New Subscription Info: The Blog is Moving!

Hey! It's been a while since I posted--not because I ran out of things to say but because I decided to try something new. I've been hosting the blog through Blogger since 2012. That's 10 years!!! Blogger is free, and if you know a little code (which I do), you can do some pretty nifty things. However, I found that I there were 2 things that bothered me greatly about the blog.

1. I have a lot of content and it's really hard to navigate. Separating out the poems from the Bible studies from black history is bad enough, but within the Bible studies I had studies on specific chapters and studies on topics and commentary about different denominations... How do I create a landing page that is both informative and not overwhelming?
2. Every post requires a picture. If you go back to my posts from 2015 or so, you'll see horrible graphics and random photos that have nothing to do with the post, just to avoid the dreaded "image not found" message. Eventually, I started creating branded photos so newer posts are more streamlined, but that takes time. I learned, I don't like graphic design, and I don't like creating images for the posts when they don't add value to the content.

So, I've decided to move the blog to Notion. I've been using Notion to organize my life for about 4 years now, and as I've gotten better with it, I've realized it could be used for a blog site. The con is that I have to move posts over individually. Which has actually been a blessing because I get to see the growth I've had since I began this blog, and I get to clean up A LOT of typos and spelling mistakes 😂.

What does that mean going forward?

For now, www.psalmstogod.com, is going to remain pointing here so you can still access this content. However as I move things over, I will not be adding new posts to this site. New content will be uploaded to that site.

If you are subscribed and want to continue receiving content and updates please visit the new site and subscribe to the newsletter at the bottom of the home page. I appologize for the inconvenience but hope the new site will be better for all of you as well as myself.

Thanks!!

Mediate Like Abigail

The life of Abigail is given in 1 Samuel 25. In our introduction to her, we are told that she is intelligent and beautiful, a description that should not be taken lightly. Growing up I heard about Abigail maybe once or twice, but we never really discussed her in detail nor the implications of her behavior on the expectations of being a woman of God.

Beauty and Brains

Each translation has a slightly different word choice in the description of Abigail, but using the context of the passage I believe she was being described as wise and clever. When it comes to Abigail's beauty, I think it's interesting that the author creates a juxtaposition between intelligence with beauty and being mean and surly. It almost implies that one cannot be intelligent and mean or mean and beautiful. This implication hold with other passages in the Bible that tell us man looks outward while God looks at the heart (1 Samuel 16:7) and that beauty is fleeting (Proverbs 31:30). Since it is the Holy Spirit that is inspiring this passage, I opften wonder if the word beauty is describing her heart or her physcality, or possibly both. Another interesting point about her description is that her intelligence is mentioned first. Usually the first thing listed is the most pronounced or the more important matter.

Saving the Day

We only get one chapter about Abigail but it's pretty powerful. When her husband, Nabal, is rude to David, Abigail sets things right by doing going behind her husband's back to do the right thing. She provides the hospitality that David desereved, intercedes on her husband's behalf—complete with an appology where she takes the blame for her husbands rude behavior and an isult to her husband's character—and tops it off with a little chastizing of David, as well. Abigail's actions are bold and very different from what the church typically teaches about the Godly woman's behavior.

Prepared

So, one thing the church pushes on women that Abigail does display is hospitality. The amount of food Abigail just has lying around to be given away is astonishing. Even with a grocery store 5 minutes from my house, I don't know that I could acquire that much food in the time Abigail did. Of course it is importatn to point out here that Abigail had servants to help her with this task. She did not prepare all this on her own! It is this preparedness, however, that allows her to make ammends. If I were in Abigails shoes, everyone would have died, because even if I'd thought to do what she did, I would not have had the means. It is important for us as believer to anticipate what is needed. A simple example is leaving the house early because you anticipate traffic to cut down on road rage and crazy driving.

Behind Her Husband's Back

Where things get interesting is that Abagail did not submit to her husband's decision. The way the church harps on submission, you would think the "appropriate" action would have been to stay out of it, or to ask for permission to to give David the food. Abigail does neither and is praised for being intelligent. Also, her actions save the lives of many people, since David's reaction was to kill Nabal's household. Personally, I believe this goes back to something I said at the beginning of this series: we're only required to submit to a Godly husband. In Ephesians 5, where women are told to submit, the whole relationship is compared to that of Christ and the Church. Christ is the perfect husband, He would never lead you to harm, nor ask you to do what is wrong. Christ loves His bride. Nabal did not exhibit the fruit of the Spirit and thus wasn't Christ-like, and we see Abigail praised for chosing Christ-like behavior over submission to her husband. That says something.

Correction

Not only does Abigail go behind her husband's back, she corrects David. David's revenge scheme wasn't Godly either. Abigail reminds him that vengence is for the Lord. She says o in a polite manner, but she is in fact correcting a man, the future king of Israel no less. She was not silent by any means. Upon being corrected, David—the man after God's own heart—thanks her for her correction. He recognizes his wrongness and acknowledges that she is correct. Think about that.

Happily Ever After?

After Abigail saves her household, she tells her husband what she has done—no secrets!—and upon hearing this news, he has a stroke or heart attack. Within a few days Nabal is dead. Remember, during this time, women weren't afforded many rights, so with her husband dead and seemingly no son to take care of her, Abigail was possibly placed in a difficult predicament when Nabal died. It's posssible that she had family who would have seen to her needs but likely she would have been destitute. Fortunately, David was impressed by Abigail (or felt obligated, the Bible doesn't say exactly). When he hears that Nabal is dead, he sends for Abigail and makes her one of his wives. The Bible names another woman as also being taken as a wife for David so I'm not sure if Abigail was his second or third wife, but at this point in David's life, Saul had taken David's first wife, Michal, from him. Therefore it is possible that for a time Abigail served as the first wife (meaning she would have had the most influence and power). That being said, we know David had many many wives, so I'm not sure this was a love marriage.

SOAP Method | Study the Word

I wasn't always a freestyler when it comes to studying the Word. In the begining it can be hard to figure out how to study the Word (or even what to study). There are a ton of mnemonic devices to help you study the Bible. I plan to do a video summarizing 5 of them, but I also wanted to show you examples of them in use. The five mnemonics I will be covering are:

1. S.O.A.P.
2. F.E.A.S.T.
3. R.E.A.P.
4. H.O.P.E.
5. E.A.S.Y.

The S.O.A.P. Method

S.O.A.P. stands for scripture, observation, application, and prayer. I may be biased because this was the method I used as a newbie to Bible Study, but I think it's the most popular of all the methods. Although I have one nitpick about this method—I believe you should start with prayer (which I'll discuss later)—it's a great way to start out studying. Below, I'm going to take you through Exodus 36:1-7 using this method.

Scripture

The first thing you want to do is read the scripture. If it's a shorter scripture, I like to write it out. For longer passages, I have a "special"[1] Bible I write in, which I may use to underline, circle and otherwise call attention to the parts that sick out to me. Neither of these are required, though. The more you study, the more you'll find what works for you.

¹“Now Bezalel, Oholiab, and every skillful person in whom the Lord has put skill and understanding to know how to perform all the work in the construction of the sanctuary, shall perform in accordance with everything that the Lord has commanded.”

²Then Moses called Bezalel, Oholiab, and every skillful person in whom the Lord had put skill, everyone whose heart stirred him, to come to the work to perform it. ³They received from Moses every contribution which the sons of Israel had brought to perform the work in the construction of the sanctuary. And they still continued bringing to him voluntary offerings every morning. ⁴And all the skillful people who were performing all the work of the sanctuary came, each from the work which they were performing, ⁵and they said to Moses, “The people are bringing much more than enough for the construction work which the Lord commanded us to perform.” ⁶So Moses issued a command, and circulated a proclamation throughout the camp, saying, “No man or woman is to perform work any longer for the contributions of the sanctuary.” So the people were restrained from bringing any more. ⁷For the material they had was sufficient and more than enough for all the work, to perform it. Exodus 36:1-7

Observation

Observations can be made mentally or recorded, depending on your style. If you record them, you can write out sentences and paragraphs, map from the written out verse, or use a bulleted list—whatever works for you; don't be afraid to try out different methods. Below is a bulleted list of observations I made while reading this passage:

• The Lord gave certain people specific talents for use in building the sanctuary.
  • Did He give them talents on the fly?
  • Or did people have the talent before, either something they picked up in Egypt, or had always possessed?
• They had already taken up one collection/offering, but people still came back to give more.
• Giving was voluntary.
• They gave so much Moses had to stop them!
• God gave to them in such a manner that they were able to give enough for the sanctuary and still have more left to give.

Application

Applications take us from in the passage to our present day life. How does this passage speak to me, what does it say about our current society, etc. During this step we can come up with pracitcal ways to improve oursleves and our community based on what we have observed. For me, this usually starts with questions. Below is what my thought process looked like for Exodus 36 applications.

• What are my God given talents and skills?
• Am I using them for His kingdom? Is He calling me to use them for His Kingdom?
• What does giving in abundance mean today?
  • Moses stopped the people from giving at some point, so there was a clear boundary at which point it became "excessive" giving
  • Moses stopped them when they had enough for what God needed
  • So, we should give freely with an open heart, but be mindful of God's voice or messenger telling us when we have given enough.

Prayer

The final step is prayer. Personally, I believe this hsould be the first step in a Bible Study, and to be honest, I get annoyed when I attend Bible Studies that wait to pray until the end. There are four ways to incorporate prayer into a Bible study:

1. Pray before the study
2. Pray after the study
3. Pray before and after the study
4. Pray randomly throughout the study

While there is no Bible verse that instructs on this, I would strongly sugggest method #3. The reason I prefer this method is based on John 14:26, 1 Corinthians 2:14, and 1 John 2:27. The Holy Spirit interprets the Word for us and opens our spiritual eyes. To understand the Word we need to put away flesh and read in the Spirit, which for me means inviting the Holy Spirit in before I start studying. Then at the end of the study I ask the Spirit to help me implement what I've learned in my life and to continue working on me in the areas in which I struggle. Some people feel like diving in and then asking the Holy Spirit to sort out the wrestling between Spirit and flesh afterward. I concede that there's nothing inherently wrong with that method but if I had to only have one prayer during my study I would pray before the study. Nonetheless, as you study and grow your relationship with God you will find what works for you, and who knows, you might be a method #4 person and pray midway through the study. As long as you're studying and leaning on Him for understanding, I'm proud of you!

References and Footnotes

1. I say special because it's the only one I write in; there isn't acutally anything special about it.

The Allegory of Food

From the fall of man to the last supper, food is at the center of so many crucial moments in the Bible. The more I read the word, however, the more I see that food serves as a stand in for something mcuh more important and our connection to food is heavily correlated to this more important object.

Major Events Centered on Food

The Fall of Man

Most people concerate on disobedience and pride when discussing the fall, but I've always found it fascinating that the test of man's obedience was a fruit. We don't know what type of fruit they eat—thanks to Paradise Lost most people are convinced it was an apple, despite there being no evidence for this. Let's say it was an apple, though, for argument's sake. Can you imagine throwing away paradise over an apple? Of all the fruits that exist in the world—and they had access to all the fruits—an apple is pretty basic. Now, of course I would say that because I've tasted one before and can easily compare it to other fruits. Nonetheless, Adam and Eve were given everything good to eat freely by God. Imagine standing in the grocery store and the manager says you can have anything you want in the store for the rest of your life as long as you don't take [insert a single item]. What item would it take for you to walk away from the deal? Where would you lose your self control? (I'm thinking I'd lose it at salt... How would I season all the food without salt!?)

Food seems like such a minor offense for us to be condemned over. This is probably why most pastors focus on obedience and pride, rather than the notion that our condmened existence is a consequence of eating the wrong fruit. Yet, there's quite the profound correlation between today and what happened then. The popular phrase "you are what you eat" is scarily true. Countless studies have proven that many of the health issues in the United States stem from poor diet. The standard American diet (aptly dubbed SAD) puts you at risk for obesity, diabetes, high blood pressure, high cholesterol, and so much more. People with these underlying conditions are more likely to experience severe COVID or death if infected with COVID-19. It follows (and studies have proven) that diet affects your life span. Also, what you eat provides your body with certain nutrients that help you function. Side effects of not consuming the proper balance of nutrients include fatigue, lethargy, moodiness, and more.

We were not created to consume certain foods!

Manna

In Exodus 16, we learn that while the Israelites were in the wilderness God provided them with a mysterious food called "manna." Manna was perfectly crafted by the Father to provide for their dietary needs and rained from the heavens faithfully everyday (except Sabbath).

And the house of Israel named the bread manna, and it was like coriander seed, white, and its taste was like wafers with honey. Exodus 16:31 NASB

The provision of manna took away the need and worry of foraging for food in the wilderness. Today, much of the Middle East is desert. I'm not sure exactly what the terrain between Egypt and Israel was during Moses' era, but even if it were rich with clean animals and bountiful with plants, it would have been a lot of work to hunt and forage. In my hometown, there used to be a blueberry farm—rows and rows of blueberry bushes kept by one man who used to sell the berries. When he died, no one took over the farm. In a year the weeds were so high it was hard to distinguish the blueberry bushes. Within two years it was a mess of weeds and baby pine trees, and by the third year it had been reclaimed by the forest. No doubt, there may still be blueberries buried in there somewhere, but the bushes are now competing for nutrients with the other plants now growing there and there are no longer neat pathways for one to get to the berries. Plus, some of the bushes likely died, making the quantity of berries drastically smalleer. Add in the fact that local wildlife no has free access to the berries and you can bet that it would be pretty hard to get a significant harvest in it's current state. The same concept would apply in any fertile wilderness.

Similarly, when humans raise cattle and other livestock for food, it may be messy, but it's fairly simple to corral the animals to slaughter. In the wild, one needs to first find the animal and then spear it from a distance as the animals wouldn't be tame enough for you to approach it. For a small family, perhaps this wouldn't be so bad, but for the entire nation of Israel plus the mixed multitude... How many wild animals would you have to find and kill to feed everyone?

The manna was a curcial gift from God that allowed Israel to continue even when they were in a position where they should starve.

Feeding the Multitude

There are multiple times in the New Testament that Jesus feed a multitude with a scant amount of food. I don't know what size the loaves of bread or the fish he carried were, but as someone who has eaten a whole large pizza by myself, I agree that it is miracluous to feed that many people with such a small quantity of food. Now I've heard pastors try to downplay the miracle by suggesting other people added to the meal, but regardless of how the miracle played out, the fact remains that a large group of people were brought together and able to join together from a small and finite quantity of food.

Example Prayer

In the example pray Christ gives us in Matthew 6, He says: "Give us this day our daily bread." Why do you think this was included?

The Last Supper

The final encounter Messiah has with His disciple is the last supper. We know that the early church often ate together and this likely stemed from Christ's example.

What is Food?

Food isn't just food though. Food is the Word of God!

But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. Matthew 4:4 KJV

And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst. John 6:35 KJV

Reflect back on the events mentioned above and substitute Messiah or the Word of God for food.

Rejecting God

In the garden, the forbidden fruit becomes a false god. The abundant fruits available to Adam and Eve are the true God. You could also think of the forbidden fruit as a forbidden word (it is after all from the Tree of Knowledge), and the other fruits as the pure Word of God. By choosing the forbidden fruit, Adam and Eve choose a false god, a false narative, a false doctrine. In the same way, we pollute our bodies by eating foods not meant for the body, we pollute our minds by consuming words not meant for our soul. Our corrupted bodies is what leads to death, but it is our corrupted minds that cause the trouble of sin.

Salvation

Romans 5:8 tells us that even as sinners who may not have comprehended the gift, Christ died for us. The Word was made flesh (John 1:14) and dwealt with us even though we didn't earn it. This same Word, dubbed the Bread of Life, is what saved us from our sin. If sinlessness was the garden or will be paradise, could we not think of sin as the wilderness? In the wilderness (sin) we need saving (the Bread of Life). This is exactly what the Father demonstrated in Exodus 16 by giving the Israelites manna (bread) while in the wilderness (lost). His promise to them did not end when they created the golden calf or because they complained; He provided this salvation free of charge for whoever would accept it.

Spreading the Word

When Christ feeds so many people with only a few loaves of bread and a couple fish, the food is the Word of God. Although God is infinte, the words written in the Bible are finite. At first, God selected the Israelites to be the keepers of the message—a limited number of people—but after Christ's death and resurrection, the same message was preached everywhere. In short, there is enough of gospel to feed the entire world. What's more, is that although God gave us a finite story, it can be multiplied without being changed. For example, most of Messiah's parables are related to agriculture and farming because that is how his audience could relate. Today, we can relate the exact same message using new parables more applicable to our audience. In this way, the one message is multiplied to educate thousands of cultures the same way the one meal was multiplied to feed thousands of people.

Our Daily Bread

In the example prayer of Matthew 6, Yeshua/Jesus prays "Give us this day our daily bread." We see evidence of God literally giving daily "bread" in the Exodus when manna rained from the heavens everyday (except Sabbath) for 40 years while Israel wandered in the desert. We also see men of God, like Daniel, who understand that the daily "bread" needed is not physical food but spiritual food. These men pray and communicate with God multiple times a day. When we pray this prayer, truly we are asking for daily wisdom from God, daily surrender to His Will, and daily understanding of His Word!

Unity

All of the holy days declared by God included a feast. In the New Testament, we see that every time the disciples get together, there is breaking of bread (re: food). The Bible correlates oneness of the body, celebration, and food. It makes sense that the food is the Word of God. Only when we follow His Word can we acheive unity and peace.

Events Indirectly Related to Food

Eating the Scroll

Both Ezekiel and John are given scrolls to eat while receiving a prophecy from the Most High (Ezekeiel 2-3; Revelation 10:9-10). In both cases, the scroll is described as having a sweet, honey-like taste, and, although described in different ways, bitterness is the end result for both men. Ezekiel leaves feeling bitter, while John has bitterness in his stomach. It makes sense that the Word of God is sweet—the Gospel literally means "good news"—but it also makes sense that it is bitter. The bitterness comes from the reality that there are in fact consequences for not following God, and that we have all fallen short. Every prophet who approached the throne of God was immediately embarassed by their own sinfulness, as we would be if we were to be in His presence today. On top of that, the sweetness that is unconditional forgiveness also applies to our enemies. The same way Stephen was forgiven of his sins, Paul was forgiven for stoning Stephen. There is a bitterness in knowing you must forgive others to receive your own forgiveness. There is also a bitterness in knowing that despite the free gift, not everyone will accept it. As such there are horrible times ahead and those who have accepted the gift will have to endure to the end.

Fasting

Fasting is the process of denying yourself food. I find it such an interesting concept when thinking about the fact that much of the Bible is talking about the importance of "daily bread." Yet, science has shown that fasting is actually good for your body. It gives the digestive system time to heal and rest. Is this true of the Word too? Might there be times where we need to simply reflect on all that we've been given instead of plowing ahead?

Matthew 1-2: The Birth of Christ

Discussion of the lineage and birth of Christ as well as the star signifying His birth and the gifts given to Him.

Lineage

Matthew starts off with the lineage and birth of Christ. Lineage was a major deal to the Israelites, in fact, in most societies bloodlines are very important. Several verses in the Bible articulate that the life of a person is in their blood. Our blood defines us—no, I'm not referring to blue blood or other worldly definitions. I'm referring to the very cells within our blood. The DNA contained in these cells is like a computer program that controls how we interact with the world around us. I don't want to get sidetracked, so if you want to know more about the life in the blood, check out my podcast episode on the topic.[8] The main point I'm making here is bloodlines are more than just wealth and worldly power passed down generation to generation, it's also Godly covenants passed from seed to seed. Because of this, the Jews meticulously kept up with bloodlines, searching for the promised seed (Genesis 3:15) that would defeat Satan.

The lineage presented in Matthew traces back to Abraham, and identifies Christ as a legitimate descendant of David with rights to the throne of Israel. That would be the end of the story, except Luke gives a very different lineage. There are many theories about why this is, which I've already covered in my post Harmonizing the Gospels: the Lineage of Christ. I don't want to be redundant, so I'm not going to go into detail about the lineage. I will say that there are multiple theories discussed in the post, and I fall in the camp of those who believe one lineage is that of Joseph (a legal justification for Christ's lineage) and one is that of Mary (a true bloodline lineage). Nonetheless, the early Church did not contest the written accounts, nor cry foul about such a glaring mistake; therefore regardless of why they are different, I am confident that the disciples and early church understood both of these lineages to be correct and valid.

Christ is Born

Matthew doesn't go into as much detail about the birth of Christ as Luke, but he does give us a few details to think about.

Mary & Joseph

When I look at the scenario of Mary and Joseph, I can't help but imagine this in today's crazy society. Can you imagine preparing for a wedding and finding out your fiancee is pregnant and you've never slept with her? While, I suspect how people external to the situation saw it would vary in our time (considering that premarital sex has been normalized, most would just assume it was Joseph's baby), the internal struggle each person experienced would have been very similar in today's time.

Today, Mary probably wouldn't worry about "slut shaming" or being condemned for having sex outside of marriage (depending on what circle she traveled in), but she would still be faced with the impossible task of convincing Joseph she hadn't been unfaithful. How crazy does it sound to say "I promise I'm a virgin...An angel told me I was carrying the Son of God, that's why I'm pregnant"? That probably sounded crazy then too. The only reason Joseph believed her is because the angel visited Joseph as well. Had Joseph not been visited by the angel, he would have left her. Sticking with the culture of Mary's time, her parents would have been furious if she'd gone to them; an illegitimate pregnancy would eliminate most decent prospects in marriage. Mary had to step out on faith that God would work things out. We aren't told how many people knew this information or how deep into the pregnancy she was when she got married, so we don't know how people around her reacted (if they reacted at all) but when she accepted what the angel told her, she had to accept the possibility that she would never be accepted into society again.

From the text, we know that Joseph was definitely not convinced by whatever Mary said (and who could blame him!?). It took an angel confirming that matter (as it should) for him to settle in to his role, but what is interesting is how Joseph intended to handle it. He could have been bitter and nasty about it; he could have made a spectacle of her. However, Joseph had resolved to handle the issue discreetly. This is a clear depiction of the man God chose to raise His son.

Both Mary and Joseph's reactions to the situation are indicative of why God chose them in the first place. Aside from being descendants of David to fulfill the prophecy, both bore the fruit of the Holy Spirit. God was entrusting this couple with His only son; He had to know they would make good parents.

The Wise Men & The Star

One of the most popular aspects of the birth of Christ is that of the star. One thing I could never understand as a child was why only the magi saw the star. Herod seems utterly baffled at its appearance and can't determine how old the child is based on the information. If the star was abnormally bright, wouldn't Herod have seen it and remembered? The cartoon-ish way Christians portray this element as a large gleaming star hanging above the manger is ridiculous and clearly false. A more likely scenario is that a sign played out in the heavens (see Genesis 1:14 for the purpose of the stars to be signs).

In some translations, the men who come to see Christ are the "magi" in others they are called "wise men." The original Greek is μαγοζ, which was a term applied to "the wise men, teachers, priests, physicians, astrologers, seers, interpreters of dreams, augurs, soothsayers, sorcerers, etc." in that culture. We can already see why some translators favored the term wise men, a term that could encompass many of the other terms. A compelling theory I've run across leans toward them being "astrologers."

I use the term astrologers loosely because there's context that needs to be applied here. In Matthew's day, anyone who studied the stars in any form or capacity was an "astrologer." Today, we have to terms for people concerned with the stars: astronomer or astrologer. Astronomers study the movement, behavior, life/death and inner workings of stars, while astrologers seek to connect those things to how events play out on earth. If you grew up in church you were probably taught that astrology is bad. I want to challenge that notion a bit wit this Bible verse:

¹⁴Then God said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night, and they shall serve as signs and for seasons, and for days and years; ¹⁵and they shall serve as lights in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth”; and it was so. ¹⁶God made the two great lights, the greater light to govern the day, and the lesser light to govern the night; He made the stars also. ¹⁷God placed them in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth, ¹⁸and to govern the day and the night, and to separate the light from the darkness; and God saw that it was good. ¹⁹And there was evening and there was morning, a fourth day. Genesis 1:14-19 NASB

In Genesis 1:14 we are told that God created lights in the sky not just for seasons and tracking time, but also for signs. So there is some relevance to "reading the stars." The thing to keep in mind is that it is not the stars making things happen. The stars are merely testifying to what God has already spoken (Psalm 19). Keep that in mind as you read what I'm about to type.

There is a theory that the star referenced in Matthew 1 is actually the behavior of a star over time (there are also theories about conjunctions of planets forming a really bright star, but that goes back to my question of why no one else seemed to notice). Many cultures have a zodiac and while they may ascribe slightly different names, the constellations are fairly consistent. One of the signs in the zodiac is Leo, the Lion. The lion was connected with the tribe of Judah and is connected to the Messiah (Who is the Lion and the Lamb). The brightest star (well, star system, but it appears as a single star to the naked eye) in Leo is called Regulus which comes from the Latin rex and means "little king."[1] Also in the sky is the planet Jupiter, which isn't a star but does appear as a light in the sky. Jupiter is named after the Roman god who was "king of the gods;" it was regarded as the king planet. Some who've studied the stars have identified interesting interplay with these three signs in the sky around the time of Christ's birth. This behavior is as follows: Jupiter (the king planet) passes through the lion near Regulus (the king star), goes in to retrograde (which mean it appears to go backwards, passing Regulus in the opposite direction), then crosses Regulus again. This pattern would have taken quite some time to complete, but the wise men would have seen the king planet "crown" the king star in the lion. It's not hard to see how that would be interpreted as the Messiah (the lion of Judah) being born (little king); especially if you were familiar with prophecy and understood the 70 weeks of Daniel. If you dig into it, though, there's even more with Virgo (the Virgin), Venus (the mother star), Mercury (the child star), and prophecy given in Revelation by John... If you're interested in this theory, I found a great video on YouTube that goes in to more detail (he goes into a lot of other things too; I encourage listening to the whole series, but I am linking the part specific to the star at the nativity). This theory explains why no one else noticed the star.

Herod and the Massacre of the Innocents

When the wise men get to Jerusalem they tell Herod why they're in town, and Herod is not happy to hear that the true King of Jerusalem has been born. Here I want to insert some context that will be reoccurring theme in the gospels: the Jews thought the Messiah was going to restore Israel to the splendor of Solomon. Essentially, they expected something much closer to what we expect for the second coming. In Herod's mind, this child would grow up and overthrow both him and the Roman government that gave him authority. This is why from birth, Christ was seen as a threat to power.

Herod, being led by Satan, does the same thing Pharaoh did while Israel was awaiting a Savior in Egypt (Exodus 1): he kills all the children. This fulfills a prophecy given by Jeremiah 31:15. During this atrocity, Mary, Joseph, and their newborn baby hide in Egypt, which also fulfills a prophecy (Hosea 11:1). Please note that the family hiding in Egypt follows the pattern started with Abraham of hiding in Egypt when there is trouble in Israel.

Nazarene

Before we end the chapter, we are told that Joseph and his family settle in Nazareth to fulfill a prophecy that the Messiah would be a Nazarene. There are two major things to point out about this revelation.

First, the reference to this prophecy appears to be lost. Many theories have been ascribed to what is being referenced here. Some believe there was a book that has not been added into our canon. Others believe it is a reference to Him being despised (Isaiah 53), because in John 1:46 we learn that the residents of Nazareth are not held in high esteem.[3][4]

Second, Nazarene is not the same as Nazarite. I've heard many people confuse this. Christ was a Nazarene because He was raised in Nazareth (similar to how I would be considered a Carolinian because I was raised in the Carolinas). Christ did not take a Nazarite vow, as evidenced by His consumption of wine (Numbers 6; Luke 7:34-35).

Frankincense, Gold, and Myrrh

The 3 gifts given to Christ are very fitting. Each represents a part of the Messiah's purpose. Frankincense was associated with the priests (Leviticus 2). Gold was associated with kings (). Myrrh was associated with death (Mark 15:23).[5][6][7]

Also, a common misconception is that there were 3 wise men; this assumption comes from the fact that they gave 3 gifts. It could just as easily been ten wise men or two wise men—the Bible does not specify that each man gave one gift, only that there was more than one man and 3 gifts given.

References

1. Larry Sessions. "Meet Regulus, The Lion’s Heart". Earth Sky. May 1, 2020
2. "Solar System Exploration: Jupiter". NASA; visited July 2021
3. "The Messiah would be called a Nazarene". Jews for Jesus; visited July 2021
4. "What prophecy is Matthew 2:23 referring to regarding Jesus being a Nazarene?". GotQuestions.org; visited July 2021
5. Eric Zielinski. "Gold, Frankincense & Myrrh – The Truth About Their Significance". Natural Living Family. June 23, 2020
6. Clint Pumphrey . "What Are Frankincense and Myrrh?". How Stuff Works. October 16, 2018
7. "Why Did the Magi Bring Gold, Frankincense and Myrrh?". Biblical Archaeology Society. June 15, 2021
8. Ree Hughes. "The Life is in the Blood". PSALMS to God. June 23, 2021

Harmonizing the Gospels: The Lineage of Christ

The lineage of Christ is crucial to Him fulfilling prophecy. Is it possible that the Bible contradicts itself on this fundamental point?

The lineage of Christ is given by Matthewm disciple of Christ, in Matthew 1:1-17 and Luke, a contemporary of Paul, in Luke 3:23-38. This is given to us to substaniate Christ's bloodline and prove Him to be a legitimate heir to the throne of David. Not only was this significant from a legal standpoint for the kingdom of Judah, but also a requirement of the Messiah foretold in prophecy (Jeremiah 23:5-6; Isaiah 11:1) Although Luke doesn't start with this information the way Matthew does, both present it early in their writings becuase of it's importance. If either man was presenting a man from the Tribe of Benjamin as a the long awaited Messiah, everyone would know the person was not the Messiah.

Is it a Contradiction?

Unfortunately, Matthew and Luke didn't give us the same lineage. Biblical scholars have been debating since who knows when about why these lineages are not the same. Let's dive into it.

Differences

One difference between Matthew and Luke is that Luke goes all the way back to Adam, while Matthew only goes back to Abraham. This, of course, is merely preference. From David back to Abraham (and in theory to Adam), Matthew and Luke are in 100% aggreement. After David, however, the list is very different. Luke traces the lineage through David's son Nathan, while Matthew traces the lineage through David's son Solomon. There's minor overlap, such as Zerubbabel and Sheatiel, between David and Joseph, but there's definitely more difference than similiarity.

Legal vs. Blood Relatives

One possibility is that one person is presenting a legal lineage, while the other is presenting a blood lineage. For some this may be confusing but I'd like to use my own family to show how this happens in modern day. We'll start with some easy examples and then get to some more complex ones.

One of my cousins' mother died in childbirth. Her father wasn't present so my cousin was raised by her maternal grandparents. Legal custody of the child belonged to the grandmother. Any inheritance my cousin received came straight from her grandparents. If they were royal, the succession would have been grandparent to grandchild with no mention of the mother even though the mother is part of the blood lineage. If we call my cousin Anna, her mother Bonnie, and her mother Connie,[1] a blood based lineage would look like Connie begot Bonnie and Bonnie begat Anna. A legal lineage would look like Connie begot Anna.

Now let's make it a little more complex and use the case of my own mother. When my mother was 12 she went to stay with her aunt and ended up staying there for the rest of her childhood. My great-aunt became her legal guardian and often if you hear me reference my maternal grandmother, I am actually speaking of my great-aunt, not my biological grandmother. My mom became my great-aunt's only daughter, so in turn my mom inherited all her clothes, shoes, jewelry, etc. when my great-aunt passed away. A legal the lineage went from my great-aunt to my mom. Lets call my great grandmother Dorothy, my biological grandmother Elaine, her sister (my great-aunt), Francine, and my mom Gertrude.[1] A legal lineage would look like Dorothy begot Francine and Francine begot Gertrude, while a blood lineage would look like Dorothy begot Elaine and Elaine begot Francine.

It's quite common where I'm from for families to adopt children within the family, but there's also the possibility of adopting a stranger. I have an aunt (by marriage) who was adopted by people completely unrelated to her. In that case you would see no overlap when comparing her legal versus blood lineage. For those with this lived experience, it's easy to see how both David's son Nathan and David's son Solomon could be listed as ancestors. Remember I gave you short examples from my family's modern history, if we tried to track it back centuries, who knows how many times switches like these could have occured? Something my family has in common with the Israelites is surviving captivity. I don't know what turmoil happened during the Babylonian, Greek, and Roman captivities of Israel, but chattel slavery in the United States allowed families to be sold and separated such that there were probably many babies raised by non-blood relatives. I say this to say if you were able to trace down my information and compare the legal record to the blood record, likely it would be just as convouluted.

Paternal vs. Maternal Relatives

Another idea put forth is that Matthew is giving Jesus' paternal lineage while Luke is giving his maternal lineage. There are two Biblical things that support this. First, in Luke 3:23, Luke prefaces the lineage in calling our attention to the fact that Joseph is Jesus' legal father but not His real father by saying it's commonly thought that Joseph is the father of Jesus. When my great-aunt died, my blood aunts and uncles showed up, and many people who grew up with my mom were confused because it was commonly held that my great-aunt was her mother. Second, if we look at Mary's reaction to the angel announcing her pregnancy in Luke 1:26-36, Mary doesn't question the assertion that her son would be of the lineage of David. If an angel came to me and said I was pregnant and my child would be the long lost heir to the throne of France, one of my first questions would be "but the baby isn't French?" It is very possibile that Mary was a descendant of David herself.

Now, things get really interesting. Technically speaking, Israel was a patriarchal society. Usually the first born son is who inherited glory from the father. Notable exceptions include Seth, Isaac, Jacob, and Solomon, who were not the first born sons, however they were still sons. With that line of thinking, many would ask how can Jesus be a legitimate heir to the throne of David when He doesn't have an earthly father? Just as people do today, men could legally adopt a heir and leave their inheritance to the son they've chosen, which would still allow Joseph to pass an inheritance down to Jesus. However, what's more interesting is that though rarely discussed, women could pass on inheritances too. In Numbers 26, we learn of Zelophehad who only had daughters, and in Numbers 27 they are given the right to inherit their father's property. In these verses, it is declared that a woman with no brothers who marries into her own tribe, is able to inherit from her father. When Jesus is crucified, Mary has a sister present with her (John 19:25), but the Bible never mentions Mary having a brother. It is very possible the Mary is descended from David, married into her own tribe, and inherited the lineage of David to pass to her first born son. This would also explain the need to prove Davidian descent on both sides.

What do I Believe?

What do I believe? I actually think both scenarios are true. I think Luke is providing us with Jesus' lineage through Mary while Matthew is providing it through Joseph. I think there is still some interplay of legal versus blood lineage as seen in the overlap of Shealtiel in both lineages. Matthew says Jeconiah is the father of Shealtiel, but Luke says Neri is the father of Shealtiel. Both Shealtiels have a son named Zerubbabel, making it seem as though this is the same person. In this regard, it's seems that one person is telling us who legally was the father of Sheatiel (whether like scenario 1 that I gave above or like scenario 2), while the other person is telling us who is the blood father of Sheatiel. Judging by the fact that all the kings of Judah are listed as descendants, it seems like the most likely candidate to be the legal lineage of Christ.

The Obvious Discrepancy

One thing I want to point out for skeptics, or for those who often engage in conversation with skeptics, is the logical problem of this being an actual contradiction. Archeologists have found many scrolls containing the story of Christ, some even claim to be the work of disciples such as Peter and Thomas. Beyond that there is the Apochrypa, a set of books deemed cannon by some and uninspired by others. There are even modern texts (I refuse to call them Bibles) that have been rewritten by translators (example: The Passion Bible, The Story, etc.). Knowing the importance of lineage, why would they leave a contradicting lineage in the Bible for 2,000 years. Most likely, the early Christians understood the lineages for what they are. Peter, Paul, etc., must not have had any concerns with the lineage. Otherwise they would have condemned the Gospel of Luke. When the text was translated to English in the dark ages, the book still could have been dropped or they could have forced the lineages to be the same; it's not like Google was around to let anyone know what happened. In those early days, if the intent had been to start a new religion, doesn't it make sense that those rising to power would eleminate anything that discredits them? During the dark ages, the Catholic Church had unrestrained power, wouldn't they have censored the blood line? It would have been so easy to fix!

Is Christ a Levite?

I've also heard people say Christ is actually a Levite, that He is both from the tribe of Levi and the tribe of Judah. Those who argue this then assert that by birth He has right to both the throne and the crown. The only way I surmise people make this assumption is through the connection of Elizabeth, mother of John the Baptist, and Mary. In Luke 1, Elizabeth is described as a daughter of Aaron, which makes her a Levite. However, Elizabeth is only described as a relative or cousin of Mary. There's no information on whether this a maternal or paternal relative. Why does that matter? Because tribal affiliation generally passed through the father. This is why a woman with no brother could only inherit if she married into the same tribe; this kept the inheritance within the tribe.

Elizabeth would have inherited her status as a daughter of Aaron from her father. So Elizabeth's father would need to be one related to Mary and he would need to be related to her through her father. If other generations exist between them, male relatives would need to connect them all the way for the assumption to hold. However, we aren't given the precise relationship Elizabeth has to Mary. There's a 50/50 chance it's her father that relates to Mary, but then there's another 50/50 chance that it's Mary's father that is related to Elizabeth. For just those two things to hold, there's only a 25% chance.

I admit its not impossible, but if Mary is a Levite, then the lineage in Luke can't be that of Mary. This would mean you would have to revist that idea of legal versus blood lineages. To me, there aren't enough overlaping names for me to believe that the only difference in the lineages presented are who actually raised a person. For that reason, I don't think there's much to the theory that Christ is also a Levite even though the theology of Levite + descendant of David = Priest + King is very compelling.

References and Footnotes

1. None of the names given in these scenarios are real (if you couldn't tell by the alphabetical pattern)
2. E. Earle Ellis. "St. Luke". Encyclopedia Britannica; visited June 2021
3. Erik Manning. "A Hopeless Bible Contradiction? Why do Matthew and Luke Give Us Two Different Geneaolgies For Jesus?" .Is Jesus Alive?. June 25, 2019

Luke vs. Paul: Abstaining from Meat Sacrificed to Idols

I have a list of difficult passages I've been working through and last Sabbath I added this topic after my Sabbath school class discussed Romans 14. Luke's conclusion on the issue of abstaining from meat sacrificed to idols seems to be the opposite of Pauls. In our society, these scriptures don't seem to have much relevance since our meat is usually factory farmed and not sacrificed to anyone. However, I think it's important to understand what we're reading so we can see how each passage fits in to the larger narrative. In addition, the underlying problem of bringing together people from different cultures is very real in our modern world. So, how do we harmonize these scriptures?

The Stances

Let's start by looking at each man's words on the topic. Luke, the author of Acts, mentions this issue in two places. Paul also mentions the issue twice.

²⁸For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay upon you no greater burden than these essentials: ²⁹that you abstain from things sacrificed to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from acts of sexual immorality; if you keep yourselves free from such things, you will do well. Farewell. Acts 15:28-29 NASB

But regarding the Gentiles who have believed, we sent a letter, having decided that they should abstain from meat sacrificed to idols and from blood and what is strangled, and from sexual immorality. Acts 21:25 NASB

One person has faith that he may eat all things, but the one who is weak eats only vegetables. 3 The one who eats is not to regard with contempt the one who does not eat, and the one who does not eat is not to judge the one who eats, for God has accepted him. Romans 14:2-3 NASB

⁷However, not all people have this knowledge; but some, being accustomed to the idol until now, eat food as if it were sacrificed to an idol; and their conscience, being weak, is defiled. ⁸Now food will not bring us [c]close to God; we are neither [d]the worse if we do not eat, nor [e]the better if we do eat. ⁹But take care that this [f]freedom of yours does not somehow become a stumbling block to the weak. ¹⁰For if someone sees you, the one who has knowledge, dining in an idol’s temple, will his conscience, if he is weak, not be strengthened to eat things sacrificed to idols? ¹¹For through your knowledge the one who is weak is ruined, the brother or sister for whose sake Christ died. ¹²And so, by sinning against the brothers and sisters and wounding their conscience when it is weak, you sin against Christ. ¹³Therefore, if food causes my brother to sin, I will never eat meat again, so that I will not cause my brother to sin. 1 Corinthians 8:7-13 NASB

It seems as though Luke has a hardline stance that the act is wrong, whereas Paul is saying the act in and of itself is not wrong, but we should be mindful of those around us.

Background

Let's step back into the time period of Luke and Paul for a second; it's impossible to understand these passages otherwise. In recent years, meat consumption has become a standard practice, something everyone does for every meal, but this hasn't always been the case. Meat was a luxury (and still is in some places). On top of that, there were no grocery stores or factory farms. Animals were not raised and slaughtered for mass consumption. In Paul and Luke's day, animals were kept to be sacrificed to gods. Just as the Israelites sacrificed a lamb on Passover (and then ate it), others were sacrificing animals to Roman gods. This meat could end up in the market for sale, or it could be the meat being served at your neighbor's house when you accepted a dinner invitation. Being unsure of the origin of the meat, many believers abstained from meat altogether (hence Paul referencing those who only ate vegetables).

The major issue in the church that both men were addressing was how to deal with Gentiles in the Israelite religion. Israel was supposed to be a Theocracy, with God as their king. The laws of God and the laws of the land were to be one and the same. Since everyone was to be worshiping the same God, their was never worry that the meat brought from your fellow Israelite was sacrificed to a pagan god. Roman however, was diverse, like the United States. In the cities of the Gentiles, you had people from different religions and cultures; you could never be sure what had been done to the meat sold in markets or served in people's homes.

Similarly, the mindset of the Jews and the Gentiles was different. Jews were simply accepting a deeper understanding of the religion/scriptures they had been taught from birth. Gentiles were unlearning the religion of their birth and learning something new. This changes how you approach things...

Modern Examples

I have two examples from my own personal life to illustrate how background can change the way you see things.

A friend of mine sent me a song by Lecrae. When I clicked play, I instantly recognized the beat. Lecrae's song samples from a Hip Hop song that has been sampled by many other artists. Instead of focusing on the lyrics of this particular song, my brain went to the lyrics of the song where I had first heard this beat. There is already a connection in my mind between the original song and that music. Not only did the lyrics of that song (which is not Christian) pop into my head, but memories associated with that song as well. It is impossible for me to worship and focus on God when listening to this song because my brain associates it with other things. My friend however, had never listened to non-Christian Hip Hop. They have never heard any of the songs that Lecrae is sampling from. They have no memories associated with that beat. They are able to listen and hear Lecrae's lyrics in peace.

Another friend introduced me to Erin Condren planners. I used her planners for 3 years before switching to a bullet jounral. It was during that time that I began keeping Sabbath. When I started using the planners, I didn't notice that they started the week on Monday, but as I got deeper in to my studies it bothered me. Like most people in the U.S., my brain was wired for Sunday being the end of the week: you work Monday through Friday, chores on Saturday, and rest on Sunday. Observing the Sabbath took a massive shift in mindset to see the week as Sunday through Friday, with Saturday as the day of rest. Now I start my week with chores, meal prep, and planning, but it's strange having that at the end of the week in your planner. I needed the visual of Sunday at the beginning of the week and Sabbath at the end to help me adjust my mindset.

Now, because of my experience, I could argue that no one should be listening to Lecrae and that no one should be using planners that start on Monday. This is the issue Paul and Luke are addressing. In my modern scenarios there is nothing inherently wrong with Lecrae's song or the planner; it is my experiences, my mindset, that affects the situation. There are many people who can listen to that Lecrae song and be moved by the Holy Spirit. There are many people who can use planners that start on Monday and still keep Sabbath. Paul's argument is the same: it's in the individual's mind.

Abstaining From Meat Sacrificed to Idols

While I can see clearly what Paul is suggesting when I bring it into a modern lens and inspect my personal life, it still gets muddy when I try to put it back in context with his time period.

Some ministries teach that Paul is expanding on Luke's instructions in Acts, essentially telling why they should abstain from the meats.[1] I question this interpretation for two main reasons. In Acts, Luke said absolutely to abstain from meats sacrificed from idols. While Paul does say that he would abstain to keep his brother from stumbling in 1 Corinthians, in Romans 14 Paul tells the one who does not eat not to judge the one who eats and vice versa. Putting Paul's writings together, I would say his stance is that it's OK to eat meat sacrificed to idols as long as it doesn't cause fellow believers to stumble. Luke on the other hand doesn't leave any room for eating this meat if no one objects...

My second concern is that the topics surrounding this issue actually seem to matter. Neither author is solely talking about meats sacrificed to idols. Luke also mentions consumption of blood, consumption of strangled animals, and sexual immorality. The command to abstain from blood is given all the way back in Genesis 9, right after the flood, before the establishment of Israel. Strangled meat refers to meat that had not been killed according to the custom, which typically meant blood was still inside that animal, pointing us back to the first issue of abstaining from blood. Sexual immorality is also spoken against in Genesis before the establishment of Israel, and is spoken against by Jesus/Yeshua/Messiah. Yes, all of these were part of pagan practices in Roman, but they were also forbidden during Noah's time, when there were no other people on the planet and thus, no pagan practices to conflict with God's ways. In Revelation 2:14,20, John comes back to the point of abstaining from meat sacrificed to idols and once again, God is condemning it.

In contrast, if you look at the modern examples I gave, you will never find passages where God condemned a specific type of music or planner.

Harmonizing

Honestly, I don't know the answer. This is one of those passages I will have to keep studying. Comment below how you view this passage and how you harmonize them.

References

1. "What does the Bible say about eating food/meat that has been sacrificed to idols?". GotQuestions.org; visited June 2021

Obadiah

Introduction

The book of Obadiah only has one chapter! It's one of the shortest books in the Bible. With such a succint book, you can expect that not much is known about it's author, the prophet Obadiah—he keeps it straight to the point and doesn't spend much time on himself. Some scholars believe he was a contemporary of Jeremiah, while others believe he operated around the reign of Jehoram, and yet others place him as a contemporary of Elisha. The latter camps argue that because Obadiah doesn't mention the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple, it was probably written before that destruction took place. The earliest date (Obadiah as a contemporary of Elisha) was proposed because Obadiah seems to reference the act that occurs in 2 Chronicles 28:17. No matter which of these dates is the true period in which Obadiah wrote, we can see that his prophecies were written before they were fulfilled.

Woe to Edom

Unlike most prophetic books of the Old Testament, Obadiah only talks about judgment on one nation: Edom. Edom was the bitter enemy of Israel, dating back to the rivalry between Esau (Edom) and Jacob (Israel). Despite the two brothers seeming to come to an agreement and make peace with each other, these two nations never got along. Edom joined Israel's ememies in attacking the city (2 Chronicles 28:17) and was not helpful when they were fleeing Egypt during the Exodus (Numbers 20:18). For this reason, God issued a judgment on Israel. Obadiah also lists the fact that Edom gloated over the failures of Israel as part of the judgment.

The judgment was that Edom would cease to exist. Obadiah describes the extent of dismantling Edom by contrasting it to robbery by thieves and plunders behave, noting that even they would leave something behind. Edom would become completely desolate and they would be betrayed by their so called allies. Today, there is no nation claiming to be descended from Edom. The last archelogical record explicitly referencing Edom as a kingdom/nation dates to 667bc.[2]

For the day of the Lord is near upon all the heathen: as thou hast done, it shall be done unto thee: thy reward shall return upon thine own head. Obadiah 1:15 KJV

Characteristics of Edom

I thought it was interesting that there are a few descriptions of the Edomites that give us a glimpse of their culture. They were said to live in the clefts of the rocks, meaning they lived in the caves. I find this interesting because the other mention of caves in the Bible that come to mind are also negative. It is in a cave that Lot's daughter rape him to produce sons (Genesis 19:30-38) and in Revelation, it is there that the lost go to hide from God's wrath (Revelation 6:15). To this day there is still negativity associated with living in caves via the term "caveman."

Another thing I found interesting was that the Edomites were compared to an eagle. Countries have always had mascots, likely why in visions God uses beasts to represent countries (see Daniel 7, Acts 10, and Revelation 13). The eagle was also associated with the Roman empire. Today, the eagle is associated with many countries accross the globe, including the United Staes.[3]

What Can We Learn From This

For passages like this, I often ask myself what it is saying about my world today. Yes, the primary purpose was to give hope to the Israelites that the Edomites would pay for their behavior, and one could argue that a secondary purpose was for God to prove His ability to reveal the future to His servants. However, there's a reason God preserved this text for us today, long after the name Edom has become a thing of the past.

One of the main condemnations of Edom is that they relished in their brother's pain. We should not mock anyone else's suffering! We should also be willing to help our brothers and sisters when they are in need. We can learn from Edom's mistakes to ensure that we don't behave the same way.

References

1. William MacDonald. Believer's Bible Commentary, pg. 1121. 1995
2. "Edom". Wikipedia; visited January 2021
3. "Eagle (heraldry)". Wikipedia; visited January 2021

Satan's Defeat | Dealing With the Devil (Part 6)

Introduction

This is the final peice in a series on a study I did, entitled "Dealing with the Devil," and based on a 30 day scripture plan I found by The Ruffled Mango.[1] In this post, I'm covering the last 4 days—we're going to look at:

• Revelation 12:7-10
• Revelation 20:7-15

Revelation 12:7-17: The Battle in Heaven

Satan and his angels go to battle against Michael and his angels. Michael and his angels represent the kingdom of God and are victorious in battle. Upon defeat, Satan is cast down to earth—not hell. This moment in Revelation is thought to be the moment when Jesus/Yeshua ascends to heaven after the resurrection. This is when He truly took the throne. That put us in a "transitional" state, much like that of the U.S. at the moment. Satan refuses to acknowledge God's victory, but the fact is, the day is coming when Christ will come to collect His kingdom.

Now judgment is upon this world; now the ruler of this world will be cast out John 12:31 NASB

⁸And He, when He comes, will convict the world regarding sin, and righteousness, and judgment: ⁹regarding sin, because they do not believe in Me; ¹⁰and regarding righteousness, because I am going to the Father and you no longer are going to see Me; ¹¹and regarding judgment, because the ruler of this world has been judged. John 16:8-11 NASB

Revelation 20:7-15: Satan Defeated For Good

Ultimately only those who submit to Christ are spared from the second death. When Satan is defeated, all those who sided with him, are also defeated. This passage is heavy, but only for those who are not written in the book of life. Those in the book of life are the ones who keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Christ. We can be thankful knowing that eventually, the devil's reign of terror will end and no one will have to deal with him ever again!

References

1. "June Scripture Writing Plan". The Ruffled Mango; visited October 4, 2020

Leadership | Dealing With the Devil (Part 5)

Introduction

This is a continuation of a study I'm doing on "Dealing with the Devil," based on a 30 day scripture plan I found by The Ruffled Mango.[1] In this post, I'm covering days 19 and 20—we're going to look at:

• 1 Timothy 3:1-3
• 1 Timothy 3:4-7

³This is a true saying, if a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. ²A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; ³Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous; 1 Timothy 3:1-3 KJV

1 Timothy 3:1-3: Characteristics of a Leader

This passage defines the traits of a "bishop" (KJV) or "overseerer" (NASB), which is simply put, a leader. These traits are echoed in Titus 1:7-9.

Though this passage is likely referring to leadership within the church, it is fitting for all areas of our life. We should be exemplifying this definition of leadership in every aspect of our lives. Remember, just because you are not officially a leader, it doesn't mean soemone isn't looking up to you as a leader!

Good Traits to Have

• Blameless
• Monogamous
• Vigilant
• Sober (Sober-Minded)
• Hospitable
• Good Behavior
• Teacher
• Patient

Bad Traits to Have

• Drunken
• Quarrelsome
• Violent
• Greedy
• Covetous

⁴One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; ⁵(For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?) ⁶Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil. ⁷Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil. 1 Timothy 3:4-7 KJV

1 Timothy 3:4-7: Pride & Rapport

In the next part of the passage, 2 major things are called out as being behind the fall of a good leader: pride and ill rapport with the poor.

One thing I'd like to call attention to is the statement that a leader should not be a novice. In most organizations I've been in, the president of the organization is required to have been in the organization for some period of time and to have held a position within the executive board (e.g., Vice-President, Treasurer, or Secretary) prior to becoming president. It is unwise to have someone who doesn't understand the process, the history, or the mission, in a position of power.

Knowing this, it also makes sense that the fist test of leadership is your own life and family. Note, that is not to say that if your family does not fit the perfect image that you are a bad person or even that you are a bad leader, however it does mean that perhaps you time should be spent with your family instead. I've often wondered if the reason peacher's children have a reputation for actting out is because they are seeking attention from a parent who gives all their attention to the church. Sometimes we are capable of providing the necessary attention and dedication to both, but sometimes we are not. In the latter case, it's ok to take a break or to step down to focus on family.

Conclusion

This passage teaches us about the importance of leadership. The reason it is important to follow God's outline of leadership and to elect Godly leaders is because this is the easiest way for the devil to "take over." If Satan can cause one leader to fall, he can wrestle many souls from God. A perfect example of this is all the heinous crimes committed by so-called leaders of the church, such as the phedophila scandal in Catholicism, that turns people away from God.

We each have a responsibility to hold our leaders to this definition of leadership and to be leaders by this definition.

References

1. "June Scripture Writing Plan". The Ruffled Mango; visited October 4, 2020
2. "Strong's G1985. ἐπίσκοπος". Blue Letter Bible; visited November 7, 2020
3. "Strong's G4131. πλήκτης". Blue Letter Bible; visited November 7, 2020

Dealing with the Deal (Part 4)

Introduction

This is a continuation of a study I'm doing on "Dealing with the Devil," based on a 30 day scripture plan I found by The Ruffled Mango.[1] In this post, I'm covering days 15 through 18—we're going to look at:

• 2 Corinthians 12:7-10
• Ephesians 4:25-27
• Ephesians 6:10-13
• Ephesians 6:14-18

2 Corinthians 12:7-10: Strength in Weakness

Ephesians 4:25-27: Falsehood & Anger

Ephesians 6:10-13: Systems of Power

Ephesians 6:14-18: The Armor of God

The Belt of Truth

• A belt holds the rest of the armor together
• Modern day, the belt holds up our pants
• For emergency personnel or combat soldiers, the belt would be the central access point for tools (radio, gun, etc.)
• Like the belt, truth is our foundation
• Truth helps us discern things of God from decptions of the devil
• Applications:
  1. Study the Word
  2. Decorate spaces with scripture
  3. Memorize scripture

The Breastplate of Righteousness

• The breastplate protects our vital organs (heart, lungs, etc.)
• Righteousness = acting in accordance to God's moral law[2]
• God's law actually protects us:
  • Behavior protects and strengths our horizontal relationships
  • Diet protects our health and gives us strength
  • Sabbath protects us mentally and gives us rest
• Applications:
  1. Obedience
  2. Pray to overcome sin
  3. Accountability Partners

The Gospel of Peace

• Footwear gives you endurance for the journey
• Footwear should be specific to the situation
• Applications:
  1. Security in God
  2. Faith in His abilities
  3. Do not be quarrelsome or work to divide the body

The Shield of Faith

• Shields protect you from attacks
• Our faith must be rock solid so that the attack cannot penetrate
• A shield covers us just like the blood of Christ covers us
• Applications:
  1. Share your testimony
  2. Listen to others' testimonies
  3. Pray for faith (Mark 9:23-24)

The Helmet of Salvation

• Helmets protect the head (mind/conciousness)
• Spiritual battles are often mental
• Applications:
  1. Control what influences you
  2. Romans 12:2
  3. Philippians 4:8

The Sowrd of the Spirit

• Sword allows us to attack! (The only piece of the armor that does so)
• Represents the Word of God (Hebrews 4:12)
• Applications:
  1. Lean of the Word
  2. Use the Word instead of your own words

References

1. "June Scripture Writing Plan". The Ruffled Mango; visited October 4, 2020
2. "Righteousness". Merriam Webster; visited October 31, 2020
3. "Anger". Merriam Webster; visited October 31, 2020

Dealing With The Devil (Part 3)

Introduction

This is a continuation of a study I'm doing on "Dealing with the Devil," based on a 30 day scripture plan I found by The Ruffled Mango.[1] In this post, I'm covering days 10 through 14—we're going to look at:

• Acts 13:8-12
• Romans 16:19-20
• 1 Corinthians 5:1-5
• 2 Corinthians 2:10-11
• 2 Corinthians 11:12-15

Acts 13:8-12: Elymas Tries To Sway the Proconsul

Satan uses Elymas, a sorcerer, tried to sway the proconsul (a man of power[2]) from the faith and it ended up backfiring on him! In this passage, we learn that Satan uses trickery and deceit to accomplish things, but we also learn that when we stand up to him, God uses those moments to bring believers to His side instead.

Romans 16:19-20: Simple Concerning Evil

Despite their obedience, Paul chides the people on being "wise to that which is good and simple concerning evil." This hit personally, because I have a tendency to complicate issues. We thinking and overthink until we end up not sure which way is up and which way is down. Satan can use this to his advantage.

1 Corinthians 5:1-5: Separate From Evil

In this passage we learn about a church that struggled to separate themself from evil. A rotten apple spoils the whole bunch! There were 2 key points I took from this passage:

1. The devil isn't always external; sometimes we are our own adversary
2. If we need to separate from someone, the goal should be to ultimately get them back to Christ

2 Corinthians 2:10-11: Forgiveness is Key

This passage focused on forgiveness and the fact that when we don't forgive each other, the devil can get a foothold in our relationships. It reminded me of church hurt and how we both push people away and allow ourselves to be pushed away. The devil wants us to be separated because that is when we are at our weakest point.

2 Corinthians 11: Stay The Course

Sometimes we're tired, overlooked, and overworked; but if we don't do what God calls us to do, the devil will certainly send someone to replace us. There are many false prophets who are just waiting for the spotlight and with that spotlight they can do a lot of damage. It is our responsibility to be where God tells us to be, doing what He tells us to do so that the devil doesn't get to voice his deceit.

Conclusion

The biggest take away I took from this selection of passages was that we must call out false teaching and evil. We must take a stand and declare the goodness of God to contrast the devil's darkness. This is how we win souls for Christ and how we keep ourselves from being deceived.

References

1. "June Scripture Writing Plan". The Reffled Mango; visited October 4, 2020
2. "Proconsul". Dictionary.com; visited October 23, 2020
3. "Strong's G5218. ὑπακοή". Blue Letter Bible; visited October 23, 2020