John 6:15 Kingship Declined

I and a young man were discussing various facets of Jesus’ life and ministry. Without actually mentioning John 6:15, he alluded to it and asked “Why didn't Jesus accept the kingship? He could have had a much broader influence on people. When they saw the type of king he would have and could have been, they would have flocked to him.”

I commended the young man for having such an intelligent question. It is not often I hear people give that much thought to scripture. Regarding the “influence” Jesus could have had, I asked him to consider: “If Jesus had accepted that position, would people be responding to Jesus because of the message he brought or because they might be in fear of his position as king?” He immediately saw the potential of being wrongly influenced by position. There is also the matter of free will. If Jesus had accepted rulership on earth obviously his rulership would require loyalty. People would no longer feel free to decide to accept him. But there are a few other points that his question hits on.

Both the books of Mark and Luke mention a time when Jesus was expelling demons from people. Both the accounts mention something very odd -- that Jesus would not allow the demons to identify him (Jesus) as the Messiah. Why? First, he didn’t need the testimony from traitors to his Father, but just as important, he wanted the people to believe based on their own observations and faith and not something as ominous as spirit voices.

In another instance, Jesus healed a man but strictly informed him not to tell anyone who had healed him. Again, why? In this case, “people were coming at him from all sides” because they wanted the physical benefits he offered, not because of the message of the Kingdom, which was his main focus.

Yet another point (I suppose there are several others that could be cited, but these are the ones that come readily to mind), is that Jesus himself already knew that his rulership would not be administered from earth. Although in context Jesus was speaking about the “source” as not being from Satan, it bears noting that Jesus knew his rulership would be administered from heaven.

Reviewing then, Jesus' rule would not be from earth and he wanted people to accept him for the message he brought, not the position he held or the selfish benefits people could enjoy. Although the Bible does indeed promise rewards for loyalty, no real and lasting relationship (even between one or more humans) can be based on such selfish motives.

Main Topics

For years I have heard that all scripture discussions lead back to Jehovah and His sovereignty. I wondered if that was merely a general truism or if it could be tangibly illustrated with a flow-chart styled graph. My first challenge was to figure out what the main branches would be. As I contemplated this, it dawned on me that rulership (sovereignty) is always a hotly debated issue regardless of who that ruler is. Issues over policy, taxes, character and much more are heard expressed with near religious fervor. In all cases, it comes down to proponents (supporters) and opponents (those against) any particular ruler and his viewpoints, ways, and administration.

So who are the main proponents and opponents of Jehovah and his rulership. I went through multiple drafts but finally came up with two main proponents and one main opponent. The proponents are Jesus and God’s own word, the Bible. The main opponent, a vicious adversary, is Satan the Devil. From there, I asked myself: “By what means do Jesus and the Bible carry out their support of God? Likewise, by what means, methods, and agencies does Satan carry out his opposition?”

I have not added anything significant to the chart in about one year, so I am relatively certain that I have a solid study aid. If I make any changes they will be minor ones and I am committed to posting them as I complete them. You can download the chart here:

Current version of MainTopics.pdf

Romans 12:11 Aglow With The Spirit.

Pictorial Language Series

Romans 12:11 “Be industrious, not lazy. Be aglow with the spirit. Slave for Jehovah.” Other translations

I was intrigued by an observation made in the 2013 New World Translation in an appendix on page 1719. There it said that the Greek word used for “aglow” was “boiling.”

Depending on which Bible verse is being referenced with regards “zeal,” those recognized as respected Bible commentators (see note below) have proposed two different interpretations of "spirit." First is the power that God gives us to accomplish his will. In this respect, we give Him all credit for the small part we play in accomplishing his will. Second, "the spirit" could be the spirit we demonstrate, our outward prominent demeanor characterized by heartfelt appreciation for God's love.

So which is it in Romans 12:11? As always, taking into account the context helps to solve the issue. Notice verses 9 through 15. In the context of those verses, Paul addresses cognitive, decision-based actions and attitudes. Our predominant character is, in effect, “aglow” with appreciation for God. But what does being “aglow,” showing “zeal,” being “enthusiastic,” or any of the other words used in the linked “other translations” shown above have to do with the Greek word “boiling”? That to me was the intriguing part of the question. Surely the translators must have stumbled on something that would help them understand “boiling” as “enthusiasm, zeal, fervor.”

The closest I came to an explanation is the following quote: “literally "boiling" with interest or desire.” Perhaps young, expressive children are the best at illustrating this emotion. They come up to us ready to burst inside with all the amazing things they experienced that day. Just like a boiling pot that may start bubbling over the sides of container, these children are bubbling over with gleeful expressions about their day. Additionally, In American English we have a few phrases that begin with the words "bubbling over." There is "bubbling over with excitement; bubbling over with enthusiasm; and bubbling over with joy."

In all these, the phrase "bubbling over" is actually a reference to a cooking pot that is boiling and therefore bubbling or spilling over the sides of the pot. Although there is no proof the phrase actually came from zeo, the Greek word for boil, its interesting that it is used the same way in the Bible as we do in modern speech. With that in mind, we can now ask, “What did Paul mean?”

In answer, like the small children and the common phrase "bubbling over" previously mentioned, true Christians ought to find their faith so invigorating that others seeing our contagious, infectious joyful spirit, would be obliged to react as they would to a boiling pot--taking action either in a positive or negative way, but not passively.

Note about Bible commentators: Although it is readily known that I completely respect the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society for its explanation of scripture, for the sake of this article I was actually referring to more general authorities such as the ones commenting on Romans 12:11 on this link.

Watchtower References:

Issue: 12/15/2010

Issue: 10/15/2009 paragraph 6

1Kings 20:11 Girding On Armor

Pictorial Language Series

1 Kings 20:11 “The one who puts on his armor should not boast about himself like one who takes it off.” (Other translations)

War was imminent. The boastful and arrogant king of Syria (Benhadad) made unreasonable demands on King Ahab of Israel. At first, Ahab was willing to comply with the initial demands in order to keep the peace. However, when Behadad mistook Ahab’s compliance as weakness, Benhadad upped the ante and made demands that would bring financial ruin the Israelites. When Ahab declined to comply with the second demands, Behadad sent a messenger back to Ahab and bragged that he would level the Israelite city and leave it a burnt-up heap of ashes.

In response, Ahab sent Benhadad’s messenger back with the message shown above in verse 11. What in the world did he mean by that? When I first read this some 40+ years ago, I must admit that I had no clue. But as I regularly do, I wrote the passage down in a binder and filed it away until I could do more research.

In 1976 Thomas Nelson Publishers (Nashville, NY) released the “Good News Bible, Today’s English Version” When I read the passage there, a light immediately came on. “Of course!” I declared. “That seems so simple now. Why didn’t I see it before?” See what? Stop and think to yourself, “When does a warrior gird (or, “put on”) armament and when does he take it off?" Timing and circumstance are everything in this case. If you reasoned inside yourself, “Well, a warrior puts on his gear before a battle and, only if he lives to tell about it, does it take it off after a battle,” you are 100% correct.

And so it is that the Good News bible rendered that reply as: “A real soldier does his bragging after a battle, not before it.” Yes, Benhadad wasn't entitled to claim any victory until he actually engaged the Israelites and proved victorious. Curious how it turned out? Admittedly, Israel was greatly outnumbered. Benhadad had brought along 32 other kings and their armies. (There is nothing like stacking the cards in one’s own favor.) So you might be surprised to read the actual results: 1 Kings 20:21. How was this possible? Ahab had a card of his own up his sleeve -- Jehovah his God.

It is a very good lesson for all believers today. In the face of insurmountable odds, having God on our side is all we need.

Ecclesiastes 11:4 Wind and Clouds

Pictorial Language Series

Ecclesiastes 11:4 reads: “The one who watches the wind will not sow seed, and the one who looks at the clouds will not reap.” (NWT 2013) (Other translations) What is the point about the wind and clouds? Consider the situation: You are a farmer and you make constant comments about the wind. One time it is too windy: "Well, all my seed will get blown everywhere. What good is that?" The next time it is not windy enough, "There isn't enough to scatter my seed evenly. It will end up in clumps. I can't have that." The fact is, there just doesn't seem to be any perfect condition for you.The same goes with the clouds: "Well, it is starting to cloud up. It might rain. I can't harvest in the rain."

So what is the point? If you said the point is finding excuses and procrastinating, you would be 100% correct. When we are hesitant (or just plain do not want to do something) we tend to find any plausible (or even ridiculously silly) reason for delaying action.“

When the matter we are delaying could have a long range effect on our life (such as dealing with crops to feed ourselves), the result can be more than a minor inconvenience, it could be catastrophic! To avoid the possibility of suffering due to procrastination, the Bible encourages us to be determined,  industrious and diligent so that regardless of whether the returns on our investment of time, effort, and resources are small or great, we will have "something" to show for our efforts. In addition, even if things turn out poorly,  just the clear conscience of knowing we made every effort is better than doing nothing.

See this update: A Second Look at Ecclesiastes 11:4-6

About

Pictorial Series Intro

When I first started studying the Bible (over 40 years ago), I thought that most of the pictorial language would be found in passages from Psalms, Proverbs and Ecclesiastes. While it is true that they have their fair share of such, I’m beginning to realize that a great deal of the way the ancients communicated was in “figures of speech” (or, picture-words) even in common daily interactions. Unfortunately as simple and understandable as such speech ought to be, the meaning is lost in ambiguity for most modern-day readers. With that I decided to start a series featuring the pictorials and their meaning. This series will be grouped in the Index under the heading “Pictorial Language of the Bible.”

Side note: The word "idiom" can also be used to describe what I am referring to as pictorial language. Just for the record, the American language uses idioms very frequently. Imagine having to translate "The president's healthcare bill is a real hot potato" into some other language and convey the intended meaning? The correct way would be to say that "The president's healthcare bill is a hotly debated issue." But if you were a foreigner seeing the original sentence and knowing nothing about American culture, it would be a huge challenge to first understand what was written, and then try to convey not only the correct idea, but somehow preserve the artistic imagery and whimsical feeling of the original writer. Such are the challenges for Bible translators.

Jeremiah 23:25-27 Forgetting God's Name

“I have heard the prophets who are prophesying lies in my name say, ‘I had a dream! I had a dream!’ How long will this continue in the heart of the prophets, to prophesy lies? They are prophets of the deceit of their own heart. They intend to make my people forget my name by the dreams they relate to one another, just as their fathers forgot my name because of Baal.” - Jeremiah 23:25-27

The focus is vs 27. Through Christendom's translations of the Bible, and their wrong conclusions about knowing and using God's name, Jehovah, they do indeed "intend to make my people forget my name by the dreams they relate." In this case, even the modern day Israelites and Jews are guilty by degrading their Bible translations first to "Lord" and then to "the name." But they are not the only reprehensible ones. Because Christendom claims to be "My [God’s] people" they are also worthy of God’s adverse judgment. Such nominal Christians not only remove all occurrences of the Tetragrammaton, but even say that such is not really God's name at all. Their claims, like so many ancient "dreamers," have obscured God from reader’s sight as being someone who is personally interested in mankind.

The clergy of Christendom will say that "it really doesn't matter what God's name is because there is only one true God." So let me ask you, just because there is only one you in this whole world, does that mean I can just call you "hey you!"? Likely, you'd correct me and tell me to show you respect by calling you by your name. And if i were to respond to you, "What does it matter, there is only one you in this world?" you would likely go through a whole range of negative feelings and think I was stupid, arrogant, and rude.

In the "world" we live today, there are numerous other gods that are worshiped. When I was young, about 6 decades ago, there weren't so many Eastern Indians in this country (USA). But today, there are a considerable number. They bring with them their numerous gods. So they can completely appreciate the absolute need to differentiate who is being spoken of. True, those of Jewish and Christian beliefs do not recognize those deities, but that doesn't change the need to honor God by calling him by his unique name, Jehovah (or Yahweh).

But it is not merely knowing a name that matters. It is also knowing what the name means to us. People back in Jeremiah’s day were not merely forgetting who God was but also what he meant to them. Likewise today, both Christendom and those claiming to be the descendants of Abraham (some of the Jewish faith prefer being called Hebrew or Israelite, so I’m hoping to capture all possibilities by referring to their main ancestor) have replaced the Bible with the doctrines, practices, customs, and ritualisms of men. To many and for many decades, knowing God has nothing to do with knowing the book that originally introduced God to mankind. Sadly such ones do not realize they are not learning what God says but rather what men say through their philosophies.