’s group will begin a nine-week series on Beautiful Outlaw.

Peace!

Scott Stocking

StoneBridge Christian Church is located at 15801 Butler Street, between Fort and Maple.

March 23, 2012

Helmet of Salvation (Isaiah 59:17, Ephesians 6:17)

Filed under: 1 Thessalonians,Biblical Studies,Courage,Ecclesiology,Ephesians,Faith, Faithfulness,Isaiah,Old Testament,Soteriology,Spiritual Warfare — Scott Stocking @ 7:37 am
Tags: , , , , , , ,

Check out this exclusive Logos Affiliate Deal from SMGB! Logos 10 Package Deal

When my kids were learning how to ride their bicycles, I was a bit obsessive about them using a helmet. Now when I was a kid (many moons ago, now), neither my parents nor I ever gave a second thought to riding my bike without a helmet. Helmets were for football, not bike riding. Granted, the helmet cannot save you from any and all injuries, which is one of the common arguments used by motorcycle riders opposed to mandatory helmet laws. But it is a measure of protection that gave me an added sense of security as a parent as my kids were learning how to be more independent. Now that my son has his driver’s license and my daughter is only weeks away from getting her learner’s permit, I’m obsessing about safety all over again. I’m not making everyone wear helmets when he drives, obviously. But Solomon was right. “There is nothing new under the sun.”

In three passages of Scripture, God uses the “helmet” (Heb. כֹּובַע) image to describe the salvation he freely offers (Isaiah 59:17; Ephesians 6:17; and 1 Thessalonians 5:8). In Isaiah 59:17, the prophet says that God “put[s] on righteousness as his breastplate, and the helmet of salvation on His head.” In the context of Isaiah 59, God is “displeased that there [is] no justice” (vs. 15b). God’s salvation and righteousness are necessary to turn the tide of injustice in Israel. This word for helmet is only used six times in the Old Testament, but the Isaiah passage is the only time where God is said to wear this piece of armor. If God is all powerful, he doesn’t need armor, so obviously this is figurative language here. But this also betrays another myth we have about spiritual armor. We think it is defensive. But in this passage, God is not on the defense. He is moving forward in an offensive against injustice. He’s getting ready to execute his vengeance!

As I have mentioned before in other contexts, God’s salvation here goes far beyond our own personal relationship with Jesus Christ. Yes, each of us individually can personally receive God’s salvation, but not solely for our own benefit. God’s salvation here has national (and international) implications. God wants the nation of Israel to be saved, as well as the individuals within the nation.

The apostle Paul has this multifaceted view of salvation-justice as well. In 1 Timothy 2:1–4, Paul urges everyone to pray for “kings and authorities” so we may lead “peaceful lives,” because God “wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth.” Isaiah’s image of the helmet fits well here. God wants you and I to serve as ambassadors who will proclaim his salvation not only to individuals, but his justice to our leaders as well (see also Eph 3:8–11, Romans 13:1–7). We do this by our behavior as well as by the words we speak. As Christians, we are not primarily on defense. We should be advancing in the power of the gospel, taking every thought captive (2 Corinthians 10:3–6) and storming the gates of hell (Matthew 16:18).

For too long the more conservative, non-mainline denominations have put justice on the back burner, usually treating symptoms (soup kitchens, used clothing stores, etc.) while not addressing the causes (economic oppression, government policies, waste, etc.). Fortunately, more and more Christians are beginning to recognize that a witness of social justice is an important part of declaring God’s salvation to the lost, hopeless, and oppressed. And interestingly enough, the more it seems we concern ourselves with social justice, the more intense the persecution becomes against Christians. I’d say that means we must be doing something right to concern ourselves with God’s salvation-justice.

The bicycle helmet cannot protect us from skinned knees and elbows. We need kneepads, elbow pads and wrist braces if we are really serious about protecting ourselves as we ride the highways and byways of this nation. God’s helmet of salvation is only part of the “whole armor of God” that defends us against the onslaught of Satan and his forces. Not only is it defensive, but His armor terrifies our foes and causes them to retreat as they see us advancing against them in God’s might.

Peace!

Scott Stocking

A qr code on a white background linking to an exclusive deal from Logos Bible Software.

Scan QR code above to exclusive Logos Affiliate deal from SMGB!

February 20, 2012

Judas’s Kiss (Matthew 26:48–49; Mark 14:45)

Filed under: Acts,Life of Christ,Luke Gospel of,Mark Gospel of,Matthew Gospel of,New Testament,Passion,Septuagint — Scott Stocking @ 2:43 pm

Introduction

Those of us who read the Scriptures with any regularity (and even with some irregularity) have noticed the phenomenon of selective attention. What I mean by this is, when you read a passage of Scripture you know you’ve read before, you notice something that speaks to your heart in such a way that you say, “Why didn’t I see that before.” That has happened to me quite often in reading the English translations of the Bible, even though English is my native tongue. You’d think I’d remember more than I do when I read Scripture. But now on my second time through the Greek New Testament (GNT), I am experiencing that same phenomenon. Of course, having that full year of experience has seasoned me to notice certain features of the text that the occasional reader of the GNT might not notice.

Matthew 26:48–49

The subject of this blog post is one such passage. Matthew 26:48–49 is part of the story of Judas betraying Jesus to the authorities. My discussion in this post centers around the nature of the “kiss” by which Judas identified Jesus to the authorities. Here is how the text reads in the NIV, with the Greek words translated “kiss” identified:

Now the betrayer had arranged a signal with them: “The one I kiss [φιλήσω from φιλέω] is the man; arrest him.” Going at once to Jesus, Judas said, “Greetings, Rabbi!” and kissed [κατεφίλησεν from καταφιλέω] him.

The “Kiss”

New Testament Usage

Some may think the different words used for “kiss” here represent merely a stylistic difference, but an examination of the second word, καταφιλέω, reveals an interesting nuance that is lost in translation but not in context. The word is used six times in the New Testament: once each by Matthew and Mark (14:45) in their respective betrayal pericopes; and four times by Luke—three in his Gospel (Luke 7:38, 45; 15:20) and once in Acts (20:37).

Luke mentions the φιλέω kiss in his passion story, but he never outright says that Judas kissed Jesus. But it is Luke’s use of καταφιλέω that reveals the important nuance in Matthew and Mark. Luke 7 is the story of the woman who washes Jesus feet with perfume, tears, and her hair. The kissing is portrayed as a repeated action that at the same time indicates a sort of “sorrowful joy.” She is both truly repentant and truly grateful for the forgiveness Jesus would proclaim to her. In vs. 45, Luke even contrasts the φιλέω kiss he should have received from Simon as a customary greeting with the woman’s repeated καταφιλέω kissing. So Luke was fully aware of the contrast between the two words, just as Matthew and Mark were.

In Luke 15, Jesus uses καταφιλέω of the father welcoming home the prodigal son. In Acts 20:37, Luke again uses the word to describe what happened when Paul departed from Miletus after saying farewell to the Ephesian elders. Paul is facing grave danger as he returns to Jerusalem, and many of his friends think they will never see him again. This is no peck on the cheek. Strong emotions always accompany this kind of “kiss.”

Old Testament Usage

The use of this word in the Septuagint (LXX) is no different. It describes the affection Laban showed his grandchildren when Jacob departed (Genesis 31:28, 32:1). It also describes Joseph’s reunion with his brothers in Egypt (Genesis 45:15). Naomi parted with Orpah with this kind of kiss, and the bond was so strong that Ruth insisted on returning to Bethlehem with Naomi (Ruth 1:9, 14). The word describes David’s friendship with Jonathan as well (1 Samuel 20:41). But lest I be misunderstood or misinterpreted, there is absolutely no sexual connotation in these farewell “kisses.” They reveal the very deep bond of friendship that the people experienced.

Judas’s Kiss: What It Means

So what does this all mean for Judas’s kiss? The fact that Matthew and Mark use καταφιλέω to describe Judas’s betrayal kiss reveals a couple things in my mind. First, Judas seems to have genuinely loved Jesus. I don’t think it’s fair to suggest he wasn’t genuine about the show of affection, especially given the desperation of his remorse after the fact. Second, because of that love, I have to wonder if Judas was trying to force Jesus’s hand by having him arrested. Judas wanted as much as anyone to throw off Roman rule, but Judas apparently didn’t like where things were headed. I think it is within the realm of reason to suggest that Judas thought by having Jesus arrested, Jesus’s followers would rise up rebellion against Rome. Or perhaps he even thought that Jesus would make a mighty show of divine power to overthrow Rome.

His actions do not strike me as those of a man who had a traitorous heart from the beginning. Rather they seem to be desperate measures by a disillusioned man who was trying to make one last attempt to have things go his way. When he failed miserably and realized he had condemned his friend to death rather initiating a new world order, he killed himself in an ultimate act of desperation.

Conclusion

How many times do you and I get disillusioned about the way God is working in our lives? I know I have done my share of complaining to God that he’s not doing things the way I think he should be doing them. Then in desperation, I do something in an attempt to force God’s hand and realize after the fact how foolish I really was. I need to work on developing that deep and abiding trust in God that makes me want to melt into his καταφιλέω affection for me, just as the prodigal experienced when he returned home.

Peace!

Scott Stocking

February 5, 2012

Does the Structure of Exodus 21:1–27 Tell the Patriarchs’ Story?

Filed under: Biblical Studies,Exodus,Hebrew,Old Testament,Theology, Biblical — Scott Stocking @ 8:40 am

I really enjoyed my Old Testament exegesis classes in seminary with Dr. Gary Hall, who is retiring from Lincoln Christian Seminary this year. Each week, we had a passage to dissect, and we always followed the same pattern. The systematic method he taught us has stuck with me all these years, which is one reason why I love teaching hermeneutics. It has also opened up new depths of understanding to difficult passages, and has helped me discover the eternal principles behind the earthly stories of those who have gone before me.

Exodus 21 Assigned

One such passage that sold me on the value of discerning structure in the Bible is Exodus 21:1–27. I believe we had actually been assigned Exodus 21:12–27, which is set off in the TNIV with the heading “Personal Injuries.” However, when I looked at the passage in the Hebrew Bible that week, I noticed that vv. 1–27 were a complete paragraph. Dr. Hall had taught us to pay attention to such structural clues, so I took it upon myself to expand the assigned passage and see what I could discover from that. I was amazed at what I found, but I was even more amazed when I took into account the literary and historical context of the passage.

Here is the structure of the passage:

1 Introduction

    2–11 Hebrew Slaves

        12–14 Striking a man/conditionality

             15 Physically attacking Father/Mother

                16 Kidnapping

             17 Verbally attacking Father/Mother

        18–25 Striking a man or a pregnant woman

        [18–19 Striking a man]

    [20–21 Striking a Slave]

        [22–25 Striking a pregnant woman]

    26–27 Hebrew Slaves

Exodus 21 Considered

If you’ve read my posts regularly or if you’ve ever taken a class that talks about the structure of a biblical passage, you will instantly recognize this as a chiasm, a passage that presents ideas in one order and repeats them in reverse order. The key point about a chiasm is that whatever is at the center of the chiasm is the focus. So when I discovered this structure, I thought a couple things were unusual:

  1. Why were the two nearly identical laws about parents not together? and
  2. Why was “kidnapping” inserted between the two commands, especially when kidnapping isn’t mentioned in the Ten Commandments?

I need to answer both those questions together, because there is a connection. I do remember when I was looking at this passage in some English texts that one English version (I thought it was my RSV confirmation Bible, but I can’t locate it now to confirm) actually had the chutzpah to flip verses 16 and 17 around, because the translators thought as I did at first glance that they belonged together. The answer to my second question came when I looked at the Hebrew: the word “kidnap” is translated from the Hebrew phrase וְגֹנֵ֨ב אִ֧ישׁ
(wə·ḡō·nēḇ ʾîš, \wuh-goh-nayv eesh\), which literally means “the one stealing a man.” Aha! Stealing: now that is something in the Ten Commandments. Now I’m getting somewhere.

גָּנַב is the same word translated “steal” in the Ten Commandments. “Stealing” a man meant not only removing that man from his covenant community, but also taking away the life he had planned for himself. גָּנַב is often used of stealing things and people. It’s presence here, especially in the center of the structure (see above), indicates the seriousness of the crime of kidnapping. It is on a par with striking or cursing your parents, and the abuse and murder of slaves. All crimes listed here could be punishable by death, especially with the presence of the lex talionis at the end of this passage.

So now I was at least part way to an answer. Kidnapping was the ultimate form of mistreatment of another person. That is why it was at the center of the passage.

Exodus 21 in Context

But there was a larger question to answer. I had only dealt with the central elements, but what about the rest of the paragraph? I asked myself, “What do treatment of slaves, mistreatment of parents, and kidnapping have in common?” The answer stuck out like a sore thumb. Joseph. Joseph’s brothers kidnapped him. Strike one. They sold him into slavery. Strike two. They lied to their father Israel, which would be equivalent to a curse, about what happened to Joseph. Strike three. So the first story out of the gate after hearing the Ten Commandments is like a slap in the face to all of Israel. “You did it to Joseph, which is how you wound up in slavery in Egypt in the first place. Go and sin no more. Even though God intended it for good (Genesis 50:20), don’t let that be an excuse to try it again.”

Conclusion

I hope you can see how important structure and context is in determining the meaning and significance of a passage. Moses brilliantly structured Exodus 21 (or God did so for Moses) not only to communicate his statutes, but to place those in the historical context of God’s people.

Peace!

Scott Stocking

January 29, 2012

“I Am” Statement of Yahweh (Exodus 3–6, esp. Exodus 3:14)

Filed under: "I Am" Statements,Exodus,Hebrew,John Gospel of,Old Testament — Scott Stocking @ 8:33 am

As I was reading through the early chapters of Exodus last week, I was not only reminded of the “I Am” statements of Jesus in John’s gospel, but I gained some new insight into the overall application of those statements. I want to share that with you in this post.

Face to Face at the Bush

Exodus 3 is the story of Moses’s first encounter with God at the burning bush in Midian. This is also the chapter where we have the story of God revealing his personal name to Moses: יְהוָ֖ה “Yahweh” (English texts set in small caps: LORD). But the text leading up to that revelation is a story that deserves the *facepalm* of all *facepalms*! God has been preparing Moses to confront Pharaoh and deliver the Israelites from Egyptian slavery. You’d have to admit, that’s a pretty big task in those days, considering most kings and their subjects wouldn’t give a second thought about having you beheaded or drawn and quartered for merely approaching the king without invitation let alone confronting the king.

But I’m getting ahead of myself. Moses approaches the burning bush when Yahweh calls out to him. He removes his sandals, because he’s on holy ground. Yahweh proceeds to identify himself and his purposes for calling Moses, while Moses does his own reverent version of a facepalm (Exodus 3:6b). Listen to what Yahweh says to Moses in Exodus 3:6–10 (NIV) and see if you detect a pattern:

I am the God of your father, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob.

I have indeed seen the misery of my people in Egypt.

I have heard them crying out because of their slave drivers, and

I am concerned about their suffering. So

I have come down to rescue them from the hand of the Egyptians and to bring them up out of that land…

And now the cry of the Israelites has reached me, and

I have seen the way the Egyptians are oppressing them.

So now, go.

I am sending you to Pharaoh to bring my people the Israelites out of Egypt.

Yahweh makes seven(!) “I” statements here about who he is and what he will do, and he affirms that he has the power to do all this through Moses. I suppose God could have done it without all the pomp and circumstance of the plagues, but then how would anyone ever know what God thinks of kings who exalt themselves to positions of deity? But here’s the facepalm moment: after God affirms that he’s going to do all this through Moses, what does Moses say?

“Who am I that I should go to Pharaoh and bring the Israelites out of Egypt?” (Exodus 3:11).

*FACEPALM!*

Evidently Moses didn’t have Verizon, because he obviously didn’t hear God the first time. The creator of the universe is speaking to Moses, giving him more information about himself than he’s ever given to any other patriarch (except perhaps Abraham), and Moses is worried about himself! Duh, Moses, it’s not about you; God just confirmed that!

Saving Face

Of course, it’s easy for us 3500 years later to look back on this story and be a little critical of Moses. The story does show his human side, and I wonder how many of us would have be willing to saddle up and head out without questioning God further on the matter. God isn’t afraid of having a conversation with us, and he’s big enough to deal with our questions and fears. He’s ever so patient with us as we muddle through life trying to figure out his will and purpose for us. But he also offers reassurance to us in the form of a promise that is repeated time and again in both the Old and New Testaments. He offered that promise to the patriarchs before Moses, and he offers it again to Moses in 3:12: “I will be with you.”

This is where the Hebrew gets very interesting, and most English translations relegate the significant issue to a footnote. The Hebrew word for “I will be” is the standard “to be” verb: הָיָה (hāyāh), but since Hebrew, like Greek, alters the spelling of its verbs based on the person and number of the verb, the form that is used in 3:12 is אֶהְיֶה (first person singular ʾehyeh; notice the letters are the same, except for the aleph א added to the front of the word). This is the exact same form that most English translations render “I AM WHO I AM” in 3:14 when God reveals his name! To their credit, most English translations have a footnote on v. 14 saying that this could be “I WILL BE WHAT I WILL BE,” but in my opinion, that should be the translation in the main text. The form יְהוָ֖ה “Yahweh” that is used regularly throughout the Hebrew Old Testament is probably related to the third person singular form of the verb.

Hebrew verbs don’t have tense in the same way that English verbs do. Hebrew verbs either represent completed action (perfects) or incomplete action (imperfects). The verb form Yahweh uses for his name is imperfect (ironic, I know, but that’s the grammar). What I hear Yahweh saying to Moses here is that he will do whatever it takes, he will be whatever he needs to be, to deliver the Israelites from Egypt. That is a father showing ultimate love for his children: even if it comes to destroying every last trace of the Egyptian people and culture, God will deliver his people.

Facing Up

Once was not enough, though. God has to go back through the I statements again in Exodus 6, but the Israelites were too oppressed to hear it or believe it. So God’s mighty plagues were not just to break Pharaoh’s stubborn heart, but also to show Israel that he meant business about delivering them from the Egyptians. This is emphasized in the latter plagues that have no effect on the land of Goshen where the Israelites lived.

So what does all this have to do with the “I am” statements of Jesus? What occurred to me is that Jesus was doing for his audience what Yahweh did for Moses and the Israelites. His “I am” statements affirm that he is the savior and that he can and will do whatever it takes to deliver people from sin and Satan, even to the point of dying on a cross. Jesus stood up to the religious oppressors of his day and proclaimed the good news of God’s deliverance and love for his creation.

Many of us Christ followers I’m sure have done our own facepalms when friends or family just don’t comprehend the good news. Well, you’re in good company. Be patient and keep at it, because you might have to witness a lot of pain and suffering before the deliverance finally happens. And Christ offers the same assurance to us as Yahweh did to Moses: “Surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age” (Matthew 28:20 TNIV).

Peace,

Scott Stocking

Please check out my friend Eric Weiss’s post on this topic: http://theoblogoumena.blogspot.com/2011/05/exodus-314-and.html.

January 26, 2012

“Seer” in Old Testament: A Hebrew Word Study

Filed under: 1 Chronicles,1 Samuel,2 Chronicles,Hebrew,Old Testament,Prophet — Scott Stocking @ 10:12 pm

I’m digging into my archives from way back, when for a short time I sent out an e-mail called “Word of the Week” and when I contributed to the HarvestNet.org forum. I hope you enjoy!

The concept of the seer in the Old Testament (OT) may be connected to the priest who wore the Urim and Thummim. I don’t know if all of the individuals called seers were keepers of the Urim and Thummim, but if any were priests (e.g., Zadok, 2 Sam 15:27), they probably did. Seventeen of the twenty-eight occurrences of “seer” appear in 1–2 Chronicles, which one should expect, since Chronicles is the priestly account of the kings of Judah.

רֹאֶה

The NIV translates two Hebrew words as “seer” in OT, רֹאֶה (rōʾěh) and חֹזֶה (ḥō∙zěh). The first word is a participle (i.e., a verb used as a noun) form of the verb “to see” in Hebrew. OT authors used the word twenty-six times. The NIV translates רֹאֶה twelve times as “seer” and twelve times generically as anyone who “saw” something in the natural way. You will find the other two occurrences in parallel passages (2 Kings 25:19, Jeremiah 52:25), where the NIV translates them as “men of the king’s council,” which might be a little closer to “seer” in the religious sense. The word is used of Samuel eight times. In fact, the first time the word is used of Samuel (1 Samuel 9:9), the author makes a point of bridging the gap between the era of the seer and the rise of the “prophet.”

The Septuagint (LXX) in seven of those eight occurrences translates this as βλέπων, “one who sees.” This word by itself has no technical significance in Greek as far as I know relating to special prophetic function. The other occurrence connected with Samuel is translated προφήτης “prophet” in the LXX (1 Chronicles 26:28). Two other mentions of רֹאֶה refer to Hanani, an advisor to one of Judah’s kings. The LXX calls him προφήτης.

חֹזֶה

The second word (חֹזֶה) is found sixteen times in the OT, and with the exception of Isaiah 30:10, where the NIV translates it “prophets” in parallel with רֹאֶה, it is translated as “seer(s).” This is the main word used to describe those who were either in the employ of a king, or advised kings. (Hanani above is the only exception, but his(?) son Jehu is called a חֹזֶה in 2 Chronicles 19:2.) Ten of the sixteen times, it either refers to the “king’s seer” or to someone who advised a king (whether the king wanted him to or not; similar to the roles played by the men in 2 Kings 25:19). I include Amos in this count (Amos 7:12). The LXX uses ὁρῶν (“one who sees,” probably with emphasis on content of what is seen rather than the act of seeing) eleven times. βλέπων is used once (in 1 Chronicles 29:29; רֹאֶה Samuel and חֹזֶה Gad are mentioned together here; both are called βλέπων in the LXX).

There is also an interesting connection with חֹזֶה in that in a few instances, the seers were connected with music or poetry. In 1 Chronicles 25:5, the LXX identifies Heman as an ἀνακρουομένῳ “one who sings praise” or “one who prophesies with music.” He is one of the men chosen “for the ministry of prophesying, accompanied by harps, lyres and cymbals” (1 Chronicles 25:1; see also Judges 5:11). Asaph (one of the more prominent coauthors of the Psalms) is also mentioned as a seer (1 Chronicles 29:30).

Finally, Isaiah 30:10 (in addition to 1 Chronicles 29:29) mentions חֹזֶה and רֹאֶה apparently synonymously. רֹאֶה and חֹזֶה are most often translated προφήτης in the LXX and “seer” in the NIV, but חֹזֶה is occasionally translated ὁρῶν in LXX, especially of David’s seer Gad.

The Role of the Seer

The role of the seer is very easy to discern in the OT. He spoke the word of God to the people or to kings. The title was prominent up through the beginning of the kingdom era, but the title gradually shifted to prophet (נָּבִיא), especially when Isaiah came on the scene. The seer was probably a little more politically connected than the prophet, but neither were strangers to the palace. And neither had a message that was any more popular with the people or the kings: they rarely minced words. Samuel was the hinge pin of history between the seer and prophet, as he ushered out the age of the judges and ushered in the age of the kings.

Conclusion

I suppose I could say my last two posts are a bit of a hinge pin as well. This blog originally started as my musings on reading through the Greek NT. But I can’t forget my Hebrew “roots” in seminary. Now that I’m reading through the OT again, I know I will have much to say on that. But for those of who are worried that my long blog title might extend to Sunday Morning Biblical Languages Blog, don’t worry. I like it just the way it is.

Peace & Shalom!

Scott Stocking


« Previous Page — Next Page »

Website Powered by WordPress.com.