service genset jogja
Ezra 1:5-6, Psalm 137:1-6

Going Home!

Filed Under: Devotions by Chuck
April 13, 2023

Cyrus gives license to the Jewish leadership to move back to Israel and rebuild the temple. It looks like everyone wants to take part in this. Ezra 1:5-6 tells about the beginning of the preparations for the move. “Then rose up the heads of the fathers’ houses of Judah and Benjamin, and the priests and the Levites, everyone whose spirit God had stirred to go up to rebuild the house of the Lord that is in Jerusalem. And all who were about them aided them with vessels of silver, with gold, with goods, with beasts, and with costly wares, besides all that was freely offered.” It was the two tribes of Judah and Benjamin that were taken hostage 70 years earlier. The Levites, many of whom had migrated from the northern kingdom to Judah to fulfill their roles at the temple are included here. Since Simeon’s land was surrounded by Judah’s land, it’s probable that the tribe of Simeon, if there were any that had not assimilated into Judah, went into captivity with them and returned with them.

The interesting phrase in this passage is that God’s Spirit “stirred them to go up and rebuild the house.” He didn’t stir everyone’s spirit, but even those who did not go with them participated in the venture. The Handbook for Translators explains, “Not every Jewish exile returned to Jerusalem. The only people who returned were those who responded to God’s leading. Here God’s action is again made apparent in the events that are being recounted. In the same way that God had moved the heart of King Cyrus (see verse 1 above), he now moves the hearts of the people to fulfill his will. This includes the heads, the priests, the Levites, together with “everyone else whose heart God had moved.”[1] God did not move in everyone to return. But it’s interesting that “…it is always God himself who takes the initiative in moving people in their spirits to take the direction he plans for them. Those Jews who responded positively did so in spite of the fact that returning home would involve considerable sacrifice and hardship. They were not going on a holiday but were faced with a hazardous journey of some 900 miles, and the land waiting for them had been devastated, with many of its towns and villages destroyed and its temple razed to the ground. We are inclined to feel, therefore, that if God himself had not moved their spirits, they would not have moved at all! The same principle applies to the experience of Christian conversion. When people commit their lives to Christ in a meaningful and lasting way, it is not because they have made a mental decision to do so, but because God himself, by his Holy Spirit, has moved them in their spirits to respond to the message of salvation.”[2] When we come to faith in Christ, it’s very much like coming home after a long captivity.

Imagine the joy of those old people who had been taken captive in their youth to see this take place in their lives. Remember the grief they experienced at the time of their being taken into captivity? Psalm 137:1-6 shares that sorrow. “By the waters of Babylon, there we sat down and wept when we remembered Zion. On the willows there we hung up our lyres. For there, our captors required of us songs, and our tormentors, mirth, saying, ‘Sing us one of the songs of Zion!’ How shall we sing the Lord’s song in a foreign land? If I forget you, O Jerusalem, let my right hand forget its skill! Let my tongue stick to the roof of my mouth, if I do not remember you if I do not set Jerusalem above my highest joy!”

[1] Noss, Philip A., and Kenneth J. Thomas. 2005. A Handbook on Ezra and Nehemiah. Edited by Paul Clarke, Schuyler Brown, Louis Dorn, and Donald Slager. United Bible Societies’ Handbooks. New York: United Bible Societies.

[2] Williams, Peter. 2006. Opening up Ezra. Opening Up Commentary. Leominster: Day One Publications.

Tags: ,
Permalink
2 Chronicles 1:4-6

Prosperity can be our enemy

Filed Under: Devotions by Chuck
April 12, 2023

Solomon is ready to become the new king after his father, David. He begins with a show of dedication to God. The external act of faith seems to us to be an overstatement, but it wasn’t so to Solomon. He was acting on behalf of himself as well as the entire nation. He did not want there to be any confusion as to whom Solomon would serve. 2 Chronicles 1:4-6 tells us about this act of devotion, “But David had brought up the ark of God from Kiriath-jearim to the place that David had prepared for it, for he had pitched a tent for it in Jerusalem. Moreover, the bronze altar that Bezalel, the son of Uri, son of Hur, had made was there before the tabernacle of the Lord. And Solomon and the assembly sought it out.  And Solomon went up there to the bronze altar before the Lord, which was at the tent of meeting, and offered a thousand burnt offerings on it.”

The “place” that Solomon went to offer his sacrifices was Gibeon because the temple had not been built yet. We can trace the locations of the Ark of the Covenant from its creation in the wilderness to Gibeon. Joshua brought both the ark and the tabernacle to Shiloh. In the days of Eli, the ark was captured by the Philistines and taken to Kiriath-jearim, where it was destroyed. Samuel tells us that Saul restored the tabernacle at Nob, after which he moved it to Gibeon. This “high place” becomes the semi-permanent site for the tabernacle and the altar of sacrifice. Gibeon is located in the Judean hill country, about seven miles northwest of Jerusalem. Underwood says, “The text does not tell us exactly what the burnt offerings are, but likely they are animals, probably young bulls. The entire animal is burned to ashes in this offering, giving it all to God. For Solomon to do this with a thousand bulls is a large, impressive display of his wealth, devotion, and the seriousness of the occasion.”[1]

Solomon’s early devotion to Israel’s God is clearly seen in this act. As a result of this act of devotion, God sends Solomon a dream and gives him the option to choose whatever he wants, be it possessions, power or pleasure. He chooses wisdom, and God honors him with everything. We read that at the end of his life, Solomon shares his remorse over the fact that none of these things brought meaning and purpose to his life. His extraordinary wisdom did not save him from the trap that has ruined many men’s lives. MacDonald says, “His wives seduced him to idolatry. He went after Ashtoreth, the goddess of the Zidonians, and after Milcom, the abomination of the Ammonites. He built a high place for Chemosh, the idol of the Moabites, and for Moloch, another idol of the Ammonites. He burned incense and sacrificed unto the idols of all his strange wives. He who had built God’s temples, and his altars, now build altars to Moloch and Chemosh. He, who had offered a thousand burnt offerings on the altar at Gibeon to the true God, now offers sacrifices to Ashtoreth and Milcom.”[2] How incredible that a man would show such extraordinary devotion at the beginning of his life and would end with acts of devotion to foreign gods. He wanted the whole nation to know where he stood when he offered sacrifices at Gibeah, but by the end of his life, his many sacrifices to the idols of his many wives showed that his devotion to the one true God was not all it seemed. Even with every blessing from God, Solomon got bored and looked for fulfillment and satisfaction in the things of the world. It’s interesting to me that the Messiah will sit on the throne of David, not on the throne of Solomon.

[1] Underwood, Jonathan, and Ronald L. Nickelson, eds. 2006. The KJV Standard Lesson Commentary, 2006–2007. Cincinnati, OH: Standard Publishing.

[2] MacDonald, James M. 1856. The Book of Ecclesiastes Explained. New York: M. W. Dodd.

Tags:
Permalink
1 Chronicles 1:1, Various

Being Connected

Filed Under: Devotions by Chuck
April 11, 2023

The Chronicler, whom I believe was Jeremiah, begins his account with Adam.  He then gives us the genealogies of Genesis up to Abraham. Abraham’s line is traced to Israel’s David and the kings of Judah ending with Israel as God’s chosen people. It’s all about the connection of his present with the past. The Israelites are God’s people. Someone once said, “How odd of God to choose the Jews!” But the Chronicler corrects that and says, “how good of God to choose the Jews.” Through the Jews came the Messiah. Once they rejected him, a new genealogy began. It’s this one that matters most. Those who accept the Jew’s Messiah, Jesus, are adopted as God’s chosen people. That’s us! The true believers in Jesus can now trace their genealogies back to Noah and then back to Adam. It’s good to feel connected to the entire deposit of world history. We know this because Paul teaches us that we’ve been grafted into the genealogy. He says our lineage goes back to Abraham according to Galatians. By faith, we are God’s chosen. How arrogant!

The Church has often been criticized for its stance on its position as God’s chosen people. It’s arrogant! It’s presumptuous. It’s blatant self-centeredness. In western civilization, it’s currently not politically correct to identify so, particularly to the God of the Bible. They say that to love our neighbor as ourselves means, respecting his or her religion as an alternative way of reaching the one God, whatever name we give Him. The popular thought is that all religions lead to God, like all the different paths that lead to the top of the mountain. They are all going to the same place.  But if we understand the second greatest commandment of loving our neighbors in this way what becomes of the first commandment? Does loving our neighbor mean we have to forfeit the exclusive claims of Jesus? How can we fulfill the first and foremost commandment of loving God with our whole heart, soul, mind, and strength? As Allen asks in his commentary, “how can we love and empathize with the God in whose Word Jesus is identified as exclusively ‘the way, the truth, and the life.'”(John 14:6)? Jesus added, “No one can come to the father but through me.” Do we put the love of our disagreeing neighbors above the love for God? I don’t think so.

Like the book of Kings, the Chronicler will give us the history of how Israel and Judah failed as a people and as a nation because they tried to reverse the order of Jesus’ first two commandments. Loving our neighbor does not mean accepting their gods. It does mean that we should pray for them and live at peace with them. Paul told his young disciple Timothy, “I urge you, first of all, to pray for all people. Ask God to help them; intercede on their behalf and give thanks for them.  Pray this way for kings and all who are in authority so that we can live peaceful and quiet lives marked by godliness and dignity” (1 Timothy 2:1-2)

Tags:
Permalink
2 Kings 1:4-8, various

No Other Name!

Filed Under: Devotions by Chuck
April 10, 2023

Ahaziah, the King of the Northern Kingdom of Israel, took a nasty fall. He sent messengers to inquire of Baal-zebub, the god of Ekron, regarding his recovery. The messengers met Elijah on their way and were sent back to Ahaziah with a frightening message. 2 Kings 1:4-8 tells us that the messengers brought the message from God’s prophet back to Ahaziah, “Now, therefore, thus says the Lord, ‘You shall not come down from the bed to which you have gone up, but you shall surely die.’ So Elijah went. The messengers returned to the king, and he said to them, ‘Why have you returned?’ And they said to him, There came a man to meet us, and said to us, Go back to the king who sent you, and say to him, Thus says the Lord, ‘Is it because there is no God in Israel that you are sending to inquire of Baal-zebub, the god of Ekron? Therefore, you shall not come down from the bed to which you have gone up, but you shall surely die.’ He said to them, ‘What kind of man was he who came to meet you and told you these things?’ They answered him, ‘He wore a garment of hair, with a belt of leather about his waist.’ And he said, ‘It is Elijah the Tishbite.’”

Ahaziah knew Elijah the Tishbite. Elijah had been the nemesis to his father Ahab and his mother, Jezebel. The description of Elijah by the messengers was in and of itself a harbinger of bad news. Prophets that looked like that seemed to always bring word of God’s judgment and always seemed to point out sin and call for repentance. The Hebrew phrase translated as “A garment of hair” in the English Standard Version, has some discussion in the commentaries. The Handbook for translators says the phrase “is literally ‘[He was] a man master of hair.’ This expression has two possible meanings. It may mean that he was a hairy man, that is, he had a long, bushy beard and long, uncut hair. Or it may mean that he was a man wearing a cloak made of hair.”[1] Some translations say “he wore a garment made of camel hair.” This is not uncommon for prophets of this nature as we read in Zechariah 13:4. The false prophets would put on “hairy cloaks” for the purpose of deceiving people. That’s the way prophets of doom dressed. Twice in the New Testament, John the Baptist is described in very similar ways. Matthew 3:4 says, “Now John wore a garment of camel’s hair and a leather belt around his waist.”  Just as Ahaziah knew that a condemning prophecy would come from Elijah, so too did Herod know that John would bring a condemning prophecy against him.

God’s message doesn’t often find its way to us through the majority or through the fineries of wealth and opulence. It comes it brash, harsh words at times. The prophets of the Old Testament present these messages. What the religious leaders of Jesus’ day didn’t readily understand was that John the Baptist wasn’t only addressing the sinful rulers of the day. He was addressing them as well. Jesus confirmed this when he spoke of John the Baptist in Matthew 11:8-11. Jesus inquires of the crowds who went into the wilderness to see John the Baptist, “What then did you go out to see? A man dressed in soft clothing. Behold, those who wear soft clothing are in kings’ houses. What then did you go out to see? A prophet? Yes, I tell you, and more than a prophet. This is he of whom it is written, ‘Behold, I send my messenger before your face, who will prepare your way before you.’ Truly, I say to you, among those born of women there has arisen no one greater than John the Baptist.” Repentance is the theme of Elijah’s call. Repentance is the theme of John’s call as well. We need to turn from our pursuit of the gods of this world and turn to the one true God for salvation. Baal-zebub cannot save us. Peter put this thought in one of his early sermons. It is recorded for us in Acts 4:12. He says, speaking of Jesus, “And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”

[1] Slager, Donald. 2008. “Preface.” In A Handbook on 1 & 2 Kings, edited by Paul Clarke, Schuyler Brown, Louis Dorn, and Donald Slager, 1–2:699–700. United Bible Societies’ Handbooks. New York: United Bible Societies.

Tags:
Permalink
1 Kings 1:5-6

A Charge to Fathers

Filed Under: Devotions by Chuck
April 9, 2023

David was quite the hero in his life. He was chosen to be King and anointed by Samuel. He slew Goliath while yet a young man. He conquered all of Israel’s enemies and united the kingdom after Saul’s death. But he couldn’t raise his family. I once met a woman who was telling me that her daughter was a drug addict in the ghetto and made her living by selling herself to get drugs. Her son was a lazy bum who was always begging for money. She said, “If I had known what my children would turn out to be, I would never have had them.” I prayed with the woman and tried to console her but the disappointment with her children could not be assuaged. I think David was more disappointed in his children. It appears he was too busy with the affairs of the state to raise his children. His sons not only disappointed him, but they attempted to usurp the throne from him. In 1 Kings 1:5-6, we read about it, “Now Adonijah the son of Haggith exalted himself, saying, ‘I will be king.’ And he prepared for himself chariots and horsemen, and fifty men to run before him.  His father had never at any time displeased him by asking, ‘Why have you done thus and so?’ He was also a very handsome man, and he was born next after Absalom.”

Adonijah was not David’s eldest son. Amnon and Absalom were both older but they have both died by this time along with another brother, Chileab (called Daniel in 1 Chronicles). Since he’s not mentioned of him we can assume he died young. Amnon raped Absalom’s sister and Absalom murdered him in return. Absalom was killed in the war against his father’s troops. Adonijah was the fourth son in David’s list of sons. We don’t know much about his mother Haggith but she is referred to as his wife, so her descendant might have a claim on the throne if so designated by David. But Adonijah decided to designate himself. According to one writer, Adonijah’s behavior “refers not to the preparation of an armament for war, but to a kingly retinue which should attend him wherever he went. The runners were a bodyguard, and the word is applied to those guards who kept the door of the king’s house. By such a step Adonijah let his intention be known and found out who was likely to be on his side.” The mention that he was a handsome man brings back memories of King Saul. The outward appearance of a person is never a good measure of his or her character.

 It seems that the key to understanding David’s domestic problems lie in Verse 6. David never “displeased” his son. This means to “…show that David had not disciplined Adonijah as he was growing up. So Adonijah’s behavior now is the result of this lack of correction and discipline by his father.”[1] He never told his children “no.” For the sake of their future and the welfare of society as a whole, the first thing every child should learn is the meaning of the word “no.” As every father soon learns, we cannot discipline our children without displeasing them at times. I like the way David Howard explains this. He writes, “That’s because our children are sinners, just as we are, and sometimes they must be made to suffer consequences for their wrong actions. Being a father is not a popularity contest; sometimes good fathering requires that we make unpopular decisions and that we do indeed interfere with our children’s lives. We need to interfere to protect them from self-destructive behaviors. We need to interfere when they hurt others. We need to interfere when they displease God.”[2] Notice also in this passage that the text does not seem to hold Haggith responsible for the rebellion. David is the father and the one pointed out in error. David did not step up and take the responsibility that was his: to provide the proper limits to his son’s behavior. His position as the king did not excuse him from stepping in and disciplining his children.

[1] Slager, Donald. 2008. “Preface.” In A Handbook on 1 & 2 Kings, edited by Paul Clarke, Schuyler Brown, Louis Dorn, and Donald Slager, 1–2:24. United Bible Societies’ Handbooks. New York: United Bible Societies.

[2] https://bcsmn.edu/king-david-a-permissive-father/

Tags:
Permalink
2 Samuel 1:10-12

Love Your Enemy!

Filed Under: Devotions by Chuck
April 8, 2023

An Amalekite brings David word of Saul and Jonathan’s death in battle. David and his army react in a way that’s different than one might expect since Saul had put it in his heart to destroy David. 2 Samuel 1:10-12 tells us what the Amalekite reported to David, “I stood beside him and killed him because I was sure he could not live after falling. And I took the crown on his head and the armlet on his arm, and I have brought them here to my lord. Then David took hold of his clothes and tore them, and so did all the men with him. And they mourned and wept and fasted until evening for Saul and Jonathan, his son and the people of the Lord and the house of Israel because they had fallen by the sword.” In 1 Samuel chapter 31, we read that archers so wounded Saul that he asked his armor-bearer to finish him off before the Philistines arrived. But the armor-bearer would not do it. Verse 4 says, “Therefore Saul took his sword and fell upon it.” Did Saul commit suicide, or did the Amalekite kill him?

Walt Kaiser has a great discussion on this question. He writes, “Although there have been attempts at harmonizing the two accounts, the effort always seems to fall short of being convincing. For example, Josephus tried to make the accounts fit as early as the first Christian century. Josephus claimed that after Saul’s armor-bearer refused to kill Saul, Saul tried to fall on his sword, but he was too weak to do so. Saul turned and saw this Amalekite, who, upon the king’s request, complied and killed him, having found the king leaning on his sword. Afterward, the Amalekite took the king’s crown and armband and fled. While everything seems to fit in this harmonization, there is one fact that is out of line: the armor-bearer. The armor-bearer was sufficiently convinced of Saul’s death to follow his example (See 1 Samuel 31). It is my conclusion that Saul did commit suicide, a violation of the law of God, and that the Amalekite was lying in order to obtain favor with the new administration.”[1]

Even though Saul acted as David’s enemy, he was still a child of God’s people, Israel. When Saul fell in battle, that meant the nation fell in battle. Mayer: There was an excellent reason for David’s sorrow for his dear friend Jonathan and the people of God, but how he could truly be sorrowful for Saul does not so easily appear. For much good came of Saul’s destruction. First, an end was put to tyranny under which the commonwealth had suffered. Second, David was rid of his deadly enemy, who always fought against his life. And third, the expected time now came of fulfilling the promise to David concerning the prophecy of taking the kingdom from Saul. Yet it is not to be thought that David feigned this great sorrow, even for Saul. Although Saul hated David, David still loved Saul just as Christ bids us love our enemies.”[2] David’s life is filled with allusions to Christ’s life. David was the “anointed one,” and through him would come the ultimate anointed one, Jesus. There are many instances in David’s life where we can see Jesus. In this story, David foreshadows Christ’s command to love our enemies. David slaying Goliath wasn’t his most extraordinary deed.

[1] Kaiser, Walter C., Jr., Peter H. Davids, F. F. Bruce, and Manfred T. Brauch. 1996. Hard Sayings of the Bible. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity.

[2] Cooper, Derek, Martin J. Lohrmann, Timothy George, and Scott M. Manetsch, eds. 2016. 1-2 Samuel, 1-2 Kings, 1-2 Chronicles: Old Testament. Vol. V. Reformation Commentary on Scripture. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic.

Tags:
Permalink
1 Samuel 1:3

Offering a Sacrifice

Filed Under: Devotions by Chuck
April 7, 2023

It was time for Samuel’s father, Elkanah, to make his annual pilgrimage to offer his sacrifices to God. 1 Samuel 1:3 tells us, “Now, this man used to go up year by year from his city to worship and to sacrifice to the Lord of hosts at Shiloh, where the two sons of Eli, Hophni, and Phinehas, were priests of the Lord.” The phrase “used to” doesn’t imply he doesn’t do it anymore, as we might use that phrase. It means that it was his custom to go up. Going up is important, but Shiloh was north of Jerusalem and in the same mountain range. Going up does not refer to going north. It refers to climbing the hills. Shiloh was 20 miles north of Jerusalem and would have been a long walk. Elkanah went to Shiloh because the Ark of the Covenant and the priests were located there then.

He sacrificed to “The Lord of Hosts.” This is the first time God is referred to as “The Lord of Hosts” in the Bible. Some argue that it means He is the commander of the Army with a great number of soldiers. Others see it as referring to the Angels at God’s command. The article in the Lexham Bible Dictionary sees it as both. The phrase “Lord of Hosts” is “A phrase describing Yahweh’s role as the Lord of the heavenly armies, the commander of the cosmic forces, the head of the divine council, and the leader of Israel’s army.”[1] I like that some translations translate it as “The Lord Almighty.” The New International Version and Today’s English Version do that.

This is also the first time that the sons of Eli, Hophni, and Phineas are mentioned. They seem to be representative of the apostate nature of Israel and the priesthood during the period of the Judges. But Elkanah is not like them. Bergen writes, “Far from being yet another decadent Israelite in the period of the Judges, Elkanah is consistently portrayed as one who is devoted to the Lord. His piety is suggested first by the fact that ‘year after year’ he ‘went up from his town to worship and sacrifice to the Lord Almighty.’ According to the Torah, every Israelite family was to make the journey to Israel’s central Yahwistic worship center. By leading his family in annual trips to Shiloh, Elkanah is shown to be a man both submissive to the Torah and strong in his domestic leadership.”[2] But Elkanah did not go to Shiloh to see Hophni and Phineas. He came to bring an offering to God Almighty. He came as Phillips says, he came to “renew his covenant fidelity.” Elkanah wanted to prioritize God in his life, not the religious system under which he lived. “However little Elkanah knew of true religion at a time like this, he knew enough to come as a sinner, seeking grace from God by means of the shed blood of a sacrifice.”[3] This is precisely how we should come as well. The sacrifice and the shed blood have already been offered for us in Jesus Christ.

[1] Acosta, Dempsey Rosales. 2016. “Lord of Hosts.” In The Lexham Bible Dictionary, edited by John D. Barry, David Bomar, Derek R. Brown, Rachel Klippenstein, Douglas Mangum, Carrie Sinclair Wolcott, Lazarus Wentz, Elliot Ritzema, and Wendy Widder. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.

[2] Bergen, Robert D. 1996. 1, 2 Samuel. Vol. 7. The New American Commentary. Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers.

[3] Phillips, Richard D. 2012. 1 Samuel. Edited by Philip Graham Ryken and Richard D. Phillips, Duguid Iain M. 1st ed. Reformed Expository Commentary. Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing.

Tags:
Permalink
3 John 1:5, John 3:19

Rejecting Apostolic Authority

Filed Under: Devotions by Chuck
April 6, 2023

In the course of complementing his readers in Gaius’ church, John speaks well of all their efforts. 3 John 1:5 says, “Beloved, it is a faithful thing you do in all your efforts for these brothers, strangers as they are.” Their efforts involved welcoming and caring for some unknown believers who were sent from John. This is understood in the context of one Diotrephes, who will be described in verse 9 as being one “who likes to put himself first.” Notice that John refers to the members of Gaius’ Church family as being “beloved.” He then tells them that their efforts on behalf of the strangers he sent to them are “faithful things.” It appears that Diotrephes was not supportive of John’s messengers to the church. John will even say that Diotrephes rejected the authority of the Apostles and his own role specifically.

First of all, John is telling his readers that they are “beloved.” It could mean that John loves them or that they are beloved in general, or it could be a reference to the fact that they are loved by God. Paul uses this language a lot and specifically tells the Thessalonians, “For we know, brothers loved by God, that he has chosen you” (1 Thessalonians 1:4). John is reminding his readers that they have received God’s love freely through Jesus Christ. Jesus once told his disciples that they had not chosen him, but he had chosen them. God is always the first to act in love. Christ is the demonstration of God’s love to the whole world, but not all will receive it. Those who receive God’s love can love God and others in return. John says we “love because God first loved us.”  In fact, unless one receives God’s love, there is no love in Him. One can be religious and never come to understand God’s love and, therefore, never be able to return that love or show it to others. It appears that Diotrephes was religious. He had some high standards, but he did not have love. He seems to oppose Gaius’ care for the companions that John sent to them.

John calls what Gaius did for the messengers that he sent a “faithful thing.” Most commentators purport that Diotrephes’s problem was a theological one. This is normally drawn from the fact that John did war with the Gnostics, who rejected Jesus’ coming in the flesh. The messengers from John presented, with the authority of an Apostle, the truth regarding the incarnation, death, and bodily resurrection of Jesus. Jones observes, “While 3 John makes no overt statement about theological difference, the stress on faithfulness to the truth by Gaius and the subsequent connection between his faithfulness and hospitality and the lack thereof by Diotrephes tips the scales in favor of theological difference. Those expelled by Diotrephes likely recognized the authority of the Elder, made the confession of Jesus come in the flesh, and hence were amenable to receiving exponents of their common view. Diotrephes, for his part, did not merely want his own shop but was determined to barricade his community from the viewpoint of the Elder and those for whom he spoke.”[1]

Although this is probably correct, it seems to be more of an issue of rebellion against authority on Diotrephes’ part. Faithfulness, as mentioned here, very likely represents acceptance of John’s authority as well as that of the other apostles. The Apostle knew that they would face this because Jesus told them that they would face rejection even from people from their own towns and families. As Heer says, “There will always be those who will reject the messenger and the message of God. Knowing that rejection would happen, Jesus encouraged His disciples to move beyond their feelings of rejection to the next place where their message and ministry would be received. Many ministers need to ‘shake the dust off’ in dependence on the authority of Christ, upon whom rests the ultimate matter of acceptance and rejection.”[2] John’s encouragement to Gaius and the other “faithful” members should be ours as well. Remember, submission to authority was Satan’s number one sin! He was not satisfied with the role God had given him and sought to usurp God’s own authority. Satan worked in Adam & Eve to reject God’s authority as well. Satan continues to work out in “rebellion” as well. The authority of the Bible, the Apostles’ teachings, is under attack in our society. It goes against our natural inclinations. We want abortion. It speaks against it. We want sexual freedom. It speaks against it. The list could go on. John wrote in his gospel, John 3:19, “The light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil.”

[1] Jones, Peter Rhea. 2009. 1, 2 & 3 John. Edited by Leslie Andres and R. Alan Culpepper. Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary. Macon, GA: Smyth & Helwys Publishing, Incorporated.

[2] Heer, Ken. 2007. Luke: A Commentary for Bible Students. Indianapolis, IN: Wesleyan Publishing House.

Tags:
Permalink
sewa motor jogja
© Chuck Larsen 2019. Powered by WordPress.