The Cherethites

Brent Pollard

“The Bible is an ocean whose depths cannot be plumbed by the plummet of human reason,” said English theologian Matthew Henry. Every time I read through the Bible as part of my daily Bible reading, I appreciate this observation. It never ceases to amaze me how something new emerges each time I reread the same Scriptures.

I’ve been noticing a group of men associated with David and Solomon that reappears when Joash takes the throne from the usurper Athaliah in the Book of 2 Kings: the Cherethites. Other groups, such as the Pelethites and the Gittites, were sometimes associated with the Cherethites. I’ll save those for another time.

Who are the Cherethites? Who you ask determines the answer. According to popular belief, the Cherethites were originally Cretan mercenaries. According to the English antiquarian C.R. Conder, this is of Byzantine origin. The Septuagint contributes to this misunderstanding by rendering Cherethite “Kretes or Kretoi.” It is understandable how someone could assume that they were Cretans. Indeed, a late-third-century commentator proposed this explanation as the origin of the Philistines. (Conder)

In reality, we must associate the Cherethites with the Philistines as uncovenanted people living in Canaan whom God would destroy alongside the Israelites when He led the latter into captivity (cf. Ezekiel 25.16; Zephaniah 2.5). However, reading Zephaniah’s prophecy makes it difficult to imagine the Cherethites as being anything but Phoenicians since God calls them “seacoast inhabitants.” As I previously stated, the Canaanites who lived along the coast were part of the Phoenician maritime empire.

But would Israel’s united monarchy or Judah’s kings associate with non-servile Canaanites? When on the run from Saul, David indeed surrounded himself with a motley crew (1 Samuel 22.1-2). Though there is no reason to believe that these 400 were Canaanites, we cannot rule out the possibility that there were Canaanites among this group of disenfranchised people.

We associate David with his valiant men, but many of them were not of Jacob’s ancestry. For example, consider Uriah, whom David assassinated (2 Samuel 11). Uriah was of Hittite origin. Although the heart of the Hittite Empire was in what is now Turkey, the presence of Hittites in Canaan during Abraham’s sojourn suggests that the Hittites colonized the region (Genesis 23.7–18).

According to Jewish sources, Cherethites were “specialized soldiers” in the king’s employ. It is clear from Joash’s account that they were the king’s bodyguards (2 Kings 11; called here Carites). In Midrash Tehillim, one “Rabbi Yivo” is quoted as saying about the Cherethites, “The Cherethites were those who cut off heads, and the Pelethites were those who performed extraordinary things in the court.” (Narbonne) This belief stems from the possibility that the Hebrew word for Cherethite may have originated from a Hebrew word that means “to cut off.” (See Strong’s numbers H3774 and H3772.) However, this only implies their role rather than addressing their identity. 

In contrast to Conder, who thought that the Cherethites were a Semitic people (Conder), William Ewing felt that the Cherethites were a Philistine clan of possible Cretan, Phoenician, or Cillician origin. (Ewing) Given their association with the Philistines or Phoenicians, it is difficult to conclude that the Cherethites were Israelites. They must have been foreigners employed by the monarchy. Ewing states that it was the custom of ancient monarchs to have foreign mercenaries serve as their bodyguards. 

It may seem odd for a king to choose foreign mercenaries over his own subjects, but it has certain advantages. Since mercenaries have fewer political or personal allegiances, they may be more dependable and trustworthy in situations like guarding the king or enforcing the law. This impartiality was likely the case with Joash, a young king God chose during a time of great danger. Joash could rely on the loyalty of his foreign mercenaries despite the threat of death from the usurper (2 Kings 11.4ff). 

Scholars and theologians have debated the identity and origin of the Cherethites. Some believe they were Cretan mercenaries or Semitic people, while others suggest they were foreigners, possibly of Philistine, Phoenician, or Cillician origins. Regardless of their identity, they played a vital role in protecting the king during political instability and danger, as seen in Joash’s account. The Bible gives us a glimpse of its depth and complexity, encouraging us to explore its pages and gain new insights.

Works Cited

Conder, Claude. “Philistines in the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia.” International Standard Bible Encyclopedia Online, edited by James Orr, 1939, www.internationalstandardbible.com/P/philistines.html.

Narbonne, editor. “Midrash Tehillim 3:3.” Midrash Tehillim 3:3, www.sefaria.org/Midrash_Tehillim.3.3?ven=Sefaria_Community_Translation&lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en. Accessed 11 May 2023.Ewing, William. “Cherethites – Meaning and Verses in Bible Encyclopedia.” biblestudytools.com, edited by James Orr, 1915, www.biblestudytools.com/encyclopedias/isbe/cherethites.html.

Half Mast

Carl Pollard

We have an American flag in the front yard of our church building here at Scottsville. Sadly, I’ve noticed lately that is has been flying at half mast more often than not. It is a common practice to fly the flag at half mast after a tragedy occurs. Our world has always been filled with evil, but the method of acting on evil impulses has just changed over time. Why is the flag always at half mast? Because evil people continue to do what they have always done. Hurt others. 

Despite our political differences, we should all be able to agree on these facts: Shooting up a school is evil. Taking an innocent life is the epitome of wickedness. And yet we get distracted by the politics of the situation and fail to see who is truly responsible. Satan has a firm grip on our world, and if we don’t do something to bring people out of his hold, bad things will continue to happen to good people. 

We shouldn’t be surprised at the state of our country. We have removed God from every place, and a godless country will only ever be evil. If we truly want to fix the problems that are constantly happening, we need to start by bringing others to Christ. Parents need to raise their children in Christ and stop making excuses for bad behavior. Mankind is naturally inclined to wickedness. Genesis 6:5 says, “The Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.” The further we move away from God, the closer we get to continual evil. 

Our flag has been at half mast far too often. I’m tired of hearing about all the innocent lives that are lost due to wicked people. Let’s put the politics aside and start focusing on the real issue. People are obsessed with following their own desires (James 1:15), and Satan loves to cheer us on. Only evil people would do what has been done lately, so let’s start teaching the love of Christ to a lost and dying world. There’s only One who can remove our wickedness, and now more than ever we need to proclaim Him! 

Resolving Our Differences

Gary Pollard

In Philippians 4, right before he confronts Euodia and Syntyche, Paul says, “My dear brothers and sisters, I love you and want to see you. You bring me joy and make me proud of you. Continue following the Lord as I have told you.” 

Then verse two, “I strongly urge Euodia and I strongly urge Syntyche to live in harmony in the lord.” The word translated “urge” here is something called a petition verb. These were usually used for strong emphasis. There are two in the same sentence in 4.2, suggesting that Paul had been leading up to this the whole time. His examples of selflessness, humility, concern about others, willingness to sacrifice for the good of others, and his examples of other Christians who did what they were supposed to do, all led up to this straightforward conclusion. These two Christian women were evidently in an argument so severe that their salvation was in serious danger (2.12). 

But he doesn’t just admonish these women and leave them in awkward silence. He asks a friend to help these women work out their issues because (4.3), “They worked hard with me in telling people the good news, together with Clement and others who worked with me. Their names are written in the book of life.” He wasn’t bullying these two women because of their issues — even as he corrected them, he made it clear that this was done out of genuine love and concern for their spiritual well-being. Because of their evangelistic mindset and excellent work ethic, their names were in God’s book of life. 

Paul repeats 3.1 in 4.4 — “rejoice in the Lord always. I’ll say it again — rejoice.” These are also imperatives. How do we fix problems in our congregations? We focus on what we have in common. We serve God and we’re waiting impatiently for Jesus to come back. It’s a lot easier to resolve our differences when we’re united in our goals. We all want the same thing. We’re all equal in God’s eyes. 

Philippians 4 has several more imperatives (5-9) — Make sure everyone sees that we’re gentle and kind. Don’t worry about anything. Ask God for everything you need and be content with what you have. Think about what is good and wholesome. Follow God’s teaching. 

At the end of Philippians 4 is another familiar verse — “I can do anything with God’s help”. This verse is on a poster at our gym near the weight lifting area (as “Phillippians” ha), and many have this verse on a shirt or tattooed. While it’s certainly innocent and kinda funny, that’s not what Paul’s saying here. To avoid ending the letter on an unpleasant note, he spends time thanking Philippi for all of the ways they’ve helped him. He slipped in that he can be content with or without money, and he can be content with or without enough food. How? Because when it comes to working for God, he’ll make sure we have the strength we need to keep going. 

Philippians 4.7 says, “Because you belong to Jesus, God’s peace will guard your hearts and minds. His peace is more profound than we’re capable of understanding.” No matter what happens to us, if we’re working for God we’ll be ok! 

The Question Jar

Dale Pollard

I’ve got a jar on my desk and members of the Tompkinsville church of Christ have filled it with some very interesting questions! Here’s some of the latest for your enjoyment. 

Q. Does God Change His Mind? 

A. No, but He is merciful and at times His anger relents towards the sinful. When a sinner turns to God, He doesn’t change His mind but rather follows through with His predestined promise to save. 

“God sent an angel to destroy Jerusalem. But as the angel was doing so, the LORD saw it and was grieved because of the calamity and said to the angel who was destroying the people, “Enough!” 

– I Chron. 21.15 

And he (Jonah) prayed to the Lord and said, “O Lord, is not this what I said when I was yet in my country? That is why I made haste to flee to Tarshish; for I knew that you are a gracious God and merciful, slow to anger and abounding in steadfast love, and relenting from disaster.

 – Jonah 4.2 

See also Hebrews 13.8 to read more about God’s unchanging nature. 

Q. When a young man is baptized, should he still be taught by a lady? 

A. Check out the article “Baptized Boys And Bible Class” on this blog. It goes into greater detail, but here’s an excerpt.

“First, it misses who is included in 1 Timothy 2:12. The Greek word translated “man” is the verse specially means “man, husband, sir.” All males are not under consideration. The Greek has words for child, including “infant” or “half-grown child” (Mat. 2:21), “child,” “son” or “daughter” (Mat. 10:21), and “young man” (Mat. 17:18). None of those words is used in 1 Timothy 2:12. The Holy Spirit chose the specific word meaning “adult man.”  Boys eleven or twelve are not men!” 

Q. Was John the Baptizer the first to baptize others? 

A. He was the first one mentioned to be baptizing in the N.T. (Matt. 3.4-5) but he wasn’t the first to perform or facilitate a baptism. This goes all the way back to the book of Leviticus where ritual cleansing was common. You can still find ancient Mikveh’s in Jerusalem today were Jews would purify themselves according to their practices. The concept of submersion wasn’t a cultural novelty— but its significance changed with the arrival of Jesus. 

Q. 1 John speaks of a plurality of “anti-Christ’s,” does that mean they’re multiple and also the end of the world is near? 

A. An “anti-christ” is simply one who is against Christ. While there seems to be an individual known as “The Man of Lawlessness” who will make an appearance in the last days, his identity is speculated. 

“Don’t let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction.” – 2 Thess. 2.3 

This topic is still hotly debated within the church. Throughout the years many have pondered over who the individual(s) might be. Names like Hitler, Pol Pot, the catholic papacy, and even an abstract idea where the Man of Lawlessness is simply “evil personified.” A modern idea that seems to be gaining traction is that artificial intelligence could be the “man” referred to in 2 Thess. The author of this post isn’t entirely sold on any of these ideas. 

Q. Did all the animals talk in the Garden of Eden? 

A. It’s interesting to note that the text in Genesis doesn’t indicate that Eve was surprised or frightened by a speaking serpent. We know that the serpent was among the “wild animals” God had made and is described as “crafty” (Gen. 3.1). The word “crafty” doesn’t necessarily indicate that it was the only animal that had the ability to speak. While Martin Luther believed the serpent was possessed by Satan, Flavius Josephus seemed to believe that all animals could speak during this time.

 “At that epoch all the creatures spoke a common tongue” (Jewish Antiquities, I .41).

We won’t know one way or the other on this side of eternity, it’s interesting to read about a conversation between a man and a donkey in Numbers 22. 

Then the Lord opened the donkey’s mouth, and it said to Balaam, “What have I done to you to make you beat me these three times?”

Balaam answered the donkey, “You have made a fool of me! If only I had a sword in my hand, I would kill you right now.”

The donkey said to Balaam, “Am I not your own donkey, which you have always ridden, to this day? Have I been in the habit of doing this to you?”

“No,” he said. – 22.28-30 

Once again, if Balaam was taken back by his donkey’s sudden ability to speak, the text doesn’t record that reaction. 

In 2018 a team at the Marineland Aquarium in Antibes, France, taught an orca whale named Wikie to speak. She was able to say the words “hello,” “good bye,” and “one, two, three.” Orcas and several species of birds have the vocal ability to speak the human tongue, so perhaps there’s some truth to Josephus’ claim. 

A Sturdy Bridge Over The Deadly Sea

Neal Pollard

The Tay Bridge in Dundee, Scotland, opened for passenger services on June 1, 1878. That very summer, Queen Victoria was a passenger onboard the train that passed over that bridge, at the time at over a mile and a half the longest railway bridge in the world. This led her to knight the bridge’s builder, Thomas Bouch. But on Saturday, December 28, 1879, the bridge collapsed in a violent wind and rainstorm as a train carrying 75 passengers was crossing it. All perished! It was the worst engineering disaster of its time. Commissioners blamed faulty design, construction and maintenance, a too narrow bridge, inferior materials, and improper precautions against wind loads for the tragedy. Shortcuts, financial problems, and engineers driving too fast all contributed to the collapse. It was a tragic loss for Scotland.

As tragic as this was, equally tragic was the response of the Church of Scotland which blamed those responsible for running and riding the train on the Sabbath for drawing God’s wrath. A bridge builder built a faulty bridge, but several supposed ministers misused the Bible to build faulty theology.

Properly handling the Bible is the responsibility of more than preachers. God expects it of all of us. So much is passed off as religious truth that bears little if any connection with what the Bible actually says. In 2 Timothy 2:14-19, Paul instructed Timothy to promote of a culture of not only reading, but of investigating that leads to understanding.

What good things happen when you properly study the Bible? You accurately handle the word of truth (15), you have no cause for shame (15), and you stand on the firm foundation of God (19). What bad things do you avoid by properly studying the Bible? You avoid “ruin” (14), ungodliness (16), straying from the truth (18), upsetting the faith of some (18), and wickedness (19).

When dealing with something as important as eternal truth and its counterparts, we must be skilled workmen (15). Shoddiness leads to disastrous results. People claim that the Bible teaches all sorts of things, many of whom have done little if any studying regarding their claims. Our job is to counter useless (14), ruinous (14), worldly (16), empty (16), gangrenous (17), upsetting (18), foolish (21), ignorant (21), and argument-producing (23) teaching that comes from men rather than God. Our job is to help build a bridge between men and God over the chasm that leads to spiritual death. What we build with and how we build makes all the difference! 

Preaching In The Age Of AI

Brent Pollard

While scrolling through a social media site, I stumbled upon a post by a concerned brother claiming that the latest AI technology would threaten the preaching profession. Although I have heard similar complaints from artists and writers, I was surprised to hear this argument from a preacher.

Artificial intelligence has caused much hysteria; some individuals have even linked its presence to their eschatological beliefs. Others fear Hollywood-like plots of machines subjugating humanity. These responses perplex me, as people will always find a way to misuse technology. Therefore, shouldn’t the same concerns be applied consistently to other tools that improve a preacher’s ability to research and communicate?

For instance, did anyone anticipate preachers becoming lazy once word processors became affordable? Did the brethren scorn those preachers who created books of sermon outlines for other preachers and Bible teachers or innovative creators of computer resources such as Mark Copeland’s “Executable Outlines”? If not, why not?

What makes AI so different from these tools that it would make preachers lazy and turn their preparation into copy-and-paste endeavors? We should not view AI’s potential for automating specific tasks and removing additional steps differently. The hyperbolic language surrounding AI technology is unjustified, and we should not dismiss the potential benefits of AI without proper consideration.

So, how should a minister or Bible school teacher use artificial intelligence ethically? For starters, AI is good at presenting summaries of online articles. If you are researching and unsure whether you can use a specific lengthy article in your preparation, artificial intelligence can quickly provide the “TL;DR version.” This step will tell you whether you should spend time reading an article and gleaning points to use as illustrations or to support your points.

Second, AI is capable of assisting you with grammar and syntax. Though lacking the interface of AIs like Bard or ChatGPT, AI tools like Quillbot can help you paraphrase your sentences in various voices, from fluent to creative. You can use these AIs to make the sentences more concise or straightforward. When combining your writing with Grammarly’s AI, you can correct yourself when you use passive voice or split infinitives.

Third, AI can potentially be a fantastic tool for expository preaching. ChatGPT and Bard are two examples of AI language models. Programmers train these language models using a large corpus of text from various sources. At the moment, ChatGPT is using the GPT-3.5 architecture. Developers train these AI on a vast dataset that includes billions of words from multiple sources, such as books, articles, web pages, and social media. The Bible is one of the texts that programmers use to train AI language models because specific translations, such as the King James Version, are in the public domain.

When you ask ChatGPT to generate an expository outline from a passage, you should double-check the results, but it does an excellent job of clarifying the context in which a Scripture appears. And, if you’re careful with your prompts, you can ask ChatGPT to provide a literal interpretation free of man’s erroneous interpretations. For example, when I inquired about Acts 2.38, it responded that baptism was for the remission of sins. (Had I only asked what Acts 2.38 means, ChatGPT would have provided various ecumenical interpretations.) 

There are other beneficial applications, to be sure, but it would be remiss of me not to include this caveat. If you want to be lazy and have AI do your lesson prep, remember that AI cannot assist you in your most important role. As Paul reminds Titus, “….show yourself to be an example of good deeds, with purity in doctrine, dignified, sound in speech that is beyond reproach, so that the opponent will be put to shame, having nothing bad to say about us” (Titus 2.7-8 NASB1995).

AI lacks emotion and real-world experience. In comparison, preaching is a highly relational profession. As a result, artificial intelligence cannot replace preachers’ personal connection and example to their congregations. Any minister who thinks he can get away with abusing any tool as a shortcut to fulfilling his task will quickly find himself called out on the carpet by those in leadership.

In closing, artificial intelligence is not a threat to the preaching profession but a valuable tool that can enhance a minister’s effectiveness. By using AI ethically to summarize articles, improve grammar and syntax, and assist with expository preaching, ministers can save time and increase the quality of their messages.However, it is essential to remember that AI cannot replace the personal connection and guidance ministers provide to their congregations. Ministers should use AI as a tool to assist and support them rather than as a replacement for the vital human element of ministry. By using AI responsibly, ministers can continue to fulfill their essential role with excellence and effectiveness.

A Road Less Traveled

Carl Pollard

Romans 12:19 says, “Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, ‘Vengeance is mine, I will repay,’ says the Lord.” Getting our own revenge is something that is very easy to do. Our human emotions will naturally push us to take revenge. We want to get even with those who hurt us. We want to hurt those who hurt us. We want to insult them and avenge ourselves. Why? Because if we are honest, it feels good. It feels good to brake check the person that cut us off. It feels good to insult the person that spoke rudely to us. It feels good to take revenge. 

The problem is if we want to build a relationship with the world and with the church, we must leave the avenging to God. We should expect the world to hurt us because it’s driven by sin. The Christian, however, shouldn’t be the same because they are led by God. 

Revenge never ends well. It doesn’t cultivate relationships, it doesn’t build up our influence. It harms our influence, and it shows that we don’t truly trust that God will avenge us. As Christians, God is our avenger. We must be careful to not practice what God has rightfully claimed. By following this command, we open the door to a healthy relationship with those in the world, as well as our Christian family. 

Romans 12:20 continues, “To the contrary (rather than take vengeance, CP), “if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals on his head. Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.” Rather than give in to the desire to take revenge, we are to treat our enemies like a friend. Feed him if he is hungry (don’t take joy in their hunger), 

If our enemy is thirsty, give them a drink (don’t taunt them and laugh in their face when they suffer). By doing this, we are acting like God’s chosen. 

Self-control is the basis for many Christian principles. Letting God take vengeance takes a lot of self-control, but ultimately it leads to healthier relationships and opportunities to evangelize to a world that doesn’t know any better. Take the road less traveled, and God will bless us in the end!

Resolving Conflict

Gary Pollard

Philippians 2.12 says, “Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.” What does Paul mean by this? He just used Jesus as an example of selflessness, positing him as the ultimate authority. He just told them that they needed to put others above self and correct several issues. So this verse is a warning — if they didn’t work out their problems, they would die spiritually. 

Resolving conflict is not just a good idea, it’s unequivocally necessary. Paul wanted Euodia and Syntyche to appreciate how dangerous their feud was for their spiritual health. They were to be so afraid of eternal consequences that they drop everything to fix the issue. 

2.14-16 has even more imperatives — do everything without complaining about it so you’ll be blameless in God’s eyes. That’s the second time he’s said this, the first was in his prayer in chapter 1. In 2.16, Paul reminds them of how much he invested in them and hopes that he hasn’t wasted his time. 

We’re all familiar with Philippians 3.1, “Rejoice in the lord.” This isn’t a generic, feel-good reminder. This is an imperative! They weren’t finding their purpose in God, so Paul had to demand that they make a change. 

Then he uses three more imperatives in a row — keep an eye out for people who try to undermine your faith. This might seem like a typical ADHD tangent for Paul, but this is where he uses himself as an example of sacrifice and selflessness again. 

This is the heart of confrontation: 3.12-16 — “I don’t mean that I’m exactly what God wants me to be. I have not yet reached that goal. But I continue trying to reach it and make it mine. That’s what Christ Jesus wants me to do. It is the reason he made me his. Brothers and sisters, I know that I still have a long way to go. But there is one thing I do: I forget what is in the past and try as hard as I can to reach the goal before me. I keep running hard toward the finish line to get the prize that is mine because God has given me a higher calling through Jesus. All of us who have grown to be spiritually mature should think this way too. And if there is any of this that you don’t agree with, God will make it clear to you. But we should continue following the truth we already have.” 

The worst part about confrontation is that our own faults are at the front of our minds. Who are we to correct someone else’s imperfections when we have plenty of our own? Paul addresses that with this section. We’re never going to be perfect, but that shouldn’t keep us from trying. Our own imperfection also shouldn’t keep us from watching out for the spiritual health of our Christian family! 

Give Like Jesus

Neal Pollard

When we think about Jesus and material possessions, perhaps we think of passages like Luke 8:3 that tell us He lived from the financial support of Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Susanna, and many others. Or His own words: “The foxes have holes and the birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay His head” (Luke 9:58). Jesus lived humbly. Despite this, how often do we reflect on Jesus’ giving?

  • He gave Himself. Scripture says this explicitly in several places. He gave Himself “for our sins” (Gal. 1:4;). He gave Himself “for me” (Gal. 2:20). He gave Himself “for us” (Eph. 5:2; Ti. 2:14). He gave Himself for the church (Eph. 5:25). He gave Himself “for all” (1 Tim. 2:6). No matter how you look at the cross, it must be described in terms of His giving. This gift was the most significant act of all history. The writer of Hebrews says “we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all” (10:10). Isn’t it interesting that Paul praises the unexpected generosity of the Macedonian givers, in part, by saying “they first gave themselves to the Lord and to us by the will of God” (2 Cor. 8:5). Gracious, generous giving is impossible without our first giving ourselves to God. Submitting ourselves to Him in utter dependency, yielding our will and desires, is a prerequisite for Christlike giving.
  • He found it more blessed to give than receive (Acts 20:35). This was His mentality and outlook. His default position was doing for others, not having others do for Him (Mat. 20:28). Paul, speaking with the Ephesian elders, reflects back on this character trait of Jesus, saying, “In everything I showed you that by working hard in this manner you must help the weak and remember the words of the Lord Jesus, that He Himself said, ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive.’ ” What is Paul talking about? In the context, he is talking about material things like gold, silver, and clothing (33), material needs (34), and helping the weak by working hard (35). He’s not referring to the Sunday collection (cf. 1 Cor. 16:1-2), but an attitude of heart instead. Again, the Macedonians embodied this attitude. Paul is still speaking of them when he writes, “Each one must do as he has purposed in his heart, not grudgingly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver” (2 Cor. 9:7). We should grow to the point where it brings us joy to give to God. Isn’t that how Jesus gave Himself for us? Study Hebrews 12:1-3 closely!
  • He gave with grace (2 Cor. 8:9). Most lexical definitions of “grace” include the word “gift,” “favor,” and “benefit.” These are undoubtedly giving terms and, when Paul uses it in 2 Corinthians 8:9, a financial term. Paul says, “For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though He was rich, yet for your sakes He became poor, so that you through His poverty might become rich.” He ties Christ’s gracious giving to his admonition that Corinth be gracious givers, too. He urges them to complete this gracious work (6), to abound in this gracious work (7), and co-participate in this gracious work (19-20). For Jesus, grace meant giving up something to meet the needs of others. For us, gracious giving means giving up something to supply the needs of others. Like with Jesus, we prove the sincerity of our love by gracious giving (8).

Should we give out of duty and obligation? Not entirely and certainly not primarily. Should we give out of gratitude? That’s certainly better than guilt. How about giving out of an effort to imitate our Savior? When we are giving, it is not merely “to the church.” It is giving to the head of the church, the one who gave everything to purchase it (Acts 20:28). Remarkably, sacrificial giving is a tangible, explicit way for us to give like Jesus. Could there be a stronger motivation?

Archaeologists Discover a Sixth-Century Old Syriac Version of Matthew’s Gospel

Brent Pollard

Archaeologists discovered a new copy of Matthew’s Gospel written on ancient parchment beneath two other copies of the same Scriptures, in Greek and Georgian. (Georgian was the last language in which Matthew was written.) Researchers found the text using ultraviolet light. The newly discovered Gospel, written in the Old Syriac language, is thought to date from the sixth century and provides essential information about the early development of Christianity in the Middle East. This version of Matthew’s Gospel has a few minor differences, suggesting that a scribe translated it from an original language different from others. On the other hand, skepticism is likely to use this idea to undermine trust in modern translations of the Scriptures.

What are the differences in Matthew 12.1’s text? On the Sabbath, Jesus and his disciples walk through grainfields when hungry and begin picking heads of grain to eat. On the other hand, the Old Syriac version found on parchment adds that the disciples rubbed the grain in their hands before eating it. While there is a Latin copy that reads similarly, the overwhelming majority of extant manuscripts of Matthew do not. Yet, it is essential to note that this does not indicate that the Scriptures have changed. Before making assumptions, the article fails to consider comparing this version to other Gospel texts.

Luke 6.1 reads as the Old Syriac version of Matthew 12.1: “Now it happened that He was passing through some grainfields on a Sabbath; and His disciples were picking the heads of grain, rubbing them in their hands, and eating the grain. (NASB1995) Could you tell me what is a more probable interpretation of the discrepancy? Could a copyist have mistakenly recorded Luke’s Gospel here, perhaps from memory? Or was this how Matthew’s account was translated into Old Syriac? 

I used machine translation to provide versions of the text in Old Syriac, Koine Greek, and Georgian. However, there may be some errors present.

Old Syriac: ܒ݁ܗܰܡܟܽܘܬܝܳܐ ܕ݁ܐܝܟܬܐ ܐܰܦ݂ ܡܶܢ ܒ݁ܰܝܬܳܐ ܐܳܦ݂ܐ ܐܰܢ݈ܬ݁ܘܼܟ݂ܝܼܣ ܕ݁ܝܶܫܽܘܥ ܕ݁ܕ݂ܶܒ݂ܪܳܢܳܐ ܕ݁ܐܰܢܬ݂ܽܘܢ ܘܐܶܠܳܐ ܟ݁ܰܢܝܳܢ ܕ݁ܡܶܠܬܼܐ ܒ݁ܡܰܥܬ݁ܝܳܐ ܘܐܶܠܳܐ ܫܰܠܡܳܢܳܐ ܠܫܰܥܬ݁ܳܐ ܘܐܰܢ݈ܬ݁ܘܼܢ ܐܰܥܡܳܢܳܐ ܘܚܶܡܪܽܘܬ݂ܳܐ ܘܐܶܠܳܐ ܘܪܰܒ݂ܶܗ ܕ݁ܝܶܫܽܘܥ܀ (Matthew 12.1)

Koine Greek: εν εκείνω τω καιρώ επορεύθη ο Ιησούς τοις σάββασι διά των σπορίμων οι δε μαθηταί αυτού επείνασαν και ήρξαντο τίλλειν στάχυας και εσθίειν. (Matthew 12.1)

Georgian: ამ დროს იესო მიდიოდა შაბათზე თერთმეტის რითმით მართლად ლოცვაში, ხოლო მისი მოწმენდები მშვიდად შებრალეს და მიწუხეს ანაზღაურებისა და ჭაშნიკად ჭრიდების ჩამრთვისა და ჭამასა და სვეტისა საშუალოდ. (Matthew 12.1)

Old Syriac: ܗܘܐ ܕܝܢ ܫܒܘܬܐ ܕܬܪܥܐ ܕܥܪܕܐ ܫܡܝܐ ܐܬܘܪܝܐ ܕܐܬܝܕܘܗܝ ܒܢܝܐ ܘܓܝܪ ܕܫܡܝܐ ܡܫܝܚܐ ܘܐܪܗܡܝܢ ܗܘܘ ܡܪܢܐ ܫܘܪܝܐ ܘܐܫܬܘܬܐ ܫܘܪܝܐ ܕܐܢܐ ܡܛܠ ܠܐܝܠܝܐ ܘܐܚܘܢܝܢ ܗܘܘ ܪܒܘܬܐ ܕܥܪܕܐ ܘܐܫܬܘܬܐ ܕܟܠܗܘܢ ܘܐܛܪܝܐ ܗܘܝܢ ܐܢܐ ܘܒܫܡܝܐ ܐܢܐ ܐܢܐ ܚܢܢܘܢ ܗܘ ܡܠܟܐ ܕܠܐ ܡܕܡ ܒܢܝܐ ܘܐܣܦܝܐ ܀ (Luke 6.1)

Koine Greek: εγένετο δε εν σαββάτω δευτεροπρώτω διαπορεύεσθαι αυτόν διά των σπορίμων και έτιλλον οι μαθηταί αυτού τους στάχυας και ήσθιον ψώχοντες ταις χερσί. (Luke 6.1)

Georgian: იყო კვირაში მეორე პროტოსაბატო, და შესულიყო მათა იესომ სამეფოს ძის გარეშე, სადაც პირობდნენ სასწაულს და თავიანთ ხელებში კი კარვებდნენ პურს. (Luke 6.1)

It is unnecessary to be fluent in any of the above languages to notice that these verses differ. There are apparent differences. There are, however, enough similarities between the two passages to cause confusion or a copyist’s error. Both passages describe Jesus and his disciples walking through fields and picking grains on the Sabbath. Both passages use phrases like “picking the heads of grain.” The context of both passages mentions the Pharisees objecting to the disciples’ actions and claiming that what they had done was not lawful on the Sabbath.

It’s possible that the scribe added a passage from another Gospel to connect it to the parable that follows in Matthew’s account, as they did for Matthew 18.11. Copyists, for example, used Luke 19.10 to introduce the parable of the lost sheep. In a more recent English translation, Matthew 18.11 is bracketed to indicate that it was missing from some old manuscripts used to translate the Bible. Studying religious texts requires careful consideration of the historical context and source material to translate and interpret them accurately. This is particularly important when dealing with ancient texts like the Bible, where variations in different versions pose challenges.

This discovery might make skeptics doubt the Scriptures’ reliability by suggesting that human error or opinion may have influenced them. The most crucial point, however, is that the systematic theology of the New Testament remains consistent, even in a copy of Matthew’s passage that is around 200 years older than the copies above it. While some manuscripts have different wording or additional verses, the message remains consistent, and the steps to salvation stay the same. Whether or not Matthew mentioned the disciples rubbing grain in their hands, the fact that Jesus died to save the world from sin is undeniable. Our demonstration of faith in Jesus Christ is also unchanged. Indeed, we should be amazed at God’s Providence in ensuring His message is faithfully transmitted to people now and in the future.

Reference

The Spirit Of Deception

Carl Pollard

In 1 John 4, we read from John some warnings concerning spirits. He says in 1 John 4:1, “Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world.” John tells us that not every spirit is from God. He goes on to say in verse 6, “We are from God; he who knows God listens to us; he who is not from God does not listen to us. By this we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of error.” 

These verses clearly teach us that there is the Spirit from God, and then there are spirits in the form of false prophets. These false prophets are from the world. The teachings of the apostles were and continue to be the standard for the church. John 13:20 says, “‘Truly, truly, I say to you, he who receives whomever I send receives Me; and he who receives Me receives Him who sent Me.’ The one whom Jesus sends is His apostle. God sends Christ and Christ sends the apostles. Therefore, If you accept the apostles you accept Christ, and if you accept Christ then you accept God. We wouldn’t even know of Christ if it were not for the apostles. They were to distinguish these spirits by seeing if those speaking were speaking things that were of the apostles and God, or of the world (1 John 4:5). 1 John 2:25 says that these people were teaching things that were contrary to John’s teachings.

So what does all of this mean? Who is the Spirit of Deception? We can piece together through 1 John, that the Spirit of Deception is that which teaches against John. By doing so, the spirit of deception has gone against the Spirit of Truth. 

The Spirit of Deception can be described as someone/something that does not teach that which is in accordance to the apostles or God, it is that which does not obey the commands of Christ, and it is that which tries to mislead Christians. The Spirit of Truth is contradicted by the Spirit of Deception. We see in the early church that one of the gifts of the Spirit was discerning spirits (1 Corinthians 12:10). 

The Holy Spirit (Helper) was given to the apostles to help them remember what Jesus had taught them, to preach about Christ, to tell the world of its sin, to preach righteousness and judgment, and to bring glory to Christ (John 14:26; 15:26; 16:7- 8,13-14). Demonic spirits spoke through false prophets to confuse and convert God’s people (1 Timothy 4:1ff). This spirit of deception was the reason for John’s writing. He says he is wrote, “concerning those who are deceiving you,” (2:26). He also said, “Children, let no one deceive you,” (3:7). The Christians John wrote to needed to learn how to distinguish these Spirits.

Sadly, we are still in the same circumstances today. People are still advocates of the devil. We find false teaching everywhere and it is up to us to test and discern between  what is from God and what is from the world. May we always be vigilant and wary of the teachings that comes from the mouth of Satan! 

Healthy Relationships

Gary Pollard

In Phil 2.2 Paul uses an imperative — make my joy complete. Because of this imperative, we know that something was still missing with that church. How were they to complete his joy? By having one mind, possessing one love, working closely with each other, by avoiding selfishness or pride, by practicing humility, by considering others to be more valuable than self,  and by investing in the lives of others. 

Look at the language used in 2.1 — if you’re encouraged by Christ, if you’re encouraged by love, if you share a common mindset, if you’re capable of compassion and pity, then make my joy complete by being unified and putting others above self. 

When we think of issues in a church, our minds usually go straight to false teaching. We want to make sure nothing inaccurate makes its way into our doctrine. That’s definitely an important part of our spiritual health, but it isn’t the only issue we face. 

This entire letter is all about how critical it is that we keep our relationships with each other healthy. And this isn’t the only time God communicates that message with us — I Jn 4.20 says, “If you hate anyone in your Christian family, God’s love doesn’t exist in you.” Mt 5.23 tells us that we shouldn’t even worship if there’s bad blood between us and someone else. Mt 18 tells us how important it is to resolve conflicts when they come up. 

God has made it very clear that it’s just as important to be on good terms with our Christian family as it is to avoid false teaching. 

“Sackcloth Beneath”

Neal Pollard

Jehoram, son of Ahab, was still king over Israel when Ben-hadad, king of Syria, was able to besiege Israel’s capital city (2 Kings 6:24). This prolonged siege led Samaria to suffer “a great famine” (25). It was so bad that donkey heads and dove dung were sold at exorbitant prices as food (26). There have been famous sieges in history, both ancient and modern, and the details of historians are soberingly terrifying. The German siege of the unprepared Russian town of Leningrad went on for 872 days. The city of three million inhabitants “ate everything from wallpaper paste to shoe leather to supplement their meager bread rations, and some even resorted to cannibalism” (Evan Andrews, 8/22/18, history.com). The writer of 2 Kings reveals that this siege was of the same sort. 

King Jehoram was “passing by on the wall” when a woman cried out to him to intervene and arbitrate between herself and another woman. According to her, they had struck a gruesome bargain to eat one’s son the day before and then the other’s son that day. She had kept her end of the bargain, but the other woman had a change of heart and had hidden her son. Such was the unimaginable depths of the people’s hunger. When the king heard this grisly story, he tore his clothes and, as the people witnessed, there was sackcloth beneath (30). Unfortunately, Jehoram was neither penitent nor reliant upon God. His grief turned to wrath against God’s prophet, Elisha, whom he resolved to kill (31-33). 

But I want you to focus on something in the heart of this story. As Jehoram walked above the people, they must have known these events disturbed him. But they understood the depths of his sorrow when in his grief and dismay he tore his clothes to reveal the sackcloth underneath. Sackcloth is a very coarse, rough fabric woven from flax or hemp, much like a burlap bag. It would itch and chafe and be very uncomfortable. It was often worn as a way of demonstrating how irritated and agitated of heart one was. 

Will you remember as you interact with people each day that they may be wearing “sackcloth beneath.” A brother or sister in Christ may be wearing some hidden cares. That person who waits on you at the bank, the store, or the restaurant, that customer service agent you interact with, that fellow driver on the road, they may be distracted, obsessed, or focused on their great grief or fear. This may help us to season our words (Col. 4:6) and soften our judgment. The way we treat them may greatly impact what happens next in their lives. When we stop and practice compassion, we may be the way God heals the hurts of those who are wearing their figurative sackcloth beneath. 

The Phoenicians: An Enigmatic People and Their Relationship with Israel

Brent Pollard

Reading about the discoveries of Biblical archaeology and how they shed light on the Bible is a fascinating hobby of mine. I read a recent article about discovering five Tartessian busts in Spain, which could shed light on people who were once close allies of Israel. Scholars considered the Tartessians aniconic because they had left behind no icons or symbols of their religion. However, among these masks, archaeologists think they might see images of the goddess Astarte. So yes, they may have discovered representations of Baal’s consort.

The Phoenicians are still shrouded in mystery. Even though scholars will reject much of the Bible’s record about Israel, they will cling to the testimony about the Phoenicians because we know so little about them. The Phoenicians were considered Canaanites, but did they come from the area or, like the Philistines, move there from somewhere else in the Mediterranean? Indeed, if these were indigenous inhabitants of the Levant or Arabia, they adapted to the sea like a duck to water, forging a maritime empire.

The Phoenicians colonized a region of Spain in addition to their colonies in northern Africa (such as Carthage). One possible origin for the name of the country is the Phoenician word “i-span-ya,” which translates as “land of gold forging” or “earth where metals are forged.” This Spanish colony returns us to the Tartessians mentioned in the first paragraph. These individuals were the product of cultural mixing between Phoenician colonists and natives of the Iberian Peninsula.

According to 1 Kings 5.1, the king of the Phoenician city-state of Tyre admired King David. King Hiram demonstrated his fondness for David by building him a palace (2 Samuel 5.11). After David’s death, Solomon still had an ally in Tyre. The Phoenicians assisted Solomon in the construction of an Israelite navy and accompanied Solomon’s men on an expedition to Ophir to obtain gold (1 Kings 9.26–28).

The fleet returned from Ophir with more than just gold; they also brought back a “very great number of almug trees and precious stones” (1 Kings 10.11 NASB1995). The Bible says King Solomon used almug wood to fashion temple pillars and musical instruments. Whatever the identity of these trees, the author of 1 Kings 10.12 states that those “trees have not come in again, nor have they been seen to this day” (NASB1995). For his part, Solomon rewarded King Hiram’s fidelity by giving him twenty cities in Galilee (1 Kings 9.11).

Solomon got his hands on goods from faraway Spain because of the alliance between Israel and Phoenicia. You can read about Solomon receiving gold, silver, ivory, apes, and peacocks from King Hiram and the Tarshish fleet in 1 Kings 10.21–23. As a result, silver’s value plummeted because it was so abundant during Solomon’s reign. Scholars have long regarded Tarshish as Phoenicia’s most western settlement in Spain. (Would our Tartessians be inhabitants of Tarshish?) Because of Tarshish’s perceived isolation, Jonah believed he could elude God by boarding a ship headed there (Jonah 1.3).

It is interesting how Solomon used his alliance with the Phoenicians when building the Temple. 1 Kings 7 details all of the work that Solomon had one named Hiram do for the Temple. This Hiram was part Israelite, having a mother from the tribe of Naphtali, and part Phoenician, having a father from Tyre. So, though he is not King Hiram, he is a man named Hiram and a Phoenician. Could Hiram have been a common Phoenician name?

Following the breakup of Israel’s united kingdom, the ten northern tribes were renowned for their great wealth. The prophet Amos blasted them for being at ease in Zion, reclining on ivory beds, and writing songs about themselves (Amos 6.1–8). No doubt, this was a result of their continued ties with Phoenicia. Their relationship was so close that King Ahab married the daughter of the king of Sidon, another Phoenician city-state (1 Kings 16.31). Not long after our introduction to Jezebel, we find her slaughtering God’s prophets (1 Kings 18.4). 

By the time we reached the world of the New Testament, the Phoenicians had long since lost their influence. The Babylonians conquered parts of Tyre built on the mainland, leaving only the island city. The Greek conqueror Alexander the Great built a causeway to the island city using debris from the city’s destruction. After a lengthy siege, he was able to take the city in 332 BC.

When the Romans took control of the Mediterranean, they refused to share it with anyone else. As a result, the Romans and the Phoenicians, then known as Carthaginians, would fight three Punic Wars. Historians call them the Punic Wars because the Romans called the Carthaginians Puni. You’ve probably heard of Hannibal, a Carthaginian. Hannibal dared to attack the Roman Empire nearly 200 years before Christ, riding his elephants across the Alps to Rome. However, the Romans foiled his plans, and Carthage eventually fell to the Romans. By 19 BC, Rome had conquered all the remaining territories of the (Phoenician) Carthaginian empire (i.e., Spain).

In the pages of the New Testament, Phoenicia is the Roman provincial name for Syria. The place where people first called Christ’s followers “Christians” was Antioch, a town in Phoenicia (Acts 11.19). Next, Paul and Barnabas traveled back through Phoenicia to report to Jerusalem’s brethren concerning the work done among the Gentiles (Acts 15.3). Lastly, Paul’s fateful return from the third missionary journey would take him through Phoenicia (Acts 21.2).

In conclusion, the Phoenicians were pivotal figures in ancient Near Eastern history, and their impact was felt far beyond the boundaries of the Mediterranean. They were important allies of Israel and built a massive empire thanks to their knowledge of the sea. Recent archaeological discoveries, such as the Tartessian busts, shed light on their religious practices, but many aspects of their culture remain a mystery. Although the Babylonians, Greeks, and Romans ultimately defeated the Phoenicians, their impact on world history is undeniable, and their legacy lives on.

A Healthy Fear

Carl Pollard

As Christians we believe in an all powerful God. A God who used words to form the universe. A God who has the power to destroy the world with a flood. A God who is Just and Holy. We fear God because He decides where we will spend eternity. 

If we are Christians, our relationship with God should be filled with Love, respect, praise, and fear. Proverbs 9:10 tells us that fearing the Lord is the beginning of wisdom. The wise person fears God, which means that the foolish do not fear God. Because they lack this fear for God, they continue in sin. They aren’t concerned about what God could do to them. 

This is where our context from Romans 3 comes into play. Mankind naturally desires sin over God. And there will be those, like in Romans 3, that will try to find excuses to continue in sin. Paul gives us the bottom line with this mindset. Romans 3:18 says, “there is no fear of God before their eyes.” He uses phobos, which is where we get our English word “phobia.” Those who live in sin do so because they have no fear of God and His power. 

When we make the choice to live in sin we are saying 3 things about God: 

  1. We truly don’t believe in God 
  2. Or if we do, we don’t think God can do anything
  3. We don’t think God will do anything

Whether we consciously think these or not, when we live in sin, we don’t fear God or the consequences. There’s a man we read about in scripture that perfectly illustrates this mindset. 2 Samuel 11 is one of the most powerful lessons we can read in scripture on sin. David’s sin with Bathsheba shows us the desire of sin, and paints a graphic picture of what sin can do to even the most godly of men. 

David sees Bathsheba bathing on the roof (11:2). He wants her, and pursues his desire. David sinned because in the moment he wanted pleasure over God. 

This is the start of David’s intricate plan to cover up what he has done. He tries to get Uriah to go home to his wife. He has Uriah killed so that he can have Bathsheba as his own. David continued to sin because there was no immediate punishment for sleeping with Bathsheba. The entire chapter ends with these words, “but the thing that David had done displeased the Lord.” 

How could such a man of God, someone that is described as “the friend of God” do such a thing? Because in that moment, and the days to follow, David lost his fear of God. It was replaced with deception, lust, and murder. 

It is said of sin that it will take you further than you want to go, keep you longer than you want to stay, and cost you more than you want to pay. We will always be surrounded by a world filled with sin, and the consequences of those sins. 

But a day will come when God will punish those who practice sin, and reward those who are faithful to Him.

Positive Encouragement

Gary Pollard

In Phil 1.6, Paul says “I am sure that the good work God began in you will continue until he completes it on the day when Jesus Christ comes again.” If this sounds familiar, it’s because he said something very similar in II Timothy 1.5 — “I remember your true faith. That kind of faith first belonged to your grandmother Lois and to your mother Eunice. I know you now have that same faith.” 

The confidence motif is repeated in both passages. It’s something Paul seems to say to give the person he’s correcting the benefit of the doubt. He also starts off his correction in both letters by saying something genuine and positive about their character. 

When we have to correct another member, we should never start with an accusatory tone. We should highlight the positive aspects of a person’s value and character and practically smother them with encouragement first. When Paul handles this uncomfortable situation he doesn’t say, “I’m sure you’re doing a great work, but…” He doesn’t tell Timothy, “I’m sure you still have faith, but…” The hug-followed-by-a-slap-to-the-face method does not and has not ever been effective. 

Instead, Paul encourages them by saying, “These are your positive attributes,” and then shifts his focus to positive examples of other people. It really is a masterful approach, but that makes perfect sense. God formatted both letters, so of course it was excellent. This also shows us that if we want to know how we’re supposed to do something difficult, we should look for a biblical example first. Chances are, God’s already given us a blueprint. 

We’re not told exactly what Euodia and Syntyche were fighting about, but there are some hints. The selflessness theme suggests a struggle with self-centered living. Love that hasn’t fully matured seems to evident from verse 9. Focusing on unimportant issues is also suggested in Paul’s prayer. Whatever it was, the root of their issue was a lack of selflessness. 

Down in verse 25, Paul talks about his struggle — he wants to leave this life and be with Jesus, but he knows the church at Philippi still needs him. He wanted to help them grow and find purpose through faith — evidently something that wasn’t already in place. 

What Could I Say At The Funeral Of A Non-Christian?

Dale Pollard

God is far wiser than we are, and there’s plenty of guidance for such potential scenarios (2 Pt. 1.3). Here are some quick things to fill your mind with before you walk into a room filled with the grieving. 

First, we all need to be reminded

“A good name is better than fine perfume, and the day of death better than the day of birth.

It is better to go to a house of mourning than to go to a house of feasting, for death is the destiny of every man; the living should take this to heart.

Sorrow is better than laughter, because a sad face is good for the heart.

The heart of the wise is in the house of mourning, but the heart of fools is in the house of pleasure.” – Ecc. 7.1-4 

A funeral is better than feasting… for three reasons. 

  1. Because a funeral serves as a motivator for needed change. 
  2. Because it serves as a reminder that life is finite. 
  3. Because we inevitably think of what will be said at our own funeral. 

Your name is assigned at birth but defined in life. 

The Trans–Siberian Railway which connects Moscow with the Russian far east is still the world’s longest direct rail route, running for 5,753 miles. The journey passes through the Ural Mountains, Siberia’s birch forest and Lake Baikal, and the entire trip, were you to ride from beginning to end, would take six days. 

We’ll all reach the end of the line at some point. Each of our journeys are at various stages of completion, some just beginning, some farther along, but the meaning of life is that it stops. However, it doesn’t end. The vast majority of all the world’s religions teach and believe in an eternal existence of some kind. 

Death is a reality that’s juxtaposed. 

It’s the end and it’s the beginning. Or as Solomon said, “…the destiny of every man.” 

Many would rather not think of their final destination because they feel it’s unknown while others avoid the thought because the subject of death is an unpleasant one. While we should celebrate the accomplishments and one’s life, funerals have always been for the benefit of the living. 

The “house of mourning” requires at least four areas of focus in order for it to benefit us. 

  1. A time to grieve loss.
  2. A time to reminisce. 
  3. A time to comfort one another.
  4. A time for reflection. 

It’s healing, it’s healthy, and it’s enlightening. Every culture on every continent would attest to this, but more importantly— God’s provided us with this truth. 

Use the time, while in the house of mourning, for the  intended purpose. 

Don’t dismiss any sobering thoughts of mortality and use this valuable time properly. 

“I will not doubt, tho all my ships at sea come drifting home with broken masts and sails 

From seeming evil worketh good to me. 

And tho I weep because those sails are battered, 

Still will I cry,while my best hopes lie shattered, ‘I trust in thee’ 

19th Century poet, Ella Wilcox 

The Unethical Understudy

Neal Pollard

One wonders if perhaps Elisha saw Gehazi as being to him what Elisha was to Elijah, an heir-apparent to his own work. Indeed, Gehazi had been with him from at least since the miracle with the Shunammite woman (2 Kings 4:12), witnessing God’s providential care of the prophet, seeing Elisha raise the dead (4:32ff), and now the curing of Naaman’s leprosy (5:1-14). Gehazi had seen God’s power firsthand in incredible ways. He had to be aware of Elisha’s inclination to execute justice on the ungodly–from disrespectful lads to the rebellious Moabites. But Gehazi had some internal problems, moral weaknesses that would literally plague him. Notice 2 Kings 5:15-27.

First, he rationalized (20). Elisha had continuously shown his faith in God’s ability to provide. Naaman generously offers to give the prophet a handsome reward. Gehazi witnessed Elisha’s refuse to “take a present” from the army captain (16). Elisha was more focused on Naaman’s physical and spiritual cleansing. Rather than trusting God’s provision, Gehazi saw an opportunity for himself. He thought to himself, “As the Lord lives, I will run after him and take something from him” (20). We get in a lot of trouble when we feed our desires for what we want and work to convince ourselves it is the right thing to do. Maybe Gehazi forgot about Achan (Josh. 7:20-21). Remember this warning: “Every man’s way is right in his own eyes, but the LORD weighs the hearts” (Prov. 21:2). In other words, we can find a way to justify any sin in our hearts, but God sees through it. So it was with Gehazi.

Second, he premeditated (21). He chases Naaman down. How often he rehearsed the story he was about to share, we don’t know. But even if he made up the story on the spot, it was in his heart before it was on his lips. Later, the prophet Isaiah would warn, “Woe to those who deeply hide their plans from the Lord, And whose deeds are done in a dark place, And they say, “Who sees us?” or “Who knows us?” (29:15). Micah adds, “Woe to those who scheme iniquity, Who work out evil on their beds! When morning comes, they do it, For it is in the power of their hands” (2:1). 

Third, he lied (22). Up to this point, Gehazi’s sin was personal and internal. At any point, he could have reversed course with a penitent heart. He could have repented of his coveting. He could have stopped his pursuit. Instead, he catches up with Naaman, who asks him what’s wrong. Then, he audaciously tells this whopper: “My master has sent me, saying, ‘Behold, just now two young men of the sons of the prophets have come to me from the hill country of Ephraim. Please give them a talent of silver and two changes of clothes’” (22). He must have been very pleased when Naaman gave him even more than he asked for. Maybe, the rationalizing servant even convinced himself God was with him since things were turning out so well for him financially. 

Fourth, he covered up (24). After the deed was done and he was returning to his “day job,” Gehazi gives evidence that he knew he was dead wrong. He went to his house before returning to Elisha, and he dropped off his stash before nonchalantly “went in and stood before his master” (25a). 

Fifth, he lied again (25-26). Elisha does something we’ll see again in the case of Peter and Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1ff). The prophet asked him where he had been and Gehazi lies to him. Lying is a cascading crime. Usually, it requires more lies to protect the previous ones. Unfortunately for Gehazi, Elisha already knew the truth. Would things have been less severe for the servant if he had come clean? We’ll never know. 

Ironically, a heathen obeyed God and was cleansed. Now, a servant of God disobeyed Him and was sullied with the stain of his sin. He found out what Moses once told Israel: “…you may be sure that your sin will find you out” (Num. 32:23). The leprosy of Naaman clung to him and would on his descendants forever (27). Thus ended the story of Gehazi, special servant of the mighty prophet. Thus began the story of Gehazi, the terminal leper. 

We live in an age where the moral compass of the world is broken. As we are in the world, we find ourselves tempted to abandon “true north.” It is so important for us to stay vigilant (1 Pet. 5:8), keeping our conscience sensitive (1 Pet. 3:16) and our motives pure (1 Chron. 28:9; 1 Th. 2:3).  The world needs examples of moral strength, in an age where rationalizing evil, plotting evil, and doing evil are commonplace. Honesty, integrity, unselfishness, humility, and the like are qualities the world will not find within. They will have to see it reflected in the lives of people whose ethics derive from God and His Word. 

Light Of The World (S3, E11)

Should You Choose “The Chosen”?

Brent Pollard

Neal’s Note: While I personally enjoy this series and don’t think there is anything wrong with watching it, I appreciate Brent’s caution to not let religious entertainment replace our responsibility to get our theology from careful Bible study (2 Tim. 2:15).

Paul immediately addresses Timothy, his young son in the faith, with a warning about the Judaizers (1 Timothy 1.3–7). If you look closely at verse seven, you’ll notice that Paul says those who want to teach the Law have no idea what they’re saying. These Judaizers may wish to appear knowledgeable, but their ignorance renders them unqualified to instruct. 1 Timothy 1.7 cautions against false teaching and highlights the importance of sound doctrine.

While we quickly see this about a group like the Judaizers, is it not also true of those who would unintentionally do the same? It is safe to say that many people have good intentions but fail to grasp the actual harm they cause by teaching something false. Take Apollos as an excellent example of this. Apollos believed that the baptism of John was still valid and preached as much. Fortunately, Priscila and Aquila were there to correct him privately (Acts 18.24–28).

But the damage Apollos inadvertently caused had already been done. In Acts 19.1–7, Paul encountered twelve men who had obeyed the teaching of Apollos. Paul corrected their misconception and assisted them in rendering obedience to the gospel of Jesus Christ. Imagine the fate of those twelve men had Paul not run into them in Ephesus! Given that we know Apollos’ heart, this was not his intention. However, confidently teaching things from ignorance has repercussions.

I imagine I am about to step into some hot water, but it is necessary to do so as I hear more and more of my brethren extolling the virtues of Dallas Jenkins’ The Chosen. The series itself begins with a disclaimer that many will likely ignore. The Chosen’s producers tell us, “Backstories and some characters or dialogue have been added.” They then add, “However, all biblical and historical context and any artistic imagination are designed to support the truth and intention of the Scriptures.” (“I Have Called You by Name”) 

Without even delving into the show itself, one should be alarmed that they freely admit that they have made additions to the Gospel story. In God’s Word, we are warned several times against adding to or taking from the Word of God (Deuteronomy 4.2; 12.32; Proverbs 30.6; Revelation 22.8). We should also be wary of what follows when Angel Studios says they derive this from an artist’s “imagination.” In his original dictionary, Noah Webster notes that imagination is a “conceit; an unsolid or fanciful opinion.” (“Webster’s Dictionary 1828 – Imagination”) So why do we want such a production about the Son of God?

As soon as the first episode begins, we learn that the pharisee Nicodemus is an exorcist, Peter and Andrew are having tax issues, and Matthew has some intriguing quirks, which later episodes explain are due to his Aspergers! That is a lot to unpack in a show that purports to help me better appreciate the life and mission of Jesus and His followers. Nevertheless, the response is nearly unanimous about why the show appeals to most of those I have spoken with. Viewers love the portrayal of Jesus in His humanity—a compassionate man with a good sense of humor.

I appreciate that. I admit that the actor portraying Jesus does a wonderful job. I, too, love the idea of my Lord smiling and palling around with His disciples. But I need help to sit through something otherwise potentially misleading to appreciate what Jonathan Roumie brings to his portrayal of my Lord. There is too much for me to ignore willingly.

The objector says this could be an excellent way to introduce the lost to Jesus. Though I appreciate any tool that can help evangelize others, this is something on which you have to spend a lot of time explaining how it differs from the Gospels. It ends up accomplishing what other pop-culture phenoms and Christian-based fiction have produced. How many eschatological views do people hold that are more “Timothy LaHaye” than biblical? How many visuals of the war in heaven do people erroneously subscribe to, thanks to John Milton’s Paradise Lost?

As Christians, we have liberty. So, I don’t want to hinder anyone from watching something entertaining that is undoubtedly more wholesome than any secular programming one might watch. As portrayals of Jesus go, this is not blasphemous like The Last Temptation of Christ or as disorienting as imagining Clueless alum Jeremy Sisto as God’s Son in Jesus (1999). But, please, “caveat oculus”—let the eye be careful. Nobody wants to stand before God’s judgment seat and discover that they are lost because they blindly believed something false confidently taught to them by another.

 1 “I Have Called You by Name.” BYUtv, 18 Apr. 2019, www.byutv.org/413b4c41-0bc2-405e-a10b-7fd147d3c607/the-chosen-i-have-called-you-by-name.

2 “Websters Dictionary 1828 – Webster’s Dictionary 1828 – Imagination.” Websters Dictionary 1828, webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/Imagination.