Reading 1 – 2Ki 18:5

“Hezekiah trusted in the LORD, the God of Israel. There was no one like him among all the kings of Judah, either before him or after him” (2Ki 18:5).

“Most apparent contradictions are easily resolved by a careful reading of the passages in question in their contexts, and by clearly defining what is, and what is not, said. For example, it is written of both Hezekiah and Josiah that ‘after him was none like him among all the kings of Judah, nor any that were before him’ (2Ki 18:5; 23:25). As these statements read, they appear contradictory until it is noted in what respect ‘after him was none like him… nor any that were before him.’ It will be seen that Hezekiah was commended because he trusted, and Josiah because he turned to the LORD. Since mutually exclusive statements are not made, the two statements are not contradictory. The problem is resolved by merely noting precisely what the records do say” (Ron Abel, “Wrested Scripture” 238).

Reading 2 – Eze 8:8-10

“He said to me, ‘Son of man, now dig into the wall.’ So I dug into the wall and saw a doorway there. And he said to me, ‘Go in and see the wicked and detestable things they are doing here.’ So I went in and looked, and I saw portrayed all over the walls all kinds of crawling things and detestable animals and all the idols of the house of Israel” (Eze 8:8-10).

“As the prophet stood there God said to him, ‘Son of man, dig in the wall’. He did so, and through the wall he saw a door. Then he was told to go in and see what vile abominations were being committed. When he went in he saw portrayed on the wall all kinds of creeping things and loathsome beasts, and all the idols of the house of Israel… The description of these gods suggests that the people had adopted some of the gods of Egypt. For some time Israel had been looking to Egypt for assistance in their conflict with Babylon” (WH Boulton, “Ezekiel” 52).

Reading 3 – Luk 4:1-13

IT IS WRITTEN!

Over the course of the 40 days temptation in the wilderness, Jesus resisted the allurements of sin by continual resort to quotations from the Scripture — specifically, in the instances given, from the book of Deuteronomy: Deu 8:3; 6:13; 6:16. Here is a profound lesson for us: while the power of will demonstrated by Jesus is surely extraordinary — even miraculous — and while the Holy Spirit received from his Father must also have played a significant part… nevertheless, there is nothing mysterious about his resorting to the comfort and encouragement of the Bible. This account tells us that the PRIMARY means by which Jesus resisted sin was… the word of God!

And the same will be true of us. Knowing the Bible — its commandments and its promises — and knowing that it IS the word of God, which may effectively work in us… this is the best means to resist all the enticements to evil that come our way. We may pray to our heavenly Father to help us in times of stress and weakness, but surely He will not help us if we have ignored the greatest means of resistance against sin and of growth in righteousness — which we have right here in our hands all the while! — the holy Bible.

Reading 1 – 1Ch 5:22

“And many others fell slain, because the battle was God’s” (1Ch 5:22).

“Warrior, fighting under the banner of the Lord Jesus, observe this verse with holy joy, for as it was in the days of old so is it now, if the war be of God the victory is sure. The sons of Reuben, and the Gadites, and the half tribe of Manasseh could barely muster five and forty thousand fighting men, and yet in their war with the Hagarites, they slew ‘men, an hundred thousand’, ‘for they cried to God in the battle, and He was entreated of them, because they put their trust in Him.’

“The Lord saveth not by many nor by few; it is ours to go forth in Jehovah’s name if we be but a handful of men, for the Lord of Hosts is with us for our Captain. They did not neglect buckler, and sword, and bow, neither did they place their trust in these weapons; we must use all fitting means, but our confidence must rest in the Lord alone, for He is the sword and the shield of His people. The great reason of their extraordinary success lay in the fact that ‘the war was of God’.

“Beloved, in fighting with sin without and within, with error doctrinal or practical, with spiritual wickedness in high places or low places… you are waging Jehovah’s war, and unless He himself can be worsted, you need not fear defeat. Quail not before superior numbers, shrink not from difficulties or impossibilities, flinch not at wounds or death, smite with the two-edged sword of the Spirit, and the slain shall lie in heaps. The battle is the Lord’s and He will deliver His enemies into our hands. With steadfast foot, strong hand, dauntless heart, and flaming zeal, rush to the conflict, and the hosts of evil shall fly like chaff before the gale” (CH Spurgeon).

Reading 2 – Eze 18:32

“For I take no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Sovereign LORD. Repent and live!” (Eze 18:32).

“This verse is frequently used to support the view that God wants to save all men and it is only their refusal to turn to Him which prevents this, for does not Peter say, ‘The Lord is… not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance’ (2Pe 3:9)?

“A moment’s reflection is enough to cast doubts on this conclusion. That God is merciful, gracious and a God of love, goes without saying; but to argue that He is so to all men, meaning every individual, contradicts the fundamental teaching of Scripture that God’s purpose is being worked out ‘according to ELECTION’ (Rom 9:11).

“The words of Jesus indicate a selection process: ‘No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me DRAW him’ (John 6:44). It is because of this that Paul writes to the Thessalonians: ‘We give thanks to God… knowing, brethren beloved, your ELECTION of God’ (1Th 1:2,4)….

“God is all-powerful and able to do as He wills in His universe. If He will indeed have all mankind to be saved, why is it that so many never get to hear the gospel message? The words of the apostle in 1Ti 2:4 — in which he says that ‘[God] will have all men to be saved’ — cannot mean that it is His desire to save every member of the human race. To interpret it thus would contradict the fundamental principle that God’s purpose is being worked out on the basis of election. In these words the apostle, who had been divinely appointed as a preacher to the Gentiles, is simply saying that it was no longer the case that ‘salvation is of the Jews’. God is now working with the Gentiles (all mankind) and it was His will that salvation be offered to ‘all men’ (ie, all nationalities) and not just to Jews.

“In 2Pe the apostle is writing to the brethren in the Ecclesias of Asia Minor. It is to these, troubled by the Judaizers and in danger of grave apostasy from the Truth, that he writes: ‘The Lord… is longsuffering to us-ward (RV, youward), not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance’ (2Pe 3:9). These to whom Peter writes had been called by the Father but were in danger of failing to ‘make [their] calling and election sure’ (2Pe 1:10). The same applies to these verses from Ezekiel. They are not addressed to the individuals of the pagan world but to the Covenant People.

“The vast majority of the Gentile world, then and now, comprise that great crowd of mankind that ‘is in honour, and understandeth not’ and who are, by God’s appointment, ‘like the beasts that perish’ (Psa 49:20). Being left by God to wander ‘out of the way of understanding’, they will by His divine decree ‘remain in the congregation of the dead’ (Pro 21:16). That this sad fact does not give God pleasure, we would agree. Let us not, however, go to the extreme of emphasizing this to the point where we deny that God’s purpose is ‘according to election’ ” (John Allfree, “Ezekiel 1-39” 186,187).

Reading 3 – Luk 15

A young man and an older man walk along together, talking about various matters. The young man says to the old man: “Tell me — I’ve studied the Bible, as you know — but I’d like YOU to tell me… what’s the gospel all about? Give me the key. Tell me what it all means.”

What did he expect to hear from the old man? What he did NOT hear was a list of 25 or 30 doctrines that had to be believed, with a corresponding number of other doctrines that had to be rejected (‘I tell you, son, believe all these things in the left column, and be sure you don’t believe any of these things in the right column, and get yourself baptized, and I can guarantee you’ll be saved.’)

And that is not meant to disparage doctrine at all, nor any statement of faith. But a statement of faith, or a list of principles with which one agrees intellectually, is NOT the final object of faith; it is NOT the reality. After the fundamental ideas have been mastered (and — make no mistake –they must be mastered!), we come face to face with the fact that there is still… something beyond!

The old man stares off into the distance; his eyes are a bit dim now, but he seems to see something the younger man can’t quite make out. “Son,” he says, his voice trembling just a bit, “let me tell you a story.”

*****

The preeminent “picture of redemption” is a simple story:

“There was a man who had two sons” (Luke 15:11)… And the father — it goes without saying — loved them both, very much.

“The younger one said to his father, ‘Father, give me my share of the estate’ ” (v 12). The first request we hear from the younger son is “GIVE ME!” — as though it had suddenly dawned on this young man that the father had wealth, and that it “rightfully” should be his!

“So [the father] divided his property between [the two sons]”: The young man was “grown up” now, and ready (so he thought!) to take what was his and enjoy it. And the father does not say, “No!” Instead, he gives his son what he asks.

“Not long after that, the younger son got together all he had, set off for a distant country and there squandered his wealth in wild living” (v 13). “Got together” is a technical expression in the Greek, meaning literally “to convert to ready cash”; the young man “cashed in” his property; he got his hands on what he could carry away, and carry it away he did! He was not content to stay at home; the world was an inviting place. “I’m outta here! Look out, world, here I come!” He traveled far away, and carelessly wasted all his father’s blessings and gifts.

“After he had spent everything, there was a severe famine in that whole country, and he began to be in need. So he went and hired himself out to a citizen of that country, who sent him to his fields to feed pigs” (vv 14,15). Pigs! The dirtiest, most despised of animals to a devout Jew! In desperate circumstances, in a pagan place, he makes an effort to save himself, by joining with unclean people, and living by unclean practices, and in unclean ways.

“He longed to fill his stomach with the pods that the pigs were eating, but no one gave him anything” (v 16). It’s a fact of life: the “world” gives nothing away! Nothing, that is, except poverty, and illness, and regret. Sadly, he came to realize that it was all “vanity and vexation of spirit”. Whatever he begged, or grabbed, or stole from the “world” was never going to be enough to fill the aching void within himself.

“When he came to his senses, he said, ‘How many of my father’s hired men have food to spare, and here I am starving to death!’ ” (v 17). The memory of his father’s love, and a safe home, touched him even in the distant land. “He came to his senses.” Here is the place where the angels begin to tune up their harps, and warm up their voices, for there is about to be joy in heaven over one sinner who repents!

“I will set out and go back to my father…” (v 18). How he had suffered, in strange lands, and with strange people. But he had learned a valuable lesson: Suffering is not punishment if it brings us back home!

“…and [I will] say to him: Father, I have sinned against heaven and against you. I am no longer worthy to be called your son; make me like one of your hired men’ ” (vv 18,19): Notice what is here, and why this story is so powerful:

First, he is convicted of his sin! Then, he confesses: “I have sinned”. No whitewash, no explaining away, no excuses, just… “I have sinned.” He has the profound feeling of not being good enough: “I am no longer worthy” (news flash: he NEVER was! Nor are WE!) And finally, there is the second request by the young man to his father. It is no longer “Give me!” That was the first request, the prayer of youth and greed. Now, instead, there is the prayer of an older and wiser son: “Father, make me…” “Father, I don’t care about what I can HAVE; I care about what I can BE! Don’t GIVE me anything; just MAKE me one of your servants! MAKE me into something worth keeping around!”

“So he got up and went to his father” (v 20): What he needed was a new beginning, and he could only find that new beginning by going back to where he had come from, by finding his “roots”, by going… HOME!

“But while he was still a long way off, his father saw him and was filled with compassion for him; he ran to his son, threw his arms around him and kissed him”: Even before he got back, his Father was watching, looking down the road. The Father’s hand was stretched out still, and when he saw him in the distance — the sad, ragged figure of his once proud young son — struggling back up the road to the old homestead, the Father could scarcely contain himself. He was “filled with compassion.” He RAN to his son, with the urgency of parental love. And he embraced him, and drew him into his bosom. There was no bitterness, no reservation, no standing upon dignity or formality. The one whom he had held in his heart, all that long time of wandering, had come home! And now he held him in his arms.

“The son said to him, ‘Father, I have sinned against heaven and against you. I am no longer worthy to be called your son. Make me like one of your hired men’ ” (v 21): Notice that it was not enough merely to think the words to himself, as the young man had done before beginning his journey home (vv 18,19). He had to say them; he had to make a public confession of sin and unworthiness, in front of witnesses. There had to be no doubt as to his intentions, in the minds of others or in his own mind.

“But the father said to his servants, ‘Quick! Bring the best robe and put it on him. Put a ring on his finger and sandals on his feet’ ” (v 22). But just as quickly as the confession came, it was over. The evidence of his past sins was not to be held over his head to shame him, or to keep him in an inferior position! He had asked only to be one of his father’s servants; but his father now elevates him to the rank of a favored son. His nakedness is clothed with a garment provided by the father — and it is the BEST garment: nothing “second-class” here! And he is given the “ring” of authority as well — the sign of a son and an heir. He may have squandered his earlier inheritance, but now he receives another!

“Bring the fattened calf and kill it. Let’s have a feast and celebrate” (v 23). The welcome is followed by a special meal of fellowship and rejoicing.

” ‘For this son of mine was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found.’ So they began to celebrate” (v 24). What power — and what joy — there is in those two little words: “OF MINE”! Now he belongs to the father again! His sins and all his past set aside, he is now something worth keeping! He belongs to the Father! “He will be mine,” says the LORD Almighty, “in the day when I make up my jewels, my treasured possession. I will spare him, just as in compassion a man spares his son who serves him” (Mal 3:16).

“Meanwhile, the older son was in the field. When he came near the house, he heard music and dancing. So he called one of the servants and asked him what was going on. ‘Your brother has come,’ he replied, ‘and your father has killed the fattened calf because he has him back safe and sound’ ” (vv 25-27). We need to see clearly here: the older son is to be commended. He had always been working — he was not a BAD son! While the younger son had gone off to live a life of sin and selfishness, the older son had been doing his duty. And now it looked as though his younger brother had had all his fun, and was ALSO going to be the father’s favorite! It was just not fair!

“[So] the older brother became angry and refused to go in” (v 28). But by keeping himself away from the feast of rejoicing with his younger brother, he was also keeping himself OUTSIDE his father’s “house”!

“So his father went out and pleaded with him. But he answered his father, ‘Look! All these years I’ve been slaving for you and never disobeyed your orders. Yet you never gave me even a young goat so I could celebrate with my friends. But when this son of yours who has squandered your property with prostitutes comes home, you kill the fattened calf for him!’ ” (vv 28-30). Sure, there is resentment here; and we can understand, can’t we? ‘But, Dad, I have been a better son than he ever was!’ And he HAD! But somewhere in the back of this exchange there is the echo of a prayer uttered in the temple itself: “I thank you, Lord, that I am not as other men!” And in that echo there is a grave danger. “We do not dare to classify or compare ourselves with some who commend themselves. When they measure themselves by themselves and compare themselves with themselves, they are not wise” (2Co 10:12).

Besides, how can he now claim perfect obedience when at this very moment he is going against his father’s wishes? One son may have been “lost” in a far-away land, but this son is showing by his present attitude that he is “lost” even though he never left home!

” ‘My son,’ the father said, ‘you are always with me, and everything I have is yours. But we had to celebrate and be glad, because this brother of yours was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found’ ” (vv 31,32). Notice how the older son had called the prodigal “this son OF YOURS” (v 30), as though to disclaim all kinship. But the father, gently and patiently, reinforces that he is “this brother OF YOURS”! Like the sheep that wandered away from the shepherd and the flock, he was lost and now is found!

The power, and the beauty, of Jesus’ story lies also in this: it is an unfinished story. There is at the end a final, unanswered question: Did the older brother go into the house again? Or did he remain outside?

The question is left unanswered in the story because we are expected to answer it, every day, in our own lives.

*****

Some final thoughts:

* We can, all of us, be like the older son. Forgiving our brother is not an optional matter. It is “heart and soul” of the gospel. It is the only basis by which we may expect that the Father will forgive us: “For if you forgive men when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive men their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins” (Mat 6:14,15).

* We can, all of us, be like the younger son too. We may not travel to a distant land, to enjoy ourselves in riotous and decadent living. But we may take little “day trips”, short “vacations” and “holidays” from our duty as children of God. Our lives may consist of many such little trips away from the Father, and then each time we hurry back, and hope that no one noticed we were gone. To us too, as well as the really “serious” sinner, the words of the old hymn apply:

“Oh, Thou who knowest the path we take,

Who seest how OFT we roam,

Reveal Thyself, the living way,

And guide ALL travellers home.”

There is nowhere that we can travel, not the “farthest country”, from which we cannot return to the Father’s love. There is no “pit” so deep — nor so degraded — from which we cannot be drawn out by the “cords of love”. The Father is always waiting. When men and women knows they are “starving to death” — like the prodigal son (v 17) — then, and only then, are they ready to come home! The Father “runs” to the son, to forgive him and welcome him home. The Father “rises early and sends the prophets” (2Ch 36:15; Jer 25:3), beseeching His people to come back to Him. And when we do, then He “runs” to meet us! Like Abraham with his beloved son Isaac, the Father in heaven “rose early in the morning” and hastened, with His Son, to the place of sacrifice (Gen 22:3,6,8). “What, then, shall we say in response to this? If God is for us, who can be against us? He who did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all — how will he not also, along with him, graciously give us all things?” (Rom 8:31,32). We should think of Jesus on the cross as the outstretched “arms” of God; just as the Son’s arms were stretched out and nailed to the cruel cross, so the Father’s arms are stretched out, beckoning us sinners to come home to Him. “God was reconciling the world to himself IN CHRIST, not counting men’s sins against them” (2Co 5:19). The Father has made every effort, and provided every opportunity, by which we might be drawn to Him and saved. Truly, “a good measure, pressed down, shaken together and running over”, has been poured into our laps (Luke 6:37,38). “Fear not, little flock; for it is your Father’s good PLEASURE to GIVE you the kingdom” (Luke 12:32).

*****

If there is any single “picture of redemption” — above all others — in which the gospel, and all of man’s hope, and the love of God which passes understanding, is isolated, and compressed, and comprehended, then it must be this one. Everything else that we might learn from the pages of Scripture, everything else that we might glean from a lifetime’s experience in living the Truth in a hard and often cruel world, everything else we might know of the human condition, and of human need, ought to be set alongside, and interpreted in the light cast from this simple picture:

“But while he was still a long way off, his father saw him and was filled with compassion for him; he ran to his son, threw his arms around him and kissed him” (Luke 15:20).

May it be so for each one of us.

Reading 1 – 1Ki 10

The visit of the Queen of Sheba is typical of the peoples of the Millennium coming to worship Christ. She had heard about Solomon’s wisdom, and wanted to learn more for herself. Through our teaching of the people in the towns and villages over which we rule, the motivation for the visits to Christ at Jerusalem will be similar. The Queen of Sheba saw Solomon’s wisdom through seeing the “sitting of his servants, and the attendance of his ministers, and their apparel” (1Ki 10:4-8). It was through her observation of Solomon’s people that she perceived and understood his wisdom. The nations will likewise learn the knowledge of Christ through observing the example of natural Israel and ourselves; as they should in this life too.

Reading 2 – Jer 36:21-24

“The king sent Jehudi to get the scroll [of Jeremiah], and Jehudi brought it from the room of Elishama the secretary and read it to the king and all the officials standing beside him. It was the ninth month and the king was sitting in the winter apartment, with a fire burning in the firepot in front of him. Whenever Jehudi had read three or four columns of the scroll, the king cut them off with a scribe’s knife and threw them into the firepot, until the entire scroll was burned in the fire. The king and all his attendants who heard all these words showed no fear, nor did they tear their clothes” (Jer 36:21-24).

God’s Word is a burning fire (Jer 20:9)! We can warm ourselves by it, but not in the way Jehoiakim did! Do we cut up and cast aside and burn God’s Word?

The “scribe’s knife” in the NIV is translated as “penknife” in the AV. Alan Hayward has an interesting comment about the use of a penknife, in much more modern times, which strangely echoes this incident:

“A very interesting book was published in the year 1900: ‘A Bible Hand-book for the Use of Unbelievers.’

“It is an astonishing document. It contains nearly two hundred pages of Bible quotations, arranged by two atheists to provide ammunition for other atheists to shoot at Christians. So-called contradictions, absurdities, indecencies, atrocities — they are all there.

“Nearly all of them can be answered quite successfully. I use the book to give my senior Sunday School scholars something to cut their teeth on. What concerns me at this moment is the thirty-four pages of ‘unfulfilled prophecies and broken promises.’

“This is an accusation to be taken very seriously. If true, it would undermine the Bible-believer’s foundations. If the Bible is full — as that book alleges — of promises that have been broken, how can we trust it? How can it be inspired? And if it contains lots of unfulfilled prophecies, what then?…

“Relax. There is nothing to worry about.

“In their preface the atheist writers said that, to ensure accuracy, they cut all their quotations out of printed Bibles with a penknife. Unfortunately, this is not the way to treat the Bible. Bible verses only make sense if you study them in their context, that is, their setting. You need to read the verses on either side of the verse in question. As I have pointed out on several occasions, you also need to make allowance for Hebrew idiom.

“These authors have done neither. They have treated each verse as an isolated statement of literal English. In consequence the interpretations they put on many passages are quite ridiculous. For example, they quote the words of Jesus, which were obviously meant to be symbolic: ‘Whoso eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternal life’ (John 6:54). Alongside this they print the absurd comment: ‘Cannibalism to secure eternal life’ ” (“God’s Truth” ch 20).

It is plain to see that the Bible cannot and should not be cut up into small pieces, with a penknife or by any other means. (Not even by computer and word processor!) Just like the old saying about real estate, it’s all about location, location, location! Every verse in the Bible is meant to be studied in its proper setting, comparing verse with verse, and chapter with chapter, in its immediate context. And then, broadening the scope a bit, every book in the Bible is meant to be studied alongside the other parts of the Bible — law compared with history, and history with prophecy, and gospel with gospel, and New Testament fulfillment with Old Testament prophecy. Any form of “study” of the Bible that cuts the word of God into small, distinct pieces — or that attempts to take lessons from single verses or short passages cut off from their setting — will only lead to confusion or worse. Most every “false doctrine” that is believed, anywhere, can be “proven” by such a “penknife” method!

Or, as it has been said, a “text” without a “context” is merely a “pretext” — and one more way of cutting up the word of God, and making it meaningless.

Reading 3 – Mar 10:31

“But many who are first will be last, and the last first” (Mar 10:31).

“Why is it that the last shall be first? What is it that makes this so difficult to accept? The answer came in the form of an ugly little dog. Sophie has taken over our hearts and in many respects our house. She is not particularly pretty (one ear stands up and one lies down, and she has patches of hair that inexplicably shoot up like a lion’s mane); nor does she have any pedigree. She is, however, a good little dog and clearly loves us. She follows me wherever I go all over the house. She can’t stand to be away from me. When I do go away and come into the house, I receive a greeting of a king. When I walk into the house, this little dog is celebrating like this is the most miraculous thing that has even happened — her master came home!

“Isn’t this a little how God views us? Let’s face it, we don’t provide God with a whole lot of value. He doesn’t really ‘need’ us any more than I ‘need’ my dog. What we do provide Him is love, devotion and faithfulness. When Jesus comes back, will we celebrate like my dog celebrates when I come home? Or will we be like the bad dog who has spent the day chewing the sofa cushion, and then slinks off to hide? Do we follow our Master wherever He will lead us? Do we obey commands? Is our love demonstrative to Jesus in the way my dog’s love is to me?…

“Many of the qualities we attribute to great men — intelligence, boldness, speaking abilities, education, beauty, wealth, etc — mean absolutely nothing to God. In fact, these attributes can impede our service to God if they translate into pride. God loves us because we love Him (even though He loved us first!), and even if we are like ugly little dogs!

” ‘Brothers, think of what you were when you were called. Not many of you were wise by human standards; not many were influential; not many were of noble birth. But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong. He chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things — and the things that are not — to nullify the things that are, so that no one may boast before him’ (1Co 1:26-29)” (Kyle Tucker).

Reading 1 – 2Ki 14

In 2Ki 14, “a last opportunity for the nation presented itself, as in Israel and Judah there reigned three able sovereigns in Amaziah, Uzziah, and Jeroboam II. The weakness of surrounding nations was their opportunity. A vigorous struggle broke out to raise the nations from the depression into which it had fallen. Syria and Edom were reduced. The borders were extended, the struggle partly successful. But it was frustrated by calamities beyond human power. The kings conquered their enemies, but not themselves, and thus failed in the struggle for complete independence. Those whose pride makes them too eager to fight may get enough of it in quick order. Many would have honour and wealth enough, if they but know when they had enough. But the prosperity of Israel under Jeroboam was a delusion and a snare. Two prophets raised their voices in warning and rebuke. Hosea and Amos, sounded forth their stern, harsh language, revealing the true state of the ecclesia. Hosea was a citizen of the north, for he speaks of the land (Hos 1:2) and ‘our king’ (Hos 7:5). The rough shepherd Amos was from Judah. He beheld with indignation the soft luxury and abandoned life in the northern kingdom. He gives a frightful picture of an apostate, licentious and decadent Israel. It was the ‘last days’ of the Davidic monarchy, and little time remained before the divine judgment came upon both northern and southern elements of the nation” (GE Mansfield).

Reading 2 – Eze 4

In Eze 4, the total of 430 days (390 for Israel: v 5; and 40 for Judah: v 6) seem to represent a complete period of affliction, of 430 years (cp Gen 15:13; Exo 12:40).

The complete interpretation of these symbolic numbers and periods of time may yet elude us. However, there are some significant dates worth noting:

There is a period of 40 years for the Exodus: from the leaving of Egypt (approximately 1446 BC) to the entry into the Land of promise (c 1406).

And from thence, approximately 390 years would measure from the entry into the Land (1406) to the coming of the kingdom in the person of Saul (1016).

Then again, 390 years would be the time period from Saul (1016) to 13th Josiah (626 BC), and a remaining 40 years from the 13th Josiah to the actual fall of Jerusalem (586) at the hand of the Babylonians, which Ezekiel witnessed.

After the Kingdom of Judah, then, 390 years would take us from the fall of Jerusalem (586 BC) to 196 BC. And 40 more years (196 BC to 156 BC) would take us to the desecration of the Temple, and the ensuing Maccabean war.

After the dividing of the kingdom, between Israel and Judah, the North and the South, then, 390 years would measure from the 4th of Rehoboam (2Ch 12) to the time when the Temple was burnt in the 19th of Nebuchadnezzar (Eze 33:21). This would be approximately 982 to 592 BC.

Reading 3 – 2Co 13:5

“Examine yourselves to see whether you are in the faith; test yourselves. Do you not realize that Christ Jesus is in you — unless, of course, you fail the test?” (2Co 13:5).

To “fail the test” here comes from the Greek “adokimos” — which elsewhere is translated “reprobate” (Rom 1:28; 2Co 13:5-7, 2Ti 3:8; Tit 1:16), “castaway” (1Co 9:27), and “rejected” (Heb 6:8). It is used to describe a counterfeit coin, deficient as to weight or quality of metal. It is also used, figuratively, to describe a cowardly soldier who fails the test of battle; a candidate rejected for office; and a stone rejected by the builders. In each case, that which is “reprobate” has promised something by its outward appearance which it cannot deliver! It has, perhaps, a “name to live”, but it is dead — like clouds that promise rain, but give none; and like stars in the heavens that appear fixed, but prove to be “wandering stars”, or meteors.

Reading 1 – 1Ki 15:17

“Baasha king of Israel went up against Judah and fortified Ramah to prevent anyone from leaving or entering the territory of Asa king of Judah” (1Ki 15:17).

“We read of a very early king of Israel, Baasha, making his iron curtain. He fortified the border, ‘that he might not suffer any to go out or come in to Asa, king of Judah’ (1Ki 15:17).

“Why did he do that? Other books of the Old Testament supply the answer. Like the builders of the Berlin wall he was not concerned about keeping an enemy out, but with keeping his own people in. All the God-fearing people in the idolatrous north wanted to emigrate to the south, where the Temple in Jerusalem kept true worship alive.

“Baasha’s iron curtain was inefficient. He lacked the barbed wire and minefields beloved of modern dictators. The Second Book of Chronicles tells us that when good king Asa purged all the idols out of the Kingdom of Judah, this was the result: ‘He gathered all Judah and Benjamin, and them that sojourned with them out of Ephraim and Manasseh and out of Simeon. For they fell to him out of Israel in abundance, when they saw that the Lord his God was with him’ (2Ch 15:9)” (Alan Hayward, “God’s Truth” ch 10).

Reading 2 – Jer 41:16-18

“Then Johanan son of Kareah and all the army officers who were with him led away all the survivors from Mizpah whom he had recovered from Ishmael son of Nethaniah after he had assassinated Gedaliah son of Ahikam: the soldiers, women, children and court officials he had brought from Gibeon. And they went on, stopping at Geruth Kimham near Bethlehem on their way to Egypt to escape the Babylonians” (Jer 41:16-18).

“Geruth Kimham” is literally “the residence of Chimham”. What is the point of this? JJ Blunt, in his book, “Undesigned Scriptural Coincidences”, suggests the following, which connects this incident with one in the days of David and the rebellion of Absalom:

“David having won the battle, and recovered his throne, prepares to repass the Jordan, and return once more to his capital. His friends again congregate around him, for the prosperous have many friends. Amongst them, however, were some who had been true to him in the day of his adversity; and the aged Barzillai, a Gileadite, who had provided the king with sustenance whilst he lay at Mahanaim, and when his affairs were critical, presents himself before him. He had won David’s heart. The king now entreats him to accompany him to his court, ‘Come thou over with me, and I will feed thee with me in Jerusalem’ [2Sa 19:23]. But the unambitious Barzillai pleads fourscore years as a bar against beginning the life of a courtier, and chooses rather to die in his own city, and be buried by the grave of his father and of his mother. His son, however, had life before him: ‘Behold thy servant Chimham; let him go over with my lord the king; and do to him what shall seem good unto thee. And the king answered, Chimham shall go over with me, and I will do to him that which shall seem good unto thee’ (2Sa 19:37). So he went with the king. Thus begins, and thus ends, the history of Chimham; he passes away from the scene, and what David did for him, or whether he did anything for him, beyond providing him a place at his table, and recommending him, in common with many others, to Solomon before he died, does not appear. Singular, however, it is, and if ever there was a coincidence which carried with it the stamp of truth, it is this, that in Jer 41, an historical chapter, in which an account is given of the murder of Gedaliah, the officer whom Nebuchadnezzar had left in charge of Judea, as its governor, when he carried away the more wealthy of its inhabitants captive to Babylon, we read that the Jews, fearing for the consequences of this bloody act, and apprehending the vengeance of the Chaldeans, prepared for a flight into Egypt, so ‘they departed,’ the narrative continues, ‘and dwelt in the habitation of Chimham, which is by Bethlehem, to go to enter into Egypt’ (Jer 41:17). It is impossible to imagine anything more incidental than the mention of this estate near Bethlehem, which was the habitation of Chimham — yet how well does it tally with the spirit of David’s speech to Barzillai, some four hundred years before! for what can be more probable, than that David, whose birthplace was this very Bethlehem, and whose patrimony in consequence lay there, having undertaken to provide for Chimham, should have bestowed it in whole, or in part, as the most flattering reward he could confer, a personal, as well as a royal, mark of favour, on the son of the man who had saved his life, and the lives of his followers in the hour of their distress; and that, to that very day, when Jeremiah wrote, it should have remained in the possession of the family of Chimham, and have been a land called after his own name?” (USC).

Reading 3 – Mar 15:22

“They brought Jesus to the place called Golgotha (which means The Place of the Skull)” (Mar 15:22).

What do we know about the site of the tomb?

It was rock-hewn (Mar 15:46). “In the place” (Joh 19:46), “near at hand” (Mar 15:42). A private garden belonging to a rich man (Mat 27:57).

The traditional site, where the “Church of the Holy Sepulchre” is located today, was probably inside the city walls at that time, and thus disqualified… for Jesus was crucified outside the city.

Another possibility, “Gordon’s Tomb”, was discovered in 1867 — north of the old city, near the Damascus Gate, under a hill somewhat resembling a skull. (An English explorer named Gordon discovered and excavated this tomb.) The entire area was found to be honeycombed with tombs dating to first century. One tomb nearby bore the inscription: “Buried near my Lord”.

The sepulchre is in what was obviously once a garden — a small level yard with a few fruit trees and plants. At the north end is a high perpendicular wall. There is an opening with a runway suitable for a rock wheel, and a burial room about 10 feet square.

Golgotha signifies “skull”, from the Hebrew “galal” = circle (cp Galilee). Most likely, then, it was this hill north of Jerusalem, on the Damascus Road, where criminals were executed. To it was attached the name of “Skull” because

it was the place of death, shaped like a skull, with recesses for eyes, mouth, etc, and perhaps the site where Adam died [it is an ancient tradition that Adam died at what later became Jerusalem]; and perhaps the site of the burial of Goliath’s head/skull.

If the ancient tradition is correct, that Golgotha derived its name from being the burial place of Adam… then here, supposedly, was laid to rest the skull of the first Adam; and here, also, the last Adam came to restore that which his predecessor lost.

A more likely supposition, however, is that Golgotha was the site of the burial of the skull of Goliath (1Sa 17:54). Thus Christ, in his death, figuratively bruised the head of the serpent (Gen 3:15) just where David buried the head of the Philistine, the “man of sin”.

Reading 1 – 1Ch 7:21

“Zabad his son and Shuthelah his son. Ezer and Elead were killed by the native-born men of Gath, when they went down to seize their livestock” (1Ch 7:21).

Ezer and Elead were men of Ephraim. “[They] had probably joined the families of their grandfather Joseph’s brothers, who had settled in Goshen, only to be slain there on the northeastern border of Egypt by Palestinian raiders who came down from their birthplace in Gath. (But Keil says that Ezer and Elead were killed when they were involved in cattle rustling. The pronouns [‘they’ and ‘their’] are ambiguous)” (Expositors Bible Commentary).

Reading 2 – Eze 20:29

“Then I said to them: What is this high place you go to? (It is called Bamah to this day)” (Eze 20:29).

Bamah signifies “high places” — this is where all the altars were. Yahweh had confronted His people with their use of the high places or hilltops for idolatry. The name of the high places, “Bamah”, had a double significance. It meant “high place,” but it also meant literally “go where” or “go to what” (Heb ‘ba mah’). Thus Bamah became a contemptuous pun. When the people went to the high places to worship idols, where were they going? They were going nowhere of any significance, to do nothing of any importance, since these idols were nonentities (they were, in the sarcastic phrase of the apostle Paul, “no-gods”: 1Co 8:4; 10:19,20!) and could not help them. The name Bamah said more about these places than just identifying them as high places of worship, and Yahweh has perpetuated the name Bamah for this reason.

Reading 3 – Luk 17:27

“People were eating, drinking, marrying and being given in marriage up to the day Noah entered the ark. Then the flood came and destroyed them all” (Luk 17:27).

Eating, drinking, marrying… these are all activities which are not wrong in themselves, but only as they become obsessions to those caught up in materialism and self-indulgence. We do well to remember that such activities are the mere “scaffolding” of a life, but not the life itself. They are all destined to come to an end with the return of Christ.

“Then the flood came and destroyed them all.”

“Universal was the doom; neither rich nor poor escaped: the learned and the illiterate, the admired and the abhorred, the religious and the profane, the old and the young, all sank in one common ruin. Some had doubtless ridiculed the patriarch — where now their merry jests? Others had threatened him for his zeal which they counted madness — where now their boastings and hard speeches? The critic who judged the old man’s work is drowned in the same sea which covers his sneering companions. Those who spoke patronizingly of the good man’s fidelity to his convictions, but shared not in them, have sunk to rise no more, and the workers who for pay helped to build the wondrous ark, are all lost also. The flood swept them all away, and made no single exception” (CHS).

One hundred different varieties of evil and indifference and neglect were all swept away by the waters of the flood — unique though each form of life was at the time, they were at last all together in a common death. The only ones who were saved were those who actually sought places in the ark of safety.

Reading 1 – 1Ch 16:21,22

“He allowed no man to oppress them; for their sake he rebuked kings: ‘Do not touch my anointed ones; do my prophets no harm’ ” (1Ch 16:21,22).

The kings, so far as we know, were Pharaoh in Gen 12:17, and Abimelech king of Gerar in Gen 20:7; 26:11.

Who were the Anointed Ones? The fathers, along with Sarah, in the general sense of having been specially selected by God. And so God saw that, wherever the fathers went, they would be protected by His Providence, and if necessary by divine decree given to Gentile rulers.

This is the same point David was careful about regarding Saul: Never would he lift up a hand against the Lord’s anointed (1Sa 24:6,10; 26:11,23). Did David learn this psalm — and this attitude — from Samuel?

“Do my prophets no harm” is a quite remarkable addition to the Gentile account, yet strictly true: Both Abraham (Gen 22:8; 17:17; Rom 4:19) and Sarah (Gen 21:10,12; Gal 4:30) were “prophets”! And so also were Isaac (Gen 27:27-29) and Jacob (Gen 48:15-22; 49:1-27).

Reading 2 – Eze 28

“In his inaccessible and impregnable island fortress, the prince of Tyre mocked at any threat to his security. He was proud in his achievements; insolent in his challenge to others; wise in his own conceits. The king aspired to equality with God (v 2). In that, he followed the pattern of Adam in sinning and being ejected from the Garden of Eden. He is warned that he is but Adam (v 2) and the fate of Adam was to be his. He felt that he was the personification of wisdom and beauty — so was Adam (vv 4-12)! He believe that he was divine and glorious (Eze 28:2), but Adam was really that. He believed that he possessed divine wisdom (v 3), but Adam was taught by the Cherub (v 14). And as Adam sinned and was ejected from the Garden, so would the king of Tyre from his position because of his great sin (Eze 26:2). This is a dirge of great irony, satirical in the extreme, in which the record of the one great sin of Adam is used as a similitude of the one great mistake of Ithobal [the ruler of Tyre]. Figuratively, he had been in Eden because he reflected the sin of Adam; so has everybody who sins similarly (Eze 31:8).

“So the voice of the prophet sounded forth in judgement against the King of Tyre:

“Then follows:

“This chapter concludes the section on the dirge against Tyre” (GE Mansfield).

Reading 3 – Gal 2:20

“I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live” (Gal 2:20).

This means three things: (1) a man on a cross is facing in only one direction; (2) he is not going back; and (3) he has no further plans of his own; he is through with the pomp and pride and vanity of this life. Its chains are broken and its charms are gone.

“The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.”

In the most poignant personal expression Paul testifies to the moral force of the life and sacrifice of Christ when he writes that the Son of God “loved me and gave himself for me”. Nothing else can have the spiritual impact of this truth totally believed. Christ did not just die for ‘us’ as an anonymous group. The real, awe-inspiring wonder is that he died for us as a group of individuals, each of whom he loved personally. He died for each one of us. Had there been only one sinner, Christ would still have been willing to die. When each of us stands before the judgment seat he will be looking into the eyes of a man who surrendered his life, personally and individually, for him or her.

Reading 1 – 1Ch 11:15-19

“Three of the thirty chiefs came down to David to the rock at the cave of Adullam, while a band of Philistines was encamped in the Valley of Rephaim. At that time David was in the stronghold, and the Philistine garrison was at Bethlehem. David longed for water and said, ‘Oh, that someone would get me a drink of water from the well near the gate of Bethlehem!’ So the Three broke through the Philistine lines, drew water from the well near the gate of Bethlehem and carried it back to David. But he refused to drink it; instead, he poured it out before the LORD. ‘God forbid that I should do this!’ he said. ‘Should I drink the blood of these men who went at the risk of their lives?’ Because they risked their lives to bring it back, David would not drink it” (1Ch 11:15-19).

“There is something peculiarly touching and beautiful in the above scene, whether we contemplate the act of the three mighty men in procuring the water for David, or David’s act in pouring it out to the Lord. It is evident that David discerned, in an act of such uncommon devotedness, a sacrifice which none but the Lord Himself could duly appreciate. The odor of such a sacrifice was far too fragrant for him to interrupt it in its ascent to the throne of the God of Israel. Wherefore he, very properly and very graciously, allows it to pass him by, in order that it might go up to the One who alone was worthy to receive it, or able to appreciate it. All this reminds us, forcibly, of that beautiful compendium of Christian devotedness set forth in Phi 2:17,18: ‘Yea, and if I be poured out upon the sacrifice, and service of your faith, I joy and rejoice with you all; for this cause ye also joy and rejoice with me.’ In this passage, the apostle represents the Philippian saints in their character as priests, presenting a sacrifice and performing a priestly ministration to God; and such was the intensity of his self-forgetting devotedness, that he could rejoice in his being poured out as a drink-offering upon their sacrifice, so that all might ascend, in fragrant odor to God” (CHM, cited by AW Pink).

There is, perhaps, a New Testament echo of this incident: the “three mighty men” of Christ were Peter, James, and John; like David’s mighty men, they desired the kingdom and glory for their master. But the apostles did not really understand that Jesus must first “pour out” his life (cp Mat 16:21-23; 17:4; 19:27; 20:20-23) before he could drink of the cup of joy in his Father’s kingdom. So Jesus, who turned water into wine (blood) at Cana (John 2:8), did in fact pour out the “water”, or blood, of his own body, on the cross — like David, he could not drink fully of the joy until he had first experienced the sorrow (Heb 12:2).

Reading 2 – Eze 24:18,19

“So I spoke to the people in the morning, and in the evening my wife died. The next morning I did as I had been commanded. Then the people asked me, ‘Won’t you tell us what these things have to do with us?’ (Eze 24:18,19).

“Ezekiel’s wife died. His heart was bleeding; but he received orders from his divine Master that he should not mourn, nor weep, nor make any sign of mourning whatever. It was a strange command, but he obeyed it. The people understood that Ezekiel was a prophet to them in all that he did; his actions did not concern himself alone. He was a teacher, not only by his words, but by his acts; so the people gathered round him, and said to him, ‘What is the meaning of this? It has some bearing upon our conduct; tell us what it has to do with us.’ He soon explained to them that, before long, they also would lose by sword, and pestilence, and famine, the dearest that they had, and they would not be able to have any mourning for the dead. They would be themselves in such a state of distress that the dead would die unlamented, the living having enough to do to mourn over their own personal sorrows. It was a terrible lesson, and it was terribly taught” (CH Spurgeon).

Reading 3 – Luk 21:19

“By standing firm you will gain life” (Luk 21:19).

“Be faithful, even to the point of death, and I will give you the crown of life” (Rev 2:10).

“You need to persevere so that when you have done the will of God, you will receive what he has promised… we are not of those who shrink back and are destroyed, but of those who believe and are saved” (Heb 10:36,39).

“It is possible to ‘lose self’ for Christ’s sake, and by that very means to gain it. On the other hand, a man may gain great possessions and ‘forfeit himself’ (Luk 9:25, Moffatt). For encouragement in the trials which would come upon his friends in the days ahead Jesus promised that ‘in your patience ye shall win your souls.’ Similarly, in Luk 17:33, the one who shrank back for fear of losing his life, was actually losing himself. At the judgment seat of Christ many will be consigned to the second death because they have avoided suffering and in some cases death in an unwillingness to share the sufferings of Christ. But those of faith who for Christ’s sake have lost their lives will gain life, and self, for evermore” (John Carter, “Hebrews” 202).

Reading 1 – 1Ch 6

1Ch 6 is the genealogy of the tribe of Levi. Details of the family tree are as follows:

Levi is the father of Kohath, Gershom, and Merari. Kohath is the father of Amram, Izhar, Hebron, and Uzziel, as well as 9 of the 22 divisions of the Levites (1Ch 23:12-20). Amram is the father of Moses and Aaron. Aaron is the father of Eleazar and Ithamar; from Eleazar come 16 of the 24 divisions of priests; from Ithamar come 8 of the 24 divisions of priests (1Ch 24). Izhar is the father of Heman (1Ch 6:33-38); from Heman come 14 of the 24 divisions of singers (1Ch 25:4). Uzziel is the father of Elizaphan (Exo 6:22). Gershom is the father of Asaph (1Ch 6:39-43); from Asaph come 4 of the 24 divisions of singers (1Ch 25:2). Gershom is also the father of 9 of the 22 divisions of the Levites (1Ch 23:7-11). Merari is the father of Ethan/Jeduthun (1Ch 6:44-47); from Ethan come 6 of the 24 divisions of singers (1Ch 25:3). Merari is also the father of 4 of the 22 divisions of Levites (1Ch 23:21-24).

The above may be summarized in the following table:

Reading 2 – Eze 19:1-4

“Take up a lament concerning the princes of Israel and say: ‘What a lioness was your mother among the lions! She lay down among the young lions and reared her cubs. She brought up one of her cubs, and he became a strong lion. He learned to tear the prey and he devoured men. The nations heard about him, and he was trapped in their pit. They led him with hooks to the land of Egypt’ ” (Eze 19:1-4).

The lion, of course, refers symbolically to the tribe of Judah (Gen 49:9). Lions were a common sight in Judah in Ezekiel’s day. Lions were reckless, capricious, and selfish.

“This section… is a lamentation for two of the last princes of Israel, and for Israel itself. When Josiah was killed at the battle of Megiddo, he was still a young man — under forty years of age; his sons were therefore very young to succeed to the throne of a kingdom in such precarious times. It is perhaps for that reason that the two who are mentioned in the lamentation are spoken of as whelps. The ‘mother’ is the kingdom of Judah. On the death of Josiah it is said ‘the people of the land’ — that is the mother country — took Jehoahaz, and anointed him as king in place of his father… He was 23 years old, and only reigned three months, when the Pharaoh of Egypt, returning from Megiddo, deposed him and carried him to Egypt as a prisoner [2Ki 23:31,33,34; Jer 22:11,12,18], setting Jehoiakim on the throne of Judah to reign there as a vassal king [Eze 19:5]” (WH Boulton, “Ezekiel” 86).

Reading 3 – Luk 16:19-31

It has been generally argued by Christadelphians that Jesus, in Luke 16:19-31, is deliberately using false ideas in a sort of parody. Truth be told, we are often reluctant — when preaching to others — to be drawn into a discussion of the “rich man and Lazarus.” Our reluctance testifies to the difficulties inherent in this approach, and maybe also a little discomfort at the thought of such a large portion of the words of Jesus being — fundamentally, even if ironically or sarcastically — erroneous!

In the absence of any more reasonable explanation, this approach would have to do. But perhaps there is a “better way” to read the parable.

Watch punctuation

First of all, some background. The Greek language has a system of punctuation marks somewhat similar to ours. Originally, this was not so; there was no punctuation, and moreover, the writing was not separated into words. (“The oldest Greek manuscripts had no chapter and verse divisions, no punctuation marks and hence no separation into sentences, and not even any separation between words. All they have are line after line, column after column, page after page, through a whole book of the New Testament”: Earle, “NIV: The Making of a Contemporary Translation”). Punctuation marks were first introduced in the days of Jerome (c. 400 AD), who translated the Bible into Latin.

The best-known example of such “repunctuation,” at least to Christadelphians, is Luke 23:43, which the KJV translates: “Verily I say unto thee, Today thou shalt be with me in paradise,” but a much more appropriate translation might be “I say to you today (or even, ‘Today I say unto you’), you shall be with me in paradise.”

But other instances may be found. For example, the KJV translates Luke 16:22,23 as: “The rich man also died and was buried. And in hell he…” But Willliam Tyndale (1525) translated this as: “The rich man died and was buried in hades.” Likewise, even the Douay (Roman Catholic) version (1582) reads: “The rich man died also, and was buried in hell.”

The Greek also has a “kai” (“and”) between “buried” and “in Hades.” So perhaps the most literal translation would be: “The rich man died and was buried, EVEN in Hades” (the “kai” used for emphasis, and here translated “even”). Or, alternatively, “The rich man died and was buried AND was in Hades” — i.e., “he died and remained in Hades” — until — when? The resurrection, of course!

The repositioning of this one period (English “full stop”) changes, at a single stroke, the whole tenor of the parable. Now it is no longer Jesus’ (ironic, but also false) description of what happens immediately after death. Rather, it is his description — in a perfectly Biblical fashion — of what will happen some considerable time after death and burial, when he returns to raise, judge, and either reward or punish all the responsible.

A couple of other points may clarify this:

V 22: “The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham’s side (or ‘Abraham’s bosom’).” “Abraham’s bosom” is supposedly a specific place in the underworld of Jewish mythology, where immediately after death the “immortal souls” (!) of the righteous are joined together with those of Abraham and all the faithful fathers.

We know already that Jesus did not believe this. The question is: did he speak in a parable as though he did?

Consider an alternative: (1) First, the phrase could mean: “the beggar died, and (in the resurrection) the angels carried him to Abraham’s bosom.” (2) Second, to lie in another’s bosom is to occupy a special place of favor at a meal, something like a “guest of honor” — as John did with Jesus in the upper room (John 13:23). There are, in this same section of Luke, several references to eating meals (cp. Luke 13:28-30; 14:7-24; 15:16,17,23,28), so the idea of Lazarus reclining at a meal with Abraham is perfectly suitable to the overall context.

Lazarus enjoying a meal with Abraham provides a striking contrast: in his previous life, he was denied even the crumbs that might fall from the rich man’s table (Luke 16: 20), but now (ie, after the resurrection?!) he sits down to a sumptuous banquet (cp Luke 13:29! In fact, the whole of Luke 13:24-30 is remarkably parallel to Luke 16:19-31, seen in a “repunctuated” light: proud Jews cast out of the kingdom, with weeping and gnashing of teeth, while Gentiles and “sinners” are welcomed in.)

Likewise, being previously denied access to the “table,” Lazarus had been treated as a “Gentile,” an unclean “dog” (cp Mat 15:27). His closest companions were other “dogs,” who licked his sores (Luke 16:21). These sores were not bound up, as were the wounds of the man who fell among thieves (Luke 10:34). But later (v 22 here) they will be!

V 23: “In hell (Hades) — (the preceding goes with v 22; a new sentence begins here) — When he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus in his bosom.” Very significantly, the “hell” here is Hades, not Gehenna. Hades (literally, “the unseen place”) is equivalent to the Hebrew sheol, the grave! Throughout the New Testament it is invariably Gehenna that is associated with the fire of eternal destruction at the last day (Mat 5:2,29,30; 10:28; 18:9; 23:15,33; Mark 9:43,45,47; Luke 12:5; Jam 3:6). Conversely, Hades — if we set aside Luke 16:23 for the moment — is never associated with burning and destruction, but always with the grave (Mat 11:23; 16:18; Luke 10:15; Acts 2:27,31; 1Co 15:55; Rev 1:18; 6:8; 20:13,14)!

Therefore, to separate Hades/grave from torment/Gehenna, as is done by the insertion of a period (and an implied passage of time between death and resurrection), is to give both Hades and Gehenna their proper meanings as in other New Testament usage. First comes the grave, and only after a resurrection and judgment is there (the possibility of) the judgment of Gehenna!

“Torment” is the Greek basanos. It is a word the meaning of which seems to have developed, or evolved, over time: (a) first of all, it was the black rock an assayer would use to test whether gold or silver coins were real or forgeries (he did this by rubbing the coin against the stone, and then checking the color); (b) second, by implication, it came to mean checking any calculation in a financial transaction; and from thence to (c) any type of testing; and finally (d) testing by means of torture. With basanos and related words the general concept would seem to be that of judgment, with perhaps the accompaniment of pain.

Here the “torment” of the rich man would be the self-inflicted bitterness and recrimination of knowing that it is too late to set right one’s past life, and the witnessing (for some brief time after resurrection and judgment) of the beginnings of God’s glorious kingdom, knowing that one will be excluded.

Also, the “looked up” of v 23 is, literally, to lift up one’s eyes. Especially, with reference to Abraham, it suggests one’s eyes surveying the land of promise, with a view to the kingdom (Gen 13:14; Deu 3:27).

A suggested summary

With all the above in mind, and with the suggested punctuation, the parable might now be summarized thusly:

“There was a rich, finely-robed, well-fed man — who ignored the needs of the poor, especially a beggar named Lazarus. But after the beggar died (and was resurrected!), the angels carried him to Abraham’s bosom. The rich man also died and was buried in the grave. Then, later (after his own resurrection!) he was in torment, as he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side, reclining in his bosom.

“So the rich man called to ‘Father Abraham,’ begging for mercy. But Abraham reminded him that in his previous life he received good things, while Lazarus received only bad things, and now their fortunes were reversed. And now also, their lives being ended, it was too late to make amends!

“(Returning from this vision of the future, back to the present…) Seeing now that such is the fate of all who live their lives in ease and disregard for the mercies of God, the rich man begs that his family be warned. ‘Cannot someone return from the dead to bring them to repentance?’ But Abraham replies that even the resurrection of the dead (even, we might suppose, the resurrection of the Son of God!) will not be sufficient!”

The conclusion: While Jesus may well be referring in passing to the (erroneous) doctrine of “Abraham’s Bosom,” his own direct teaching in the parable may now be seen to be perfectly in harmony with the truth of the gospel. It is as if Jesus were saying:

“Yes, there is a place known as ‘Abraham’s bosom,’ but it will be the table (the ‘Marriage supper of the Lamb’) in the resurrection and the kingdom of God, and you Pharisees and Sadducees, unless you repent, will have no part in it.”

And, “Yes, there will be fiery torment for the wicked after death, but it will not be in a shadowy underworld. Instead, it will be the weeping and gnashing of teeth involved in seeing others –especially those whom they held to be unclean and sinners — enter into the resurrectional kingdom, while they themselves are thrust out! And then, ultimately, it will be the fire of eternal destruction — the ‘second death.’ “

Reading 1 – 1Ki 17

Elijah was a prophet of the LORD; a man sent from God (1Ki 17). He appeared out of Gilead to Ahab, the apostate king of Israel, who ruled the ten rebellious tribes that worshipped at Bethel and Dan. Evils covered the Land like a flood. For three and a half years Elijah prayed for no rain; the LORD answered with drought and famine. The Land literally burned during that judgment, for its natural life and livelihood depends on the water from heaven.

Elijah hated Queen Jezebel’s promotion of Astarte, the goddess named for the planet Venus. He hated the whoredom of the people who worshipped the goddess of “love” and “queen of heaven” through the religious cult that included sodomy and prostitution. Elijah hated the robbery and oppression condoned by King Ahab. He hated the people’s disobedience to the Law given to Israel at Sinai. Ahab also worshiped the calves, the pagan imagery of the worship of the “host of heaven,” which dates from even before the time of the exodus from Egypt.

Elijah was one individual among 7,000 who remained faithful to God during Israel’s apostasy of the ten tribes. He was very zealous for the one true God, who created the heavens and the earth. A righteous man, Elijah was also a passionate man. Simple, child-like, trusting; at times not fully understanding why, he nevertheless did the bidding of his God. That’s all. Because he was hot and not cold to do His work, God will send him [or someone very like him!] to Israel again, before Christ returns to rule from Zion’s hill.

Reading 2 – Jer 43:7-11

“So they entered Egypt in disobedience to the LORD and went as far as Tahpanhes. In Tahpanhes the word of the LORD came to Jeremiah: ‘While the Jews are watching, take some large stones with you and bury them in clay in the brick pavement at the entrance to Pharaoh’s palace in Tahpanhes. Then say to them, “This is what the LORD Almighty, the God of Israel, says: I will send for my servant Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, and I will set his throne over these stones I have buried here; he will spread his royal canopy above them.” He will come and attack Egypt, bringing death to those destined for death, captivity to those destined for captivity, and the sword to those destined for the sword’ ” (Jer 43:7-11).

At last the emigrants arrived at Tahpanhes, ten miles west of where the Suez Canal now stands. There, in response to the word of the Lord, Jeremiah the prophet called the attention of his fellow-Jews to a specific prophecy regarding Nebuchadnezzar, whose wrath they had sought to flee.

Not only would the king of Babylon come into Egypt, but he would even set up his pavilion and throne of administration at the very place where they now were. Egypt would surely feel the weight of his military might. There would be plundering and destruction — and surely these fearful and faithless Jews would not escape him, even in this distant land!

In as powerful way as he possibly could, Jeremiah warned them, ‘You may run from the judgments of Yahweh, but you can’t hide!’

Reading 3 – 1Co 1:27-29

“But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong. He chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things– and the things that are not– to nullify the things that are, so that no one may boast before him” (1Co 1:27-29).

This is one of the fundamental messages of the Bible, and shown in practice a hundred times:

God saves a nation through one man, after first selling him into slavery, and casting him into prison. God rescues that same nation through one little baby destined for death, but plucked out of his burial coffin on a whim by a king’s daughter. God sends home 30,000 troops, and wins a great victory with 300. Another army cringes in their tents at the threats of a giant warrior, who blasphemes the name of the God of Israel, but a little boy — rejecting all the armaments of a soldier — goes out to “fight” him with a shepherd’s sling… and faith. A whole nation is brought to the brink of ruin, and extinction, with a huge army surrounding its capital city — and then, to top it all off, its king is smitten with a deadly disease — but God answers his prayers and the threat is wiped out in a single night. Thousands of Jews die ugly, horrible deaths on Roman crosses, but one of those poor suffering “criminals” turns out to be the Saviour of the world.

In our Father’s world, a still, small whisper of wind shakes the earth; a tiny cry in a lonely manger introduces a new world order; a microscopic seed grows into a great tree; and a little stone becomes a great mountain to fill the whole earth…

…”So that no flesh may boast before HIM…”