AUDIO
Visit ThisIsYourBible.com
v.11 - is one of the many examples one could take from this chapter to demonstrate Eliphaz's sincerity, and yet nevertheless he did not understand the nature of the chastening of the Lord in its true fulfilment. Here in this verse Eliphaz quotes a truth - 1Sam.2:7-8, Psa.91:14, 107:41, Eze.7:24. It is a very frightening thought that in our sincerity, we too could be blinkered (with no evil intention) to aspects of God's saving truth, and need to humble ourselves before our brethren that they might help us back to a position of grace and God's service.
Peter [UK] Comment added in 2001 Reply to Peter
This chapter is a continuation of Eliphaz's comments.
5:6-8 Eliphaz suggests that though affliction is not a chance happening all men are subject to so Job ought to pray to God. However notice his conciliatory approach.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2001 Reply to Peter
v.17 - This statement is very true. Not everything spoken by Job's friends follows scripture correctly as they seem to come at it from an angle which does not understand the forgiveness and mercy of God, but here we have a statement which is repeated elsewhere - Psa. 94:12, Prov.3:11-12
Peter [UK] Comment added in 2002 Reply to Peter
5:12-13 The quoting of 5:13 in 1 Corinthians 1:19 against the background of the comments of Job 5:12 provides a powerful warning against those in Corinth who would trust in their own understanding.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2002 Reply to Peter
5:1 Eliphaz seem to be saying that there is no one 'out there' who is able to help Job. He is saying that so that Job will see him as the sole source of help.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2003 Reply to Peter
Job 5:27. It appears in this verse that Eliphaz in the conclusion of his remarks is issuing a final plea to Job to listen what has been said, consider it. It is for your good.
John Wilson [Toronto West (Can)] Comment added in 2003 Reply to John
REACTION TO REBUKE
If we are ever rebuked or told off about anything, there are a number of responses that can often happen. One is that we become defensive and do all that is in our power to clear or defend ourselves of blame (even though it may have been our fault), and to pin as much responsibility or blame on anyone else we can find. Another way we respond is to become bitter against the person who has pointed out our faults and to determine to pay them back sometime later. These are both reactions based on emotion rather than logical thought and reason.
If we were honest with ourselves, we would accept the rebuke, consider it and take the opportunity to change, if it is needed, to become a better person. We would also be thankful to anyone who helped us change in this way.
Eliphaz gave some advice to Job. He said, "Blessed is the man whom God corrects; so do not despise the discipline of the Almighty." (Job 5:17) When it comes to God's correction we can be sure that it is right and that we need it. So Eliphaz was right when he said, "Do not despise the discipline of the Almighty." We must act on God's discipline - not react against it.
So let's change our response to rebuke - especially rebuke from God or his Word - from an emotional reaction, to thoughtful and thankful action.
Robert Prins [Auckland - Pakuranga - (NZ)] Comment added in 2003 Reply to Robert
Eliphaz instructed Job to respect God. Of-course Job was doing this anyway. It’s interesting to note that this comment in Job 5:17, about not despising God’s chastening is repeated by Solomon in Prov 3:11.
David Simpson [Worcester (UK)] Comment added in 2005 Reply to David
V.5 "even out of the thorns" Even when part of the grain remains hanging on the thorn bushes (or "it is growing among thorns" Matt 13:7), the hungry gleaner does not grudge the trouble of even taking it away, so clean swept away is the harvest of the wicked.
John Wilson [Toronto West (Can)] Comment added in 2005 Reply to John
Eliphaz' statement is correct in essence: Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty (v.17). But, Eliphaz' assumption is that Job must have done something wrong to displease the LORD. Job, the man whom God calls upright (1:1), is not aware that he has committed any offence against the LORD. Eliphaz' rush to judgement should not be our own when we see a brother or sister experiencing calamity. Rather, we should rally around to help and comfort without analysis or judgement. As we will see, this is Job's request of his friends.
Michael Parry [Montreal (Can)] Comment added in 2005 Reply to Michael
5:13 In telling Job that God ‘taketh the wise …’ he is implying that this is Job’s problem. That Job thinks he is so clever that he does not understand what is happening. Now there is no evidence in the text to indicate that Job thought of himself as ‘wise’ in the way that Eliphaz is accusing him. Therefore Eliphaz’s comments are groundless.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2006 Reply to Peter
5:1 Maybe the ‘saints’ RV holy ones – are other esteemed elders in the area. Maybe Eliphaz is challenging Job saying if you will not listen to us see if you can find someone else who will agree with you.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2007 Reply to Peter
5:17 Eliphaz’s comment about chastening, whilst correct, was not the most helpful thing to say to Job. Job was in a dire situation and all his friend can say is ‘enjoy your troubles because they are for your good’. We do well to realise that there are times when saying the obvious is not necessarily the best thing to say.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2008 Reply to Peter
5:2 Eliphaz sees Job as the one showing ‘wrath’ and is counselling him to remember that such wrath is not good. However there is no evidence that Eliphaz’s comment have any basis in reality. We can so easily make assumptions about others and then use that assumption to form a judgement about what should be done without realising that our views are just assumptions.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2009 Reply to Peter
Charles Link, Jr. [Moorestown, (NJ, USA)] Comment added in 2009 Reply to Charles
5:8 Eliphaz actually tells Job that if we were in Job’s position he would call on God, implying that he felt that Job did not call upon God.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2010 Reply to Peter
Job 5:1 - "saints" [Heb. "qadosh" (6918) means "holy, Holy One(s), saint(s), angel(s), sacred, sanctuary, set apart"] could refer to esteemed elders or immortal angels.
Job 5:3-7 - a specific example of "exact retribution" witnessed and recalled for Job's "edification".
Job 5:8 - "God" [Heb. "el" (410)], second mention of "God" [Heb. "elohiym" (430)].
Job 5:9-11 - i.e. in situations that seem hopeless God can do the seemingly impossible.
Job 5:17 - the Lord chastens those whom He loves (Heb 12:5-11).
Job 5:18-19 - God heals and rescues.
Job 5:23 - perhaps "in league with the stones of the field" suggests not being injured stepping on stones while walking.
Charles Link, Jr. [Moorestown, (NJ, USA)] Comment added in 2010 Reply to Charles
5:18 The comment that God bindeth up is echoed in Psa 147:3 though it does not follow that Eliphaz fully understood the purpose of God.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2011 Reply to Peter
5:7 Is it actually true that man is born to trouble? It is certainly the case that God’s servants are chastened – Prov 3:11-12 - but this is not called “trouble” by God it is for his benefit. Indeed we may think that our lives are full of trouble when things are not going as we would like them to go. However this is not how God describes the way He works with His children.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2012 Reply to Peter
"He catches the wise in their craftiness." Interestingly enough, what Eliphaz says here is picked up and quoted by Paul in 1Cor 3:19. Since it is stated of Eliphaz and the other two friends of Job that they "have not spoken of me (God) what is right as my servant Job has (Job 42:8)", how could Paul use this statement of Eliphaz' in the positive way that he did?
One of the first things to note on this is the context of God's statement in ch. 42. God has just spoken to Job out of the whirlwind and has used common sense reasoning and logic to humble him enough to where he can see he was wrong in his questioning of God's integrity. And in response to His first speech, Job says in 40:4,5 -
"I am unworthy - how can I reply to you? I put my hand over my mouth. I spoke once, but I have no answer - twice, but I will say no more."
Then God goes on in Job 40,Job 41 with more points, especially with His parables of behemoth and leviathan. And Job replies in Job 42:1-6 in a wonderfully humble way ending with - "therefore I despise myself and repent in dust and ashes." Now consider the three and what they were doing during this time. If they not only saw the physical effects of this manifestation of God but also heard all that He said, where was their meek confession of their mistakes? So maybe (??) when God says what He does in 42:8 - that the three had not spoken of Me what is right as my servant Job has - He's referring to their lack of confession of sins in contrast to Job's.
Now if that is the right interpretation, we're left with the task of analyzing not only what the three say in their extended dialogue with Job but what Job says to them and trying to figure out what is good, sound reasoning and what is not. And that is - in my way of thinking - no easy task whatsoever. Nor is it all that easy to do the same with Elihu's arguments. But one thing seems pretty clear to me - some of what all say is right and to the point. And pretty obviously here in what Eliphaz states concerning God - that He is smarter than man and is able to catch the so-called "wise" in their craftiness and sweep away the schemes of these wily men - there is much truth in this statement and therefore Paul uses it in the points he's making in 1 Cor. 3.
What this whole subject reminds me of - and I think I've made the same point before but bear with me on this - is when I was living in Houston in the '70's and in Alabama ~6,7 years ago and took the newspaper both times. In each was a daily Billy Graham column in which questioners would write in and he would give his answers. Invariably if the question was on moral issues he was absolutely on top of the question with a nice well thought out Biblical answer. But if the question was on a doctrinal issue, he was - most of the time - wrong and misguided in his answer. How could a man be so smart in one area of Bible study and so dense in another? And yet he was - and so, it would appear, were the three.
Wes Booker [South Austin Texas USA] Comment added in 2012 Reply to Wes
5:19-24 Eliphaz presents a lovely picture of a serene life if one is faithful to God. Of course he is implying that Job is not faithful. However even though Job was faithful it does not follow that his life would be trouble free. We must take care that we do not fall into the same erroneous way of thinking that Eliphaz presents.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2013 Reply to Peter
"Behold, happy is the man whom God correcteth: therefore despise not thou the chastening of the Almighty: For he maketh sore, and bindeth up: he woundeth, and his hands make whole." Job 5:17-18
These words of Eliphaz are quoted by Solomon in Prov 3:11-13, and by Paul (if he wrote Hebrews) in Heb 12:5. The Hebrews passage also goes on to quote Eliphaz's earlier words in Job 4:3-4 (see Heb 12:11-13). It shows that the words of Eliphaz were read and understood by Solomon and seen as wise, and by Paul and seen as inspired. If we read and understand what's said in the book of Job, there is no reason why we can't quote it too, as it's just as much the inspired word of God as any other scripture.
Rob de Jongh [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2013 Reply to Rob
5:3 Eliphaz Speaks in innuendos against Job
Eliphaz makes true statement – but it does not follow that they apply to Job
5:3 foolish taking root
5:4 children are far from safety (against the calamities a terrible thing to say)
5:6 Affliction cometh not from the dust (implication there is a cause – God)
5:13 He taketh the wise in their craftiness (Job you are crafty)
5:17 Happy is the man who God corrects (so Job just accept your chastening)
We should take care in the way that we speak to and of others. We should not insinuate. We should speak clearly.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2014 Reply to Peter
5:27 Eliphaz’s comments are arrogant and unhelpful. Eliphaz claims to know why Job is suffering. Further his use of “searched it” implies that Job has not bothered to try and work things out from God’s views.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2015 Reply to Peter
5:4 In speaking of the death of the children of the wicked Eliphaz is making a really cruel comment as Job has lost his children – 1:13-19
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2016 Reply to Peter
5:10 Clearly Eliphaz believed that God was currently involved in the creation. As he was involved in causing it to rain He would also be evidently working in Job’s life.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2017 Reply to Peter
5:9 In saying that God does “unsearchable” things Eliphaz is, we might think, suggesting to God that there is no answer to his problems – but then Eliphaz and his friends proceed to tell Job the answer to his problems!
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2018 Reply to Peter
5:11 Job is now, as far as Eliphaz was concerned, “low” and by implication if Job turned to God he would be elevated. Actually Job was elevated by God at the end of his trials – Job 42:10 and it was not because of what Eliphaz said. Rather it was because Job prayed for Eliphaz.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2019 Reply to Peter
5:12 Job has suggested that the wicked prosper. Eliphaz’ response is a contradiction of Job’s perception. We might ask “Who is correct?”
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2020 Reply to Peter
5:12 Job has suggested that the wicked prosper. Eliphaz’ response is a contradiction of Job’s perception. We might ask “Who is correct?”
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2021 Reply to Peter
5:1 the word “saints”<6918> here is the Hebrew word which is elsewhere translated “holy” or “holy one”. Clearly there were individuals in Job’s day who were regarded as separate from other people. Eliphaz implies that there would be no value in Job turning to any of these holy people. By implication Eliphaz is telling Job that he is the best person to listen to.
Solomon encourages us to listen to more than one counsellor – Prov 11:4, 15:22, 24:5. – If Eliphaz’s words were true then others would have agreed with him. How often do we disregard the views of others when we “know” we are right?
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2022 Reply to Peter
5:2 Do we think that there is evidence that Job was envious?
How often do we impute false motives or thoughts to our fellow believers in order that we can then find fault with them?
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2023 Reply to Peter
5:19-21 Is what Eliphaz actually a true representation of how God deals with men? We have no assurance from God that he will protect His servants from trouble.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2024 Reply to Peter
5:2 Eliphaz is making unfounded accusations against Job. However what he says is true of individuals who show the qualities he speaks of – but not Job.
We should appreciate that wrath and envy are inappropriate behaviour patterns for faithful believers.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2025 Reply to Peter
v.1 - for Micah to be called a Morasthite makes us wonder if in fact he was a Gentile, but it turns out that it means he was from Mareshah, which was a city of Judah. He prophesies at home too, which is a fairly unusual thing to do (v.15).
Peter [UK] Comment added in 2001 Reply to Peter
1:2 'to the people' 'from his holy temple' 2 Chronicles 27:2 Jotham 'entered not into the temple of the Lord and the people did yet corruptly'
Or in the reign of Ahaz Because things got much worse in Ahaz's reign 2 Kings 16:14 Ahaz moved the brazen altar - To curry favour with the king of Assyria.
'Hear O Ye People' draws on the last word of Michaiah 1 Kings 22:28
1:6 The overthrow of Samaria took place when the Babylonians took Hoshea captive during the reign of Hezekiah.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2001 Reply to Peter
v.1 - Although we have here a small prophecy, that we might imagine being shown him all in one revelation, we can see that God's word came to Micah over the period which involved the reigns of 3 kings, so it must have been revealed gradually.
Peter [UK] Comment added in 2002 Reply to Peter
1:5 In saying that the transgression of Israel is Samaria and of Judah it is Jerusalem the prophet is indicating that the source of the problems in both kingdoms rested with the kings - The two cities are the two capitals of the kingdoms.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2002 Reply to Peter
1:10 'Declare it not at Gath' reflects the lament at the death of Saul (2 Samuel 1:20)
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2003 Reply to Peter
Micah 1:16. This is making reference to the final captivity of Judah by the Babylonians under Nebuchadnezzar. The land is to be made bald (a sign of mourning) like the bald eagle, because the inhabitants have been taken into captivity, nothing has been left.
John Wilson [Toronto West (Can)] Comment added in 2003 Reply to John
1:1 Micah 'saw' 'words' concerning Jerusalem. Here and Isa 2:1 are the only two places where words are seen.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2004 Reply to Peter
V.8 Micah in identifying himself with the nation reveals his reaction to the approaching judgement in order that his countrymen might be warned of the coming calamity. The lesson once again for all of us is: Set an example which others would do good to follow.
John Wilson [Toronto West (Can)] Comment added in 2005 Reply to John
Mic 1:8 Micah cannot prophesy in a cold and detached manner. When he learns of God's judgements on Judah and Israel, he "howls like a jackal" and "moans like an owl" (NIV). More than this, he goes about "barefoot and naked". This is powerful language - none hearing Micah's message would fail to notice his compassion and concern for the people, and his heartfelt desire that they should repent. Micah cared so deeply that he wept with God's people - even though he knew that they were idolaters and oppressors. This is a good practical lesson for any would-be preachers: we should follow Micah's example in showing compassion for those to whom we preach. Then we will be following the example of the greatest preacher (Matt 9:36).
Sarah Joiner [Gorseinon] Comment added in 2005 Reply to Sarah
Michael Parry [Montreal (Can)] Comment added in 2005 Reply to Michael
Micah is another prophet whom God directed to speak to both North and South Israel. The names in Mic 1:10-15are not all in the Bible Atlas, but the ones we know all appear to be in the Philistines’ land.
David Simpson [Worcester (UK)] Comment added in 2005 Reply to David
1:3 Israel were caused to ‘tread upon the high places of the earth’ Deut 32:13 Now God is going to tread those same places – but now in judgment against Israel and Judah .
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2006 Reply to Peter
1:9 The evil is no longer limited to Israel. Micah foresees Sennacherib coming "to the gate" of Jerusalem. The use of "it" and "he" is appropriately distinct. "It", the calamity, "came unto" Judah, many of the inhabitants of which suffered, but did not reach those who lived in Jerusalem, "the gate" of which the foe ("he") "came unto", but did not enter (Isa 36, Isa 37:33-37)
John Wilson [Toronto West (Can)] Comment added in 2006 Reply to John
1:5 Doubtless Judah, as they heard the condemnation of Samaria, would have felt smug but then distressed when the prophet turned to speak of them. We do well to be careful that we do not look at what we perceive to be the faults of others and not see our own faults.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2007 Reply to Peter
1:1 Micah prophesied to both Judah and Israel. He was contemporary with Hosea and Isaiah as can be seen by examining the first verse of both of those prophesies. So we should be looking for similarities between what Micah and those prophets say.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2008 Reply to Peter
This chapter contains one of the most exciting overlaps between the Bible narrative and archaeological findings. The British Museum has a whole room dedicated to stone reliefs found in the South-West palace of Sennacherib, which detail the Assyrian siege of Lachish. There is also a “prism” inscribed with an Assyrian account of the campaign. Details can be found on the following link:
https://etc.worldhistory.org/photos/siege-lachish-reliefs-british-museum/
Lachish was just outside Jerusalem, so when v12-13 speak about disaster from the LORD coming "to the gates" of Jerusalem, it is speaking of the siege of Lachish. It is also described in 2Chron 32:9.
Rob de Jongh [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2008 Reply to Rob
1:7 Israel – the Northern kingdom – has always had evil kings who did not worship Yahweh but chose false gods and idols that they made for themselves. So now the prophet, speaking of the overthrow of the Northern kingdom condemns the idols to destruction as well.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2009 Reply to Peter
Micah was of Morosheth (30 miles SW of Jerusalem) in Judah. He spoke in the days of Jotham, Ahaz and Hezekiah concerning Judah and Israel. Micah was more of a commoner than his contemporary Isaiah, an inhabitant of Jerusalem, who concerned himself more with Judah and spoke in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz and Hezekiah. Oded was another prophet of Judah who spoke in the days Ahaz and Pekah. Amos was a prophet of Israel in the days of Jeroboam II and Uzziah. Hosea was a prophet of Israel in the days of Jeroboam II and Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz and Hezekiah.
Mic 1:3-4,6,8-16 -- V3- "high places" were places of idol worship. V4- mountains and valleys probably meant rulers of high estate and the common people. V6- The Assyrians took but did not destroy Samaria in 721 BC. In 128 BC Maccabean John Hyrcanus demolished what was left and according to historian Porter, "the stones of the temples and palaces of Samaria had been...thrown together in heaps and rolled down into the valley below". V8- Micah wept and rent his clothes to mourn and depict the nakedness of Israel. V9- Her (Israel's) wound [(4347) Heb. "Makkah" translated "wound" is the same word used for "plagues" in Egypt (Deut 28:59, 61)] is incurable (i.e. Israel is incapable of repentance). The corruption of Samaria is now coming to Judah. V10- We have some plays on words with the following locations: Declare it not in Gath (i.e. "Tell-town") while the Septuagint reads, "weep not in weep-town". The Philistines would be happy to hear of bad news for their enemy Israel . The house of Aphrah means house of dust (this city and the cities of Judah in vs 11 were taken by Sennacherib in 701 BC) and it would roll in the dust. V11- Saphir means beauty or pleasant (it would be shamed in nakedness), Zaanan means flocks or march or come out as a flock (it would not come forth), Bethezel (means near house or neighbourly) "its protection is taken from you" (NIV). V12- Maroth (means bitter) waited in vain for relief. V13- Lachish (a word sounding much like "rechesh" which means "swift steed" or "team" as in a chariot team of horses). V14- "presents" (as in bridal gifts or something given away to another) to Moresheth (means betrothed, possession or dowry of) Gath (Micah was from this town). Achzib (means a lie, false, or a failed brook and thus unreliable) shall be a lie to the kings of Israel. V15- Sargon would take Mareshah (means head place or crest of a hill). Adullam was the cave where David sought refuge (i.e. the glory of Israel would be reduced to hiding like David). V16- Shaved heads (a sign of great distress such as the death of new relatives). Children to go into exile.
Charles Link, Jr. [Moorestown, (NJ, USA)] Comment added in 2009 Reply to Charles
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2010 Reply to Peter
Context
Try reading Micah in the context of 2Kin 17 & 18.
Rob de Jongh [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2010 Reply to Rob
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2011 Reply to Peter
“O thou inhabitant of Lachish, bind the chariot to the swift beast: she is the beginning of the sin to the daughter of Zion; for the transgressions of Israel were found in thee.”
In Old Testament times Lachish served as an important protective fortress-city in defending Jerusalem and the interior. Lachish was a city on the road from Jerusalem to Egypt that guarded the canyons that lead to Jerusalem and Judea. Any invading army would have to take Lachish first (Isa 36:2;37:8;Jer 34:7). It may be for this very reason that Joshua assigned Lachish to Judah (Josh 15:39) in his divisions.
In checking various translations, there are several that convey the idea, which I think would better fit with what really happened. The New Living Translation reads, “Quick! Use your swiftest chariots and flee, you people of Lachish. You were the first city in Judah to follow Israel in the sin of idol worship, and so you led Jerusalem into sin” (Mic 1:8-9). Thus Micah mourned only for Judah, which included the throne of David in Jerusalem.
Valerie Mello [in isolation, TN, USA] Comment added in 2011 Reply to Valerie
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2012 Reply to Peter
1:8 In saying that he would go “stripped and naked” Micah is like the contemporary prophet who was commanded to do this – Isa 20:2-3
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2013 Reply to Peter
1:9 The incurable wound indicates that Judah would no longer listen to God’s pleading. The only time God gives up on His children is when they will no longer listen. This is described in the context of the wilderness journey Psa 81:10-12 We should shudder at that prospect happening in our lives.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2014 Reply to Peter
1:12 In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established –Deut 19:15 – teaches a principle which is seen regarding God bringing ‘evil’ upon Israel. The contemporary prophets Isaiah and Amos have both presented the same message – Isa 45:7, Amos 3:6, 9:4. Israel was ‘without excuse’.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2015 Reply to Peter
1:2 Micah’s call to the earth to “hearken” echoes the words of Moses – Deut 32:1 – where God through Moses is instruction the nation as to how they should behave when they went into the land under Joshua.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2016 Reply to Peter
1:4 Om speaking of the mountains being molten Micah is inspired to remind the people of the deliverance in the day of Barak – Judg 5:5
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2017 Reply to Peter
1:2 Micha’s call to “hearken O earth” is similar to the words of the contemporary prophet – Isa 1:2.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2018 Reply to Peter
1 We think of the prophets speaking their words to the nation. However we should also consider that the prophets actually wrote down what they said also. We know that it is true of Micah for Matthew 2:5 informs us that Micah wrote at least some of his prophecy down.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2019 Reply to Peter
PANDEMIC!
Be careful. There is a pandemic sweeping the world, and once you catch it there is no cure. It is terminal. It is not caught by physical contact or borne on the air - it's much catchier than that. It is caught by thought. Ideas - selfish ideas that quickly become action - and then it's got you. From then on it is only a matter of time before the wages of sin are paid into your account and death takes you away.
Sin is very catchy. Listen to what Micah says about it: "For Samaria's disease is incurable. It has infected Judah; it has spread to the leadership of my people and has even contaminated Jerusalem!" (Mic 1:9). The sinners in Samaria contaminated everyone around them.
The interesting thing about the sin pandemic is that it can be traced back from the people infected, to those who infected them. Micah again: "Residents of Lachish ... You influenced Daughter Zion to sin, for Israel's rebellious deeds can be traced back to you." (v.13).
So watch out for the influences around you, leading you to sin. And make sure you are not the one influencing others to sin by your actions. While there is no cure for sin, always remember that God longs to forgive if we truly repent.
Robert Prins [Auckland - Pakuranga - (NZ)] Comment added in 2019 Reply to Robert
1:11,12,15 “inhabitants” is actually feminine. It is speaking to the women who are living in the places mentioned.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2020 Reply to Peter
1:1 there is no mention of any king in the north – only kings of Judah - even though there were kings in the north up until part way through Hezekiah’s reign. However Micah’s message is still directed against the north as Samaria is mentioned. This is not surprising as the evil northern kingdom influenced for evil Judah.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2021 Reply to Peter
1:5-6 Notice. It was the behaviour of the northern kingdom (Samaria) that had infected Judah – the southern kingdom. Whereas those in the south saw Jerusalem as the centre of their worship of Yahweh He saw it differently. The worship in Jerusalem reflected the godless worship in Samaria. So God would judge Samaria. This happened when the Assyrians took Hoshea, the last king in the north, captive. Sadly Judah did not learn the lessons and so was taken away by the Chaldeans some time later. Do we learn from the folly of others. Or do we just copy them? The company we keep affects our judgment – 1Cor 15:33
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2022 Reply to Peter
1:15 There had been an “heir” in Adullam. It was David when he was fleeing from Saul but he was heir to the throne -1Sam 22:1 -. There are later prophecies in Micah that speak of Jesus as the Messiah. Is this the first of them?
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2023 Reply to Peter
1:3 During the reigns of some of the kings Micah prophesied to there were high places” – high places to false worship. God was going to dominate them. That is the sense in which Deut 32:13 speaks of the “high places” that God rides.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2024 Reply to Peter
1:2 Micah is speaking against evil godless behaviour. But notice that whilst it is Micah that spoke the message the people to whom he spoke had to answer to God – “the Lord god be witness …”
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2025 Reply to Peter
v.1 - Because of the way that it deals with the one issue of faith in such graphic detail, there is a tendency to look upon this chapter as a stand-alone passage. In fact it is an inextricably linked part of the argument from the previous chapter (v.39) and into the next one (v.1). We should always view it in this context. It is good to look at the examples of faith, but let us remember that it is part of a dramatic exposition to us of just how we can secure our own salvation through faith and work and suffering.
Peter [UK] Comment added in 2001 Reply to Peter
Those who had faith all did something. To the faithful faith is not simply a state of mind. The state of mind - believing - prompts men and women to action.
Likewise our faith is not simply theory. We have to behave as if we believe God is working today.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2001 Reply to Peter
11:32 Maybe we would not have included Samson amongst the men of faith. As there are many other examples that could have been used - or Samson could have been left out of the list - we must work out how Samson was a man of faith.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2002 Reply to Peter
:24 In what did Moses have faith when he refused to be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter? His faith must have been in the promise to Abraham (Genesis 15:13-16)
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2003 Reply to Peter
11:28,29 Notice that Moses was the one who kept the Passover 'by faith' and it was the whole nation that crossed the Red sea 'by faith'. Israel kept the Passover at Moses' command not understanding what was happening. However the experience of their deliverance and the death of the firstborn provided them with a basis for believing that God was going to deliver them when they arrived at the border of the Red sea.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2004 Reply to Peter
V.7 The Greek word for "fear" is EULABEOMAI (2125) which signifies "with devout care" and is the same word as used by Christ to show the Godly reverence he had for his Father (Heb 5:7). Noah was not terrified at the prospect of the flood, but was motivated by a Godly reverence for Him who had issued the warning,
John Wilson [Toronto West (Can)] Comment added in 2005 Reply to John
Faith
Heb 11:6 - the importance of faith. Rom 10:17 - how to get faith
Promises
Heb 11:13,16,39 - men of old had faith they would receive the promises even though they died not having received them. Gen 12:1,2,3,7; Gen 13:14-17; Gen 15:4-5; 2Sam 7:10-16 - the promises to Abraham and David. Gal 3:26-29 - Those in Christ are heirs to the promises.
Resurrection
Heb 11:17-19 - Abraham reasoned God could raise the dead
Charles Link, Jr. [Moorestown, (NJ, USA)] Comment added in 2005 Reply to Charles
For note on v.5, please see my Heb. 11 entry for June 4th.
Michael Parry [Montreal (Can)] Comment added in 2005 Reply to Michael
11:10 Abraham’s outlook contrasts significantly with the view of those who lived in Canaan at that time. They lived in cities which, from a human perspective, had foundations. Do we live like Abraham or do we see the cities of this world as stable and continuing. It is so easy to be deceived into thinking that this order is permanent. It certainly is not.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2006 Reply to Peter
STAY ON TRACK
There is every opportunity to turn back from the road we have taken toward the kingdom of God and to go back to following our own selfish instincts again. But at the end of the road of selfishness is only death and destruction, whereas on the path we have chosen to follow toward God ends in life, joy and peace.
The unfortunate thing is that most of the temptation and encouragement we get in life is designed to take us away from the path of life. There are hardly any temptations designed to get us to stay on track with God.
So how do we combat the temptations and opportunities to go back to our old way of life? Perhaps the best way is to do it the way the faithful people of Hebrews 11 did it. "People who say such things show that they are looking for a country of their own. If they had been thinking of the country they had left, they would have had opportunity to return. Instead they were looking for a better country - a heavenly one." (Heb 11:14-16) They stayed on track by keeping focused on the promises of God. We can do the same.
By remembering and thinking about God's promises on a continual basis, we too will stay on track as we look for a better place - the kingdom God has promised.
Robert Prins [Auckland - Pakuranga - (NZ)] Comment added in 2006 Reply to Robert
11:40 ‘made perfect’ is a phrase occurring three times in Hebrews. (5:9, 11:40, 12:23) and it traces a progression from Jesus being made perfect through a multitude in the past and then onto those who are now alive in Christ.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2007 Reply to Peter
11:4 When we consider Abel, we must never overlook the fact that both his father and his mother had fallen into disobedience, his brother refused to listen to the voice of God, and became a servant of sin. Abel desired to serve God, and do His will to the best of his ability. He put his trust in the Lord. He was a solitary figure, standing up for that which he knew was right in the sight of God.
John Wilson [Toronto West (Can)] Comment added in 2007 Reply to John
11:25-26 Notice the comparison is between affliction and the treasures of Egypt. Not the kingdom and the treasures of Egypt. Moses esteemed persecution better than the wealth this world offers.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2008 Reply to Peter
V.1 Gives a definition of faith. However, that faith does not work unless a person adds action (James 2:26). Notice that all the faithful people mentioned in this chapter did something to demonstrate their faith. We must do the same. Action can, of course, be something spectacular, but it need not be. Following the commands of Jesus diligently throughout each day is an act of faith. There, faith is brought alive by the action of service.
Michael Parry [Montreal (Can)] Comment added in 2008 Reply to Michael
11:21 The faith that Jacob had that God would bring Israel out of Egypt was in a specific promise that God had made to Abraham – Gen 15:13-16
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2009 Reply to Peter
Faith (lesson 2 of 20 from "Outline of Basic Bible Teachings" by Wes Booker)
I. Is it important to have faith? Heb 11:6. Associated with belief - same root word "pistis".
II. What is it? Heb 11:1. How does it come? Rom 10:17
III. Other verses on faith, belief: A. Rom 1:16-17 - the righteous will live by faith B. John 20:24-31 - blessed are those who have not seen and yet believed C. John 3:16 - Eternal life, the result of our faith in God and Jesus D. Mark 16:15-16 - What must we believe? the gospel E. James 2:5 - the rich in faith
IV. True scriptural faith implies action that will demonstrate that faith: A. Heb 11:4,7,8, etc. Note action verbs: "offered...prepared...obeyed". B. James 2:14-26 - faith without works is dead C. 2Pet 1:4-11 - faith, the foundation on which all other Christian qualities are built
V. Unbelief is evil and will disqualify us for eternal life: A. Heb 3:12-13;4:11 (KJV) - an unbelieving heart is a sinful one and will cause one to fail to enter "the rest". B. Rev 21:7-8 - Unbelief brings about the second death.
Charles Link, Jr. [Moorestown, (NJ, USA)] Comment added in 2009 Reply to Charles
Have you ever listened to a chapter being read out in public where the reader actually starts in the previous chapter? It takes you by surprise - but is useful because for some reason the preceding verses are needed to set the scene. In the case of Hebrews 11, we need to do this at the start and the end!
Next time you read Ch.11 try starting at 10v34 and finishing in 12v3.
Rob de Jongh [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2009 Reply to Rob
FAITH IN CREATION
"Without faith it is impossible to please God." (Heb 11:6) One of the first things the writer to the Hebrews tells us that we need to have faith in is the fact that God created the earth. "By faith we understand that the universe was formed of God's command, so that what was seen was not made out of what was visible." (v.3)
Even among Christians, many people have chosen to take the path of little faith when it comes to believing in creation. I have heard many variations and combinations of creation and evolution that attempt to marry up the two concepts. These try to make it possible to believe in a watered down version of creation coupled with the time periods and development of the evolution theory. Because it is popular to accept the theory of evolution today, many try to blend it into their beliefs.
But if we, as the writer to the Hebrews says, "understand that the universe was formed of God's command so that what was seen was not made out of what was visible," we can rule out a progressive, evolving concept of creation because evolution requires things to be made out of what is seen. It is only creation that lets us hear the voice of God and see the instantaneous response to his command as it is literally described in Genesis 1.
"Without faith it is impossible to please God." Do we have a faith in his creative powers that will be pleasing to him?
Robert Prins [Auckland - Pakuranga - (NZ)] Comment added in 2010 Reply to Robert
11:33 The stopping of the mouths of lions is a comment on the record in Dan 6:22. Whereas faith is not mentioned in Daniel it clearly was manifest and the writer to the Hebrews is making just that point.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2011 Reply to Peter
“But without faith it is impossible to please him (God): for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.”
In verse 1, the apostle Paul defines faith as, “the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.” In other words, faith is a conviction of the reality of that which is promised, but which is not yet revealed. To walk in this kind of faith implies an implicit confidence in what the Bible says despite appearances, which, at times, seem to conflict with it.
Yet, faith is not just about credulity, but also a conviction founded on evidence, and the Bible furnishes us with plenty of examples why we can confidently have faith in God. The Scriptures speak to us and give us faith and endurance by which we don’t stagger through unbelief, but grow strong in faith giving glory to God, being fully persuaded of the certainty of our hope, that what God has promised He is able to perform (Rom 4:21). We are given, “a more sure word of prophecy…” (2Pet 1:19). Most of the Scriptural prophecies have been fulfilled; the most prominent in our day witnessing scattered Israel a nation again, as foretold by Jesus over two thousand years ago (Matt 24:32-34)!
Consider, here we have a nation that was once scattered throughout the earth, having no homeland. Young men, old men, women and children were murdered, driven into swamps and forests and left to die. They were bereft of homes, parents, and children. They became objects of hatred and scorn, the butt of cruelty and death. Their eyes were gripped with fear as every attempt was made to annihilate them. They trusted no one, and expected the worse. So vile were the reports of brutality perpetrated against these people that one finds it difficult to imagine men could be capable of performing such heinous acts. For all appearances, they were doomed, yet, despite appearances, they survived, as we knew they would from Scripture (Jer 31:10), nor more to be driven away from their land. So you see, we are not asked to believe blindly after all.
Valerie Mello [in isolation, TN, USA] Comment added in 2011 Reply to Valerie
11:12 Here we are talking about Abraham and Sarah. The first time that the promise of seed as multitudinous as the stars is found after Abraham was willing to offer Isaac – Gen 22:17. This detail indicates that the multitudinous seed could only come after the resurrection of Jesus. A matter of great import to those to whom the letter was written.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2012 Reply to Peter
“Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.”
When we say, “I hope so,” I hope it will,” “I am hoping it will come to pass,” these all express doubt! This is not what the Bible defines as “hope.” When the Bible speaks about hope, it speaks of it in terms of a confident and patient anticipation that it shall come to pass.
In the Old Testament the word, batach, (hope) # <982>, gives the meaning as, “confident, secure, trust,” and so it is with all its cognates. Doubt is never a part of this word (cf. Job 6:20; Psa 16:9; Ecc 9:4).
In the New Testament the word, elpis/elpizo, (hope) # <1680>, is also defined as, “anticipate, expect, confidence.” Doubt is never a part of this word (cf. Heb 3:6; 1Pet 1:3; 1John 3:3).
The things hoped for are a confident expectation, or assurance based upon a sure foundation for which we patiently wait with full confidence that it shall come to pass. Our hope is founded upon the Rock. All the faith actions of these heroes recorded in this chapter were based on their confident assurance, or hope in God that what He promised He is also able to perform (Rom 4:20-21), and it is this hope that we will be called upon to give an answer for (1Pet 3:15,21). This kind of hope is a reality, and not based on feeling.
Valerie Mello [in isolation, TN, USA] Comment added in 2012 Reply to Valerie
11:1-40 We might conclude that all men and women of faith are well practiced in patient waiting for God to keep His promise.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2013 Reply to Peter
11:24 In saying that Joseph ‘refused to be called the son of Pharaoh’s daughter’ we probably have reference to some ceremony that was to take place rather than a simple walking away from Egyptian society.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2014 Reply to Peter
11:4 So Abel had faith. So we should ask what was it that Abel believed in. There must have been some revelation to Adam and Eve about a future deliverer. We should not think of the salvation through Jesus as some plan which God devised late in time. Rather He had a plan in place right from creation.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2015 Reply to Peter
11:29 When the writer says that “by faith” they passed through the Red Sea we see that the Psalmist – Psa 116:12 – actually makes this point.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2016 Reply to Peter
11:5 The faith that Enoch had seems to be that he believed that God would take care of him against the background of the opposition that he experienced.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2017 Reply to Peter
It is an extraordinary fact that Elijah alone of the prophets (Enoch, the seventh from Adam, excepted) should not die. Paul's comment in Enoch's case probably furnishes the explanation of the case of Elijah :
" Before his translation, he had this testimony that he pleased God " Heb 11:5.
The one feature specially visible in Elijah's life is the one he referred to when excusing himself for having fled from the face of Jezebel :
"I have been very jealous for the Lord God of Hosts: because the children of Israel have forsaken thy covenant, thrown down thine altars, and slain thy prophets with the sword."
God is jealous of His honour, though full of compassion and kindness. We may therefore understand how pleasing to Him would be Elijah's undiluted and untiring zeal on His behalf. For the same reason we may understand how God would feel at liberty (as we might express it) to exempt Elijah from the common lot of men, in translating him like Enoch, " that he should not see death."
The offensiveness of sin, which brings death, is its violation of the divine supremacy, and therefore of the divine honour. Its antidote, in the sense of allowing God to forgive, is the recognition, the assertion, the vindication of that divine supremacy. This is what was done in the condemnation of sin in the crucifixion of Christ. It is what, in another form, " pleased God" in the case of Elijah, and admitted of his removal without death.
from Ministry of the prophets - Brother Roberts
Nick Kendall [In Isolation] Comment added in 2017 Reply to Nick
11:2 Whilst the writer speaks of the “elders” clearly faithful Jews in the Old Testament there is a gentile who also had a “good report” – Acts 10:3. A small point but it builds the picture that the faithful were not always Jews. God’s plan involves gentiles also.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2018 Reply to Peter
“They were stoned, they were sawn asunder, were tempted, were slain with the sword…”
In the book, BIBLE MANNERS AND CUSTOMS, by James M. Freeman, p. 465,6, it is recorded that “This terrible mode of punishment is said to have originated either with the Persians or the Chaldeans, and was occasionally practiced by other ancient nations… Dr. Shaw says that the Western Moors practiced this barbarous punishment during his travels among them. ‘They prepare two boards of a proper length and breadth, and having tied the criminal betwixt them, they proceed to the execution by beginning at the head.’”
While the Bible does not tell us Isaiah was put to death in this manner, it does tell us there were faithful ones who were. There are some ancient texts like the Babylonian Talmud and Jerusalem Talmud that recorded Isaiah’s manner of death from oral tradition. The only similarity between the two has to do with Isaiah and a tree. The Ascension of Isaiah 5:14 has, “And when Isaiah was being sawn in sunder, he neither cried aloud nor wept, but his lips spake with the Holy Spirit until he was sawn in twain.” The Midrash reads, “Manasseh sought to slay him, and Isaiah fled, and the Lord remembered him, and he was swallowed up in the middle of a tree; but there remained without the tree the fringe of his garment; and then Manasseh ordered the tree to be cut down, and Isaiah died.” The differing legends go on and on and are truly incredulous!
Traditions, if derived from Scripture, are measured with Scripture. The Bible reveals many customs and traditions of their day which validates historical accounts and vice versa (cf. 2Thess 2:15). However, all human traditions, burdensome traditions, oral traditions contrary to Scriptural truths are condemned (cf. Matt 15:1-20; Mark 7:9). Traditions are not determined by its oral or written form alone, but by its original source and content. Is it from God or men? Is it Biblically correct or does it contradict the Word? Oral tradition without Divine inspiration poses a real problem, in that its difficulty to transmit a factual, accurate account from one person to another, especially through time, does not occur.
A good while back, a group of us tested the effectiveness of passing on information by oral communication. I passed a story on to a person by whispering it into her ear who then passed it on in the same fashion, who passed it on to the next and the next in the same manner to the last person in the group. When the last person repeated the story out loud to us, it was so different from the original, it was amazing! It was fun doing this exercise, and you may like to try it too, but it shows that without Divine inspiration and revelation, written accounts from oral accounts, are totally unreliable.
Valerie Mello [in isolation, TN, USA] Comment added in 2018 Reply to Valerie
“Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.”
“By worlds, aion, we are to understand the material fabric of the universe; for aion can have no reference here to age or any measurement of time, for he speaks of the things which are Seen; not being made out of the things which do Appear; this therefore must refer to the material creation: and as the word is used in the plural number, it may comprehend, not only the earth and visible heavens, but the whole planetary system; the different worlds which, in our system at least, revolve round the sun. The apostle states that these things were not made out of a pre-existent matter; for if they were, that matter, however extended or modified, must appear in that thing into which it is compounded and modified, consequently it could not be said that the things which are seen are not made of the things that appear; and he shows us also, by these words, that the present mundane fabric was not formed or reformed from one anterior, as some suppose. According to Moses and the apostle we believe that God made all things out of nothing.” - Adam Clarke’s Commentary, 1810, emphasis added, (cf. 2018 notes on John 1:1,2).
Science is always in the pursuit of truth. Their understanding of certain matters are based on observations, experiments, and analyses, but this understanding is subject to change as new information and understanding develops. They do not deal with certainties that are beyond the shadow of a doubt. They do not deal with believed truths, belief that is central to faith, but is their weakest argument for a scientific position! An "old earth" theory cannot exist alongside a belief in creation.
Biblical scholars argue among themselves, whether “was,” hayah, is really, “became” in Gen 1:2 despite ancient Hebrew and Greek manuscripts to the contrary, but it accommodates an old earth, which some scientists claim is around 15 billion years old! Hayah, # <1961>, means, “to exist, i.e. to be or become.” Genesis means, “the origin of coming into being of something” - Merriam-Webster Dictionary. A related word, or synonym, is inception, which means, “the beginning of something … the point at which something begins its course or existence.” Creation of the land and sky were the starting points on which all else was built. "To create (absolutely)" is, bara, # <1254>; it does not mean to recreate. In fact, those who uphold such a belief are Polygenists, that is, the pre-Adamic race came from different origins and race! Because a similar word to hayah is hovah, # <1943>, and means “ruin,” this has led to further speculation in support of an old earth and a previous civilization that was catastrophically destroyed prior to God 're-creating' the earth! Why did the heavens need 're-creating'?
Gen 1:2 in Young's Literal Translation of the Bible, 1898, incorrectly translated has, "the earth hath existed waste and void..." contradicting its own comment in Heb 11:3, thus, further leading to false and mythological stories of a previous civilization that met with a catastrophic end. This also fed into the idea that millions or billions of years separated verse 1 from verse 2 (Gen 1:1,2)! If the earth is millions or billions of years old, on what grounds do we limit civilization to just this one previous civilization prior to ours? It is all speculation! The land and the sky were “without form [waste] and void [empty]” meant to them earth pre-existed and destroyed, but what it is simply telling us is that God first created the sky and land, the foundations, after which He shaped, fashioned, and beautified them with each successive 24 hour days, making the land habitable for its inhabitants. Scientifically, this is untenable!
To accommodate a gap of millions or billions of years breaks the type of the six-day work week with the seventh a Sabbath day of rest, which God intended! We need to remember that chapters and verses are man-made, and were not intended by the original Spirit-filled authors. By dividing verse 1 from verse 2 interferes with the sense of the passage. When the Bible was written there were no chapters and verses, but one continuous work from beginning to end without any breaks. Chapters and verses were added for convenience, but in doing so, has opened the door for misinterpretations.
The implications of a pre-Adamic civilization is profound! It is in effect saying, man and animals existed prior to “the beginning,” as stated in Gen 1 (cf. Mark 10:6), making it misleading; that the timescale in Genesis is incorrect; that Adam was not the first man, contradicting Genesis chapters 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5; Deut 32:8; 1Chron 1:1; Luke 3:38; Rom 5:12,14; 1Cor 15:21,22,45; 1Tim 2:13; Jude 1:14; and contradicts Jesus in Matt 19:4; that the curse of death was not the result of Adam’s sin, as stated in Gen 3, since pre-Adamic civilization and its creatures died; did death exist before sin? If it did, it contradicts Gen 2:16,17; that the connection is lost between the first man, Adam, who brought in physical death, and the last man, Adam who brought in physical resurrection from death, and that Adam’s fall affected all of creation making Rom 8:20-22 wrong, if there was a previous creation!
It is blasphemous, and challenges the Holy-Spirit filled Biblical writers by such heresies! Belief in an ancient earth, which accommodates Evolution and the Gap Theory, is in effect saying God, His Son, the prophets and apostles are wrong, or have not been entirely truthful about earth’s origin, which is blasphemy!
How many more parts of the Bible are we willing to concede to as being “errant,” or in need of “reinterpretation” to accommodate The Gap Theory, Evolution, and their fossil records? Scripture, not science, is the ultimate test of all truth and the more we deviate from it, the more humanistic we will become. The fossil graveyards all over the world are a record of the worldwide destruction of life in one age, not progressive ones, being cataclysmically overwhelmed with water at the time of the great Flood (2Pet 3:6).
More may be read in the 2018 notes on Gen 1:1,2
Valerie Mello [in isolation, TN, USA] Comment added in 2018 Reply to Valerie
11:6 the way the verse speaks of “faith” and “rewarder” is the evidence that faith is believing that God will keep His word. Rom 4:20-21
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2019 Reply to Peter
“By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac; and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten son.”
Esau was begotten by Abraham, yet God only acknowledged Isaac as the “only son” begotten of Abraham (Gen 22:2)! Why? Because Isaac’s begettal, # <3439>, Greek, monogenes, “only (begotten, child),” was not just about a physical one, but about the unique, spiritual, and covenantal relationship of the father and son. The typology is evident, Christ being the only begotten [monogenes] son of the Father (John 3:16). Through Christ, we, likewise, have a unique, spiritual and covenantal relationship with him and the Father.
The children of promise are heirs of the promises God made to Abraham (cf. Gen 18:18; Gen 21:12; Gen 22:18; Rom 9:7,8). We were begotten of the flesh, but what we, the “many sons,” (Heb 2:10) do after our baptism into the Father and Son, defines if we are truly heirs, begotten, gennao, # <1080>, of the Father - that is, regenerated, born again, and transformed through His Word (John 3:3,7; Rom 2:2; 1John 5:1,18).
(Please see Psalm 51:6 note).
Valerie Mello [in isolation, TN, USA] Comment added in 2019 Reply to Valerie
A reader writes: “I was reading the comments on the daily reading site, as I do every morning. This morning I read a particular comment written by you on Hebrews 11 relating to creation. I, of course, do not believe in evolution nor do I believe that the earth could be billions of years old. One thing my mom and I cannot seem to reconcile though is where dinosaurs fit in to the picture! They couldn’t have existed post Adam, could they?! Doesn’t seem they could have co-existed with humans... I would love your ideas on this. I just can’t seem to make their existence jive! Help!! And many thanks for your time!”
My reply: In today's reading, Heb 11:3 tells us specifically that the earth was created out of things which did not appear. Then we read in Gen 1:31 that after God built on the foundation of the planet He named, "earth" v. 2, everything He created on the earth was, "very good." However, after sin entered the world, the earth came under a curse, and dinosaurs, like lions, etc. created to live peacefully with one another, became predators.
During the Millennium, we read in Isa 11:6-9, that this situation will reverse itself, but not until then. We are living under a curse since Gen 3, but thanks be to God, all will be restored, and may that day come soon.
Reader's response: "Makes sense. Thank you so much for your time, and thank you for getting back to me so quickly!! I enjoy reading your comments in the daily readings."
Valerie Mello [in isolation, TN, USA] Comment added in 2019 Reply to Valerie
11:8 “not knowing whither he went” is just the point about Abram’s faith. He simply accepted that God would do what was best for Abram in the context of keeping the promise He had made to him.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2020 Reply to Peter
Jephthah’s vow
“When thou shalt vow a vow unto the LORD thy God, thou shalt not slack to pay it: for the LORD thy God will surely require it of thee; and it would be sin in thee… That which is gone out of thy lips thou shalt keep and perform; even a freewill offering, according as thou has vowed unto the LORD thy God, which thou has promised with thy mouth” (Deut 23:21-23; cf. Num 30:2; Ecc 5:4-7). Vows are to be kept, but this voluntary practice had to conform to the principles and precepts God laid down concerning them. For voluntary vows to be acceptable to God, they must be vows that do not break any of His laws.
We read in Lev 27:1-8, “Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, when a man shall make a singular vow, the persons shall be for the LORD by thy estimation…” This references specifically people dedicating either themselves or some other person to God, as in the case of Jephthah, and God gave specific regulations on how vows may be broken be they rash, false, forgotten, or cannot be fulfilled (cf. Lev 5:4-13).
Men are apt to repent or unable to fulfil their vows for various reasons, and God provided redemption for them. He gave categories in which they fell corresponding to their age and gender and the amount to be paid to redeem self or the other person. If the person was poor, God allowed the priest to determine a lower redemption price. In the case of Samuel, he could not be redeemed because he was a Levite, of the Kohathite branch of tribe of Levi (1Chron 6), geographically living in Ephraim (cf. Josh 21:4,5), and Nazarite for life (1Sam 1:11). Samson could not be redeemed because he was specifically chosen by God to be a Nazarite unto God for a specific purpose (Judg 13:5). All others, however, could be redeemed. It is unscriptural to claim Jephthah sacrificed his daughter as a burnt offering (Judg 11), human sacrifices being clearly forbidden, defiling, abominable, and profanes Yahweh’s Holy Name (Deut 12:31; Deut 18:9-12; cf. 2Kin 3:27; 2Kin 23:10; Isa 57:5)!
A burnt offering involved Levi priests, to whom the sacrifice was presented and examined by them, killed, dissected, burnt on God’s altar, and eaten (Lev 1; 7:1-17)! If Jephthah had by-passed the Levite priests, this offering would have been a “strange” offering, contrary to the Law and unacceptable to God! This false teaching was and is circulated by rabbis from the 1st C on, including Josephus, and may be read in their Midrash, a book they consider second only to the Bible. It states: “… he [Jephthah] could have been absolved from it [vow] by Phineas the high priest, and only the personal foolish pride of both prevented it being done” (Gen. R. 60:3)! Again, God would never sanction a human sacrifice under any condition which violates His command and profanes His Holy Name: “Thou shalt not let any of thy seed pass through the fire to Molech, neither shalt thou profane the name of thy God: I am YAHWEH” (Lev 18:21; Deut 12:31). We come to erroneous conclusions, in that Jephthah had to keep his vow and kill his daughter as a burnt offering to God, because we do not compare Scripture with Scripture. God accepted Jephthah’s vow in giving him the victory, so how was Jephthah’s vow fulfilled?
It was in the manner Hannah offered her son, Samuel (1Sam 1:11,24,25). Though the circumstances differed, Jephthah’s daughter was dedicated for life-long temple services customary for women, hence, remained a virgin, and Jephthah took a male animal as specified under the law of burnt offerings, and offered it. This explains why Jephthah was not upset over his daughter’s supposed death, but about his family lineage being his “only” child, and why his daughter so graciously accepted, not her death in so cruel a fashion, but her life-long dedication in serving Yahweh, though Jephthah’s family line ended with her, and for which the daughters of Israel praised, not lamented, her every year for four days (Judg 11:34-40). God could have chosen anyone, but He chose Jephthah’s daughter for a reason, and what a test it was for Jephthah, a test he did not fail, and for which he too was honoured with all the other faithful read in Heb 11.
Valerie Mello [in isolation, TN, USA] Comment added in 2020 Reply to Valerie
11:4 Faith as a quality expected by God is clearly seen in the rest of the letters in the New Testament. However it is only here where we actually find individuals singled out in a list. We might ask why is that so. One reason could well be that the believers in Jerusalem would regard the people mentioned as good men and women. They may have even seen many of them as upholders of the Law of Moses. However the writer’s argument is to show that it is faith and not an observance of the Law of Moses that God is pleased with.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2021 Reply to Peter
11:3 in saying that the worlds were framed by the word of God we see an idea which Peter used – 2Pet 3:5 – probably later than when heb was written.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2022 Reply to Peter
11:11 Whilst Sarah “laughed” – Gen 18:12 - at the words of the angel her confidence returned when the significance of who has spoken the promise became clear to her.
The lesson for us is clear. Once we appreciate the status of the one who has made promises to us we can have absolute confidence that he will keep His word.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2023 Reply to Peter
11:12 God called Abram alone - Isa 51:2 - which is the basis for what Hebrews is saying here. The record here focussing on the impossibility of Abraham, without God’s intervention, having any children. This makes the existence of Abraham’s large family amazing.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2024 Reply to Peter
11:1 Faith is believing that God will keep His promises and so acting as if those promises were actually a reality already. A clear example of faith being spoken of in this way is Rom 4:17-22.
Peter Forbes [Mountsorrel (UK)] Comment added in 2025 Reply to Peter