Comments for November 23

v.2 - Here we have the concept of willingness again. God requires that we be willing. Those that are willing to do his service are blessed, we can conclude from this verse. Jud.5:9, 2Cor.8:16,17

The walls of the city of Jerusalem had been built but few lived in it. Nor, it seems, did many want go there even though it had been the capital and the religious centre of the land. So Nehemiah arranges for 10% of those who had returned from the captivity to go and live there. If we take the total of those who came to Jerusalem we can calculate the total population of the land.

v.2 - I have noticed this year in my reading that there are a number of incidences of the concept of people blessing, so my rather naive concept that blessing is something that can only be conferred from the greater person to the lesser, but this cannot be true. We are instructed to bless God on at least 15 occasions, so my idea must be wrong. Blessing is something that we can confer on each other, and indeed should.

v.1 Whilst the selection of the 10% who were to dwell at Jerusalem was by the casting of lots it seems that there were some who willingly offered to go. These individuals received a blessing. Maybe they were chosen by lot and did not simply agree to go but were enthusiastic in their commitment. Where do we stand when there is work to do? Do we do it, but grudgingly or are we enthusiastic and cheerful in our commitment? The lord loveth a cheerful giver (2 Corinthians 9:7)

11:20 The reason for selecting 10% of the population of the land to dwell in Jerusalem was to ensure the security of the city. However there was no sin in those who remained in the villages. They could not all live in Jerusalem else the rest of the land would have fallen into the hands of Israel's enemies. Likewise we cannot all be involved in a particular task so we should not feel guilty just because we are unable to perform some task in the Ecclesia.

11:4 Jerusalem was on the border of Judah and Benjamin  so it is fitting that it was members of those tribes - and only those tribes - who were chosen by lot to dwell at Jerusalem. It was fitting also that some Levites went also (Neh 11:15)

New situations demand new ways of organisation. Neh 11:1,2 says that they cast lots to get 1 in 10 of the people to live inside Jerusalem, while the rest went to the other cities of Judah.  There were only 42,360 Jews, plus their servants, who had returned (Neh 7:66-69), which meant that there were only just over 4,000 inside Jerusalem.

V.1 one of ten to dwell in Jerusalem: thus the people offer themselves as human tithes; the true spirit of self-denial. Not only would the defences be strengthened, but the rebuilding of the city would be advanced with these additional workers. 

11:20 In saying that the residue lived in the cities of Judah we see an accurate comment for the cities that are now mentioned are in Judah. So incidentally we learn that the extent of the land that was inhabited by Jews in the days of Nehemiah was quite limited.

11:23 There had been a need to encourage people to go to Jerusalem. 10% of the population had gone. There were things to do, an enemy to withstand and service to keep. It is against that background that the ‘singers’ are required. Whilst it might have been thought that singers in the temple was a luxury that had to be dispensed with it was actually seen as a valuable job that had to be done. Thus it can be seen that continual praise to God was a priority, even in difficult circumstances.

V.1 The returnees gravitated to their ancestral towns and villages of Judah.  And, there would have been those who went to their heritage in Jerusalem.  However, Jerusalem was under populated for its size and importance.  And so, people living outside were persuaded, by lot, to occupy the city.

There had been 10,000 people taken captive from Jerusalem in the first Babylonian invasion of 598 BC.  The capital had to be occupied to flourish and to defend the recently rebuilt walls.  All the houses in Jerusalem had been destroyed and so there was a great need to re-build (2Kin 25:9).  This was indeed a new town and a new start.

V.32 Anathoth was a city of priests in the tribal allotment of Benjamin, and was located about 3 miles (4.8 km) from Jerusalem.

Jeremiah was pre-occupied for decades in prophesying to the people of Judah and Jerusalem about coming destruction and their subsequent captivity in Babylon. And yet, Yahweh had Jeremiah secure the purchase of a field in Anathoth (Jer 32:7-9).

Yahweh wanted to signal that, after their captivity in Babylon, there would be a restoration of the people to the land and the city.

11:36 This seemingly casual comment that there were Levites in Judah and Benjamin masks a significant point. Nehemiah was not simply concerned with the situation in Jerusalem. He was also concerned to maintain the spirituality of the rest of the land.

Neh 11:1-2 - John Wilson makes an interesting 2005 comment as to "human tithes";  possibly not all of the chosen 10% was particularly willing to give up what they had for Jerusalem; the Lord loves a cheerful giver (2Cor 9:7).

11:3  Those who were chosen to dwell in Jerusalem would have had a more difficult time than those living in the towns and village in the land because the rebuilding of Jerusalem was that which the inhabitants of the land seemed most opposed to. It is not a case of being a city dweller was more appealing. In fact is was a harder option.

11:16    The ‘outward business’ of the temple doubtless related to the day to day activities which were what one would call normal household duties which enabled the worship of God to continue. A similar phrase is found in 1Chron 26:29

11:9    The mention of an ‘overseer’ indicates that not only did people agree to live in Jerusalem – which was doubtless not as commodious as living in some of the villages – they worked to maintain the status and functionality of the city.

Living on a rock

The sequence of events here is significant. Jerusalem is situated on a rocky hill, surrounded by a large wall, and superbly placed for defence. However, there is no farmland nearby, so it is essentially a city of worship and a capital city for administration of the nation. Those who volunteered to live there were giving up their right to farm the land and make a living for themselves, which is why this event could only come after those of the previous chapter. The promise to send ten percent of produce into the city is what made it possible for these men and their families to live there. This is perhaps confirmed by the record in the new testament, where a large collection needed to be made for the saints living in Jerusalem in order to meet their needs (1Cor 16:1).

11:1      The picture of 10% of the people in the land living in Jerusalem contrasts starkly with the picture that the contemporary prophet paints of Jerusalem – Zech 8:7-8. Zechariah is clearly talking of a time distant to the time he is speaking. He is speaking of the time when the kingdom of God is re-established on earth. 

11:36    The specific mention of Judah and Benjamin probably indicates the extent of the area of land that the Jews inhabited on their return from Babylon – namely the extent of the Southern kingdom.

11:2     Those who willing gave themselves were appreciated by those who did not move to Jerusalem. How do we respond to those in our community who take on responsibilities and challenges that we do not take on?

11:6,24   The mention of Perez and Zarah takes us back to the sons of Judah whom Tamar bare to him as recorded in Gen 38:29-30

11:2    The people who went to dwell in Jerusalem offered themselves willingly. We probably find it easier to give money to the work of the gospel than making a personal sacrifice. The lesson here is clear. It is clear the greater the sacrifice is to give of one’s time.

11:2-25 this list of people can be broken down into different groups -

:2-8      Priests,

:9-13    Levites

:14-27  chief of the people. Once we see this we see the significance of the list.

11:14 if we total the number listed so far who moved to Jerusalem we find it is 4,044. To which we maybe should add some Levites. We know -:1– 10% of the population were called to go and live in Jerusalem. So it is reasonable to conclude that the total in the land as around 50,000. This is a very small population for a land with hostile neighbours and other residents in the land. So we can gain a picture of the overwhelming odds against Israel at this time.

11:6,24         Notice the mention of Perez and Zerah (Zarah). These two names are found in 38:29-30 as twins born to Tamar of Judah. And so even though they were born of a doubtful union their descendants are counted as being of the tribe of Judah.

11:1-2 Lots were cast to ensure that 10% of the population that had returned from Babylon would live in Jerusalem.  The casting of the lot would decide – Proverbs 16:33. So, given that a method had to be devised to persuade people to move to Jerusalem we are encouraged that there were those who clearly enthusiastically accepted the outcome. Are we so eager and willing when a job that we might not like needs to be undertaken?

11:1-2    The casting of lots would determine the outcome of the decision as to who would go and live in Jerusalem. However the casting of lots would not automatically make those who were chosen actually want to go to Jerusalem. However some it seems, accepted their “lot” willingly.

We might volunteer to do one thing or another for our fellow believers. We might agree to do something when asked. However we are not only expected to respond to needs but to respond willingly.  1 Peter 5:2 describes the mind that we should have.

willingly.

11:24 The genealogy that works back from Pethahiah goes all the way back, missing generations, to Zerah (Zarah) who we find in Gen 38:30. We see similar time periods covered in genealogies elsewhere in this chapter.

v.8 - This principle, borne out particularly in the account of Balaam and Balak in Num.22-24 where, regardless of his desire for reward (2Pet.2:15), Balaam was forced to speak the words of God, is one which convinces me particularly of the power of God in inspiring the writers of the scriptures. The prophets quite clearly were, at the times of their prophesyings, quite unable to influence the words that they spoke by the action of their own will. Quite a telling phrase here in this verse.

3:1 Notice that whilst the message is directed against 'Israel' it is for 'the whole family' which was brought out of Egypt. Israel and Judah thought that they were different 'fellowships' but such distinctions do not exist with the Father.

3:2 It is noteworthy that Yahweh's controversy with the Gentile cities which hated Israel is brief: "I will send a fire." But Israel had been brought into the place of privilege and so of responsibility, and the Lord's indictment is detailed and unsparing.

v.3 - Here is a clear statement of fellowship. Fellowship exists when there is agreement. Walking together is then possible. Let us beware how we interpret this. It must not be used to pick holes in our fellow man, but instead to instruct us in how to walk in agreement with God, with whom is the only fellowship that leads to life.

3:6-7 Whilst we might use these verses to show that God speaks about the future the reason why the prophet spoke these words was because in Judah and Israel there were those who would have responded to the judgements of God - 'If we had known then …'.

3:14 Bethel - the house of God (Genesis 28:17-19) - had become a place of idolatry in the days of the kings of Israel. (1 Kings 12:28-29).

Amos 3:7. As we are surrounded with wars and threats of war, we clearly see that nations cannot go to war as they please, it is the Lord sends them to accomplish His purpose. Assyria and Babylon are good examples.(Jer 51:6) We must also realize that He sends the floods, the earthquakes, famines, and pestilence.

3:10-11 The judgment upon the northern kingdom was simply because 'they know not to do right' - but they did know! They had been told but the word had no effect upon them.

V.3 A man of the world, and a man of God could not work in common, as regards to principles and aims of life, without either the man of the world giving in to the man of God (which is improbable), generally the man of God becomes corrupted by the man of the world. They are of two different minds. Compare with 1Cor 6:14

Vs.3-5 Yahweh asks a series of questions illustrating cause and effect: two people cannot walk (grow, flourish) together unless there is mutual agreement; lions will roar (as a sign of protective ownership) when they are in possession of food; a bird cannot be caught unless a trap is set for it; and no-one will set a trap unless there is prospect of a catch; a warning trumpet evokes fear in the people; and if disaster comes it is because Yahweh has caused it (v.6 cf. Isa 45:7). 

Yahweh is illustrating how sin separates His people from Him.  The cause of righteousness, from Israel, will have an effect on the relationship with Yahweh.

V.7 Surely the Lord GOD will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets (KJV). This powerful statement shows how Yahweh works to declare His counsel.  Prophets have been chosen, throughout time, as instruments to announce Yahweh's will. 

Yahweh's will has been written down so that believers of all generations can gain wisdom and understanding.  The Bible is that declaration of God's will and plan with humankind.  Salvation is possible by reading it (2Tim 3:15).

There’s a lovely reference to God and his people Israel, in Amos 3:3. two cannot walk together unless they be agreed. Young's Concordance tells us that “agreed” means to meet together by appointment.  So God is saying that He made an arrangement with Abraham, but Abraham’s seed have not kept to that appointment.  Fancy not turning up to meet God! That is really letting the Lord down.

3:3 We might be inclined to think that the ‘two’ who could not walk together were Israel and Judah. However the problem was more serious than this. Neither Israel nor Judah was able to walk with God, unlike Enoch – Gen 5:22 – because their behaviour was so abhorrent to Him.

V.6 When the sound of the alarm is trumpeted by the watchman of the city, the people are sure to run about in preparation to address the warning. Yet Israel is not alarmed, though God threatens judgements

The houses of Ivory in v15 appear to refer to the house Ahab built in Samaria, mentioned in 1Kin 22:39. The function of this house appears to have been linked to the system of false worship set up in Samaria, and in particular the inclusion of temple prostitutes. Modern bible translations render 1Kin 22:38 "while the harlots bathed". Ahab's house and the false religion of Samaria were obviously still around at the time of Amos, and God intended to destroy it.

3:3  This verse regarding two acting in a spirit of unity & agreement, links up with Matt 18:19,20 The passage in Matthew is often interpreted as indicating that it doesn't matter how small a group of believers is in order for the Lord to be present. Actually, in the context of the whole passage Matt 18:15-20 , the idea is the same as that in Amos ie that the spirit of unity is indicated by their being together (& therefore the Lord is present with them).

3:9-10 It seems that the prophet was concerned that the nations round about Israel would see the judgements against Israel. this would show them that the God of Israel will not tolerate falsehood in His people. Lest those nations thought that Israel’s God was powerless.

3:2 Because the God of Abraham had separated Israel from the nations round about them and had made a covenant with them, they were expected to extend that obedience which their favoured position demanded. We, likewise are exhorted to walk worthy of our high calling (1Thess 2:12). If we do not, we incur our Heavenly Father's discipline. We must bear in mind also that punishment does not prove that he is against us; it is the opposite, it is His love towards us. Heb 12:5-6

3:2 A fundamental principle is taught here. Because God had brought Israel out of Egypt they had a responsibility to respond to God’s love. Because they were not doing so He was going to punish them more than the nations who did not know Him.

V.7 Jesus was a prophet. Moreover, He was the special prophet who Moses promised would come (Deut 18:15,18; Acts 3:20-22). That prophet would be the Messiah.

Jesus gave witness to His special status by performing miracles. When He did so, some Jews openly proclaimed Him as that special prophet (John 6:14; 7:40). We have the recorded Word to verify that Jesus is the Prophet, the Messiah. He is the only way to salvation (Acts 4:12).

Jesus also accurately predicted the downfall of the temple, which occurred in 70 AD.  This prediction secured Jesus as a true prophet (Deut 18:22).

3:3-6 The series of questions – each of the questions would elicit the answer ‘no’ – This is just the point. God was intervening because there was a cause.

V.2 You only have I known of all the families of the earth. Yahweh had chosen Israel to be a special people unto Him (Deut 14:2).

V.3 While God’s people obeyed Him they both walked together. But now since the people disobeyed Yahweh, the two had become alienated from each another.

Vs.4-6 Three metaphors are used to underscore v.3.

V.7 Yahweh used His prophets to both exhort His people to mend their ways; and also to forecast His will (Isa 46:9,10).

V.8 Yahweh’s prophets had no choice but to prophesy (Jer 20:9).

V.9 Ashdod is synonymous with Gaza, which describes the Philistines. Both the Philistines and Egypt were nations of great idolatry. But, these idolatrous nations would look upon Samaria (synonymous with Israel) and bear witness to its idolatry.

Vs.12,14,15 Israel would be punished for its sins. Nevertheless, a remnant of Israel would be saved. The reference to Damascus occurs because Jeroboam II had secured that city for Israel (2Kin 14:28).

Yahweh is Israel’s shepherd (Jer 31:10). Ironically, Amos, God’s prophet was also a shepherd (1:1).

3:14 The ‘visit’ that God is speaking of is the Assyrian invasion which eventually took Hoshea captive

3:2 We might think that primarily Amos is speaking to the two kingdoms of Israel making the point that their agreement would lead to ‘walking together’ – fellowship. However the exhortation to them is also an exhortation to ourselves We may try to paper over cracks but we should strive for agreement as this is the only true basis for fellowship.

3:11   The adversary was the Assyrian which came against the kingdom of Israel, taken them captive in the days of Hoshea.

3:8    The analogy is simple. Men fear lions and respond to their cry. So man should respond to the words of God. Actually His ‘roar’ is more dangerous than any animal. Do we have that same ‘fear’ of the Scriptures?

3:2    Privileges bring responsibilities. Because God had revealed Himself to Israel they had responsibilities. If they did not live up to those responsibilities they would be punished. Whilst we should not serve God out of fear of punishment if we are disobedient we should, nevertheless, realise that our high calling in Christ brings responsibilities in our lives. In principle those responsibilities are to serve God faithfully. 

3:13-14        So Israel were to be punished and in particular “Bethel” – one of the seats of false worship in Israel in the days of the prophet Amos.

3:6      The ‘evil’ is not sin. It is something which is unpleasant for the people – that is God’s arm of judgement. A similar idea is found in the contemporary prophet – Isa 45:7

3:10    In the analogy of the shepherd who would rescue even parts of a lamb that had been taken and killed we see that God never gives up on His children. This is what the prophet has been moved to teach.

3:8  Amos’ comment “who can but prophesy” is an indication of the way in which inspiration works. The prophet was compelled to speak when God instructed him. Speaking the word, for the prophet, was not an option.

3:15 the idea of summer houses and winter houses might seem an unusual idea when thinking of life in Israel. However the summer houses would be in cooler areas in summer.

GET THE KNOW HOW

One of the things God had against Israel before he brought the Assyrians in to punish them, was this: "They do not know how to do right." (Amos 3:10). No doubt this was true. Even though God had sent his prophets to them time and again, the people were not being fed a steady diet of God's word.

Over the years since Jeroboam set up the calf idols, there was no regular teaching about God so that the people could learn what He wanted of them. So generation after generation, they slipped away spiritually and morally until they did not know how to do right.

We can so easily fall into the same trap. If we don't read the Bible regularly, it is really easy to forget what God wants from us. And it is not much use following other people, because they might not be following God either.

God gives us every opportunity to hear from him and to learn to do what is right, but are we taking those opportunities? Are we applying them in our lives?

Let's not set ourselves up for judgement like Israel did, but be people who listen and respond to God's word, knowing and doing what is right.
 

3:7 Amos’ comment here does not give us licence to predict the future in detail. God was warning Israel, through the prophets, in the hope that they would change their ways. If repentance was seen then the judgment might well be delayed.

Amos 3:4 Lions don't roar when they are hunting, it would scare their prey away. They are quiet and stealthy, driven by hunger to sneak up on their prey.  They roar when they have killed and have no reason to hide their location.  God is purposefully in the middle of his work with the Jews. I'd rather hear a roaring lion, than not hear a lion at all.  It's scary, but at least I know where he is and that he is not hunting.

3:1 this regathering is looking to a time after the Assyrian invasion and capture of Judah that is spoken of in Joel 2:1-7. It had a partial fulfilment with the return form Babylon consequent of Cyrus’ decree.

3:2 Ye only have I known reflects what God said to Israel as they were about to enter the land of promise –Deut 10:12. Their privileged position brought great responsibilities. The same is true to us also.

3:7 We might think that this is not quite true in our day. We cannot see for certain the details in front of us which precede the return of Christ and so conclude that in our days  Amos’ statement is not true. However it is true. The broad outline is there – enough for us to realise that God will intervene in world affairs at His set time. Enough for us to appreciate the need to be prepared and ready for the return of Christ.

Amos 3:2

“You only have I known of all the families of the earth…”

“It shows us this family the sole object of divine recognition among the nations of the earth, as we read in Amos 3:2: ‘You only have I known of all the families of the earth.’ It shows us all the divine dealings in the past absolutely restricted to this one nation and those of the Gentiles who might incorporate themselves with it (Isa 56:3-6).” Robert Roberts, FURTHER SEASONS OF COMFORT, The Fellow-Heirship of the Gentiles, p. 87

It is easy to overlook from this one verse that there were some Gentiles also included as part of the family of Israel. Isaiah reminded the Israelites who found it difficult that the covenanted Gentiles among them, the sons of the stranger, not of the sons of Abraham, had chosen to accept the God of Israel (Hos 2:23; Rom 9:23-26). Ruth, a Moabitess, through whom the Messiah descended, embraced the God of Israel, and one can feel her passion when reading her words: “… thy people shall be my people, and thy God my God” (Ruth 1:16).  

Favoring their own judgment of who was in and who was out, they displaced the LORD as sovereign of all that is. Isaiah gave a very scathing description of the overall shepherds of Israel, referring to them as lazy, “dumb dogs,” “greedy dogs,” “ignorant and blind shepherds” (Isa 56:8-11). I find this amazing; they were equated to unclean animals (Lev 11:26,27; cf. Isa 1:1-9)!

The majority of the Mosaic rabbis and Jews in our day boast in their ancestry (Matt 3:9; Luke 3:8; John 8:39), their flesh (Phil 3:3), and their law (Rom 2:17-23), yet they reject YHWH by rejecting His son, the Messiah, Yahoshua, promised from the very beginning (1John 2:23,24; Gen 3:15).  They, too, presume Abraham is their father, but Christ described those Jews who rejected him to be of their father, the “devil” (John 8:44-47)! Their communion with YHWH has, thus, been severed; they do not know Him (cf. John 17:3)!

They, like their ancestors, believe the blessing God gave to Abram (a Gentile whom God called out of paganism, Gen 12:1; Josh 24:2) and his descendants apply only to them (Gen 12:2,3). Go figure!  The blessing actually applied to all the faithful shepherds and sheep. This blessing was and is conditional on having the faith and the works of Abraham (John 8:39; cf. Matt 3:9; Rom 9:7). It also extended to the covenanted foreigners, the seed, Christ, with his brethren and sisters (Gen 17:7,8; Gal 3:16,29). The unfaithful get the curses, and one only has to look at Israel’s history to know the curses, not the blessings, that fell on them and will on all the unfaithful (Heb 10:29-31).

Under the Mosaic covenant, only the Hebrews had access to YHWH. Gentiles did not have the law, covenants, or prophets as Israel did to guide them, though they had a law (Rom 2:14,15).  They were left to seek and choose YHWH, as Rahab and Ruth did, or choose not to seek YHWH and remain in their sins. Under Christ, Gentiles were now sought out to join themselves to Israel’s God and son (Eph 2:13-15). This, however, was not Christ’s mission (Matt 15:24). Brother Roberts explained the transition from the Old to New Covenant was, “officially inaugurated” by Peter in Acts 15:7, and the “practical working,” of it committed to Paul. The beauty of God’s mercy and grace is that God has preserved for Himself a faithful remnant from both covenants, foreign and home-born (Isa 1:9; Rom 9:24-27; 11:5).

3:7  Judgment was coming from God against Israel. The people might well have reasoned that as the Assyrians were a mightier power than they were it was inevitable that they would suffered at the hands of the Assyrians. However Amos is making the point that the forthcoming judgment was of God as he had predicted in earlier prophets.

3:8 We might ask whether we are as respectful ot he word of God as we would be if we were in the presence of a roaring lion.

v.6-8 - The current writer knows himself to be in great need of this exhortation. Contentment with our lot is very much against the religion of our age. We grow up in a world where discontent, complaint and compensation seeking are the maxims of living. We must fight even harder to stay away from these thoughts and employ instead this simplicity of the outworking of our belief.

6:5 'from such withdraw yourselves' is teaching us to shun and avoid those who are doing and saying things which are not 'to the edifying of the church'. This is an individual matter. We should make our own decisions about who is and who is not helpful in our walk and take the appropriate personal action. I don't feel that Paul is speaking of 'disfellowship' in this passage.

6:20 The plea to Timothy to 'keep' the charge committed to him being contrasted with the warning to 'avoid' babbling shows us that the company we keep - either in life or the way we think - affects our spirituality.

:15 'King of kings and Lord of lords' quotes Deuteronomy 10:17. So towards the end of Paul's life he encourages Timothy to think about Israel's experiences at the end of their wilderness journey, just before they entered into the land of their inheritance.

6:4-5 We see the signs so well - in others - of strife and pointless talking. We do well to remember Jesus' parable about beams and motes (Matt 7:3). The very pride of the one who is striving about words may well be we who are looking disapprovingly at others. 

V.10,17,18,19 - After being cautioned about the love of money we read of how those with wealth can best comport themselves.

We have an interesting similarity between the first chapter and this chapter

6:20  The danger of ‘vain babbling’ is that the one babbling ends up in error, ignoring the principles of the gospel. Sometimes the irrelevant things which we think are so important become a snare to us and pride, getting in the way, separates brethren.

6:6-10 the idea of the love of money goes back to Ecc 5:10  A good test of how much we love money/material goods, is to ask ourselves how satisfied we are with what we have.

6:8 The injunction to contentment is based on Prov 30:8

V.10 In general conversation, this verse is often misquoted. It is not that money is the root of all evil, but that the love of money is the root of all evil. 

Money is an inert commodity.  Intrinsically it is neither good nor evil.  How it is used and what focus it occupies in people's lives is the concern.  Love connotes adoration, promotion, and protection.  Where money is concerned, these pre-occupations can lead to negative actions. 

If we have been blessed with monetary means, let us always be ready to use them wisely and generously in the service of the Lord.  It would be a mistake to be carried away with the false sense of power that money can bring (v.17). 

Remember Jesus' parable on such matters (Luke 12:16-21).  Let's make the Lord the object of our love, and our money an instrument of service to Him (Luke 16:13).

6:7    It is difficult for us to appreciate that ‘we brought nothing into this world’. We often behave as if we have achieved great things and the wealth or possessions that we have are a product of our own efforts.

V.7 The truth of this verse reminds me of a funny observation.                                                        There were two Jewish gentlemen, Cohen and Shapiro, who attended the funeral of their friend Goldberg.  Cohen said to Shapiro: You know Goldberg was a very wealthy man - how much did he leave? Shapiro turned to Cohen and coolly replied: All of it!

6:10 we see in 1Tim 6:6 that Godliness is what to strive for. The contrast, the love of money, produces just the opposite to Godliness in a believer – though it seems to offer short term benefits!

V.1 Masters who are unbelievers should be honoured for the sake of the Lord. This applies whether the master is good or bad.

V.2 The master who is a believer is, of course, a brother to the one who serves him. As a brother, he should treat his fellow servant in Christ with respect.

V.5 Some have used religion for monetary gain. Newsworthy examples, in our age, are some tele-evangelists. These corrupt people love money (v.10).

V.12 The prize for the true believer is eternal life not wealth in this life.

Vs.15,16 This is descriptive of Yahweh. But, Jesus shall assume the title of the King of kings, and Lord of lords when He returns (Rev 17:14;19:16).

6:11 ‘meekness’ is not an attribute that the world respects. Meekness is taken as a sign of weakness. However Moses – Num 12:3– was the meekest man on earth, yet he could lead a nation! His trust was in God and not in himself.

GODLINESS WITH CONTENTMENT IS GREAT GAIN 1Tim 6:6-7

It isn't your position that makes you happy ... it's your disposition.

6:8    In this materialistic world we are encourage to have ‘wants’ which we actually view as ‘needs’. Paul sets the correct perspective here. Food and raiment. But we should remember that god has already promised us that He will provide these for us. So avarice is unnecessary.

6:1-2  The relationship between a slave and his master was often one of mistrust. The slave would be exploited. So the slave is exhorted to faithful service no matter what the master is like and the master is not to lament having brethren as slaves. A master might lament having a brother for a slave because he knew how he should treat a brother and felt such actions were not the way in which he would treat a slave.

 1Tim 6:15,16.

Is Paul referring to God or Jesus? In other words, is the antecedent of what is said in v. 16, God in v. 15 or Jesus in v. 14?

It looks to me like it could go either way depending on the translation you're using. The N.I.V. includes "God" twice in the early part of v. 15, but neither the K.J.V. or R.V. does, therefore pointing more toward the antecedent being Jesus -  1Tim 6:14. Let's look at it from both points of view.

If the N.I.V. is more accurate and God is the subject of what is said in vv. 15 & 16, then there is truth in the statement that He is ultimately the only Ruler, the King of kings and Lord of lords (many such passages along these lines, especially in the Old Testament). The first part of v. 16 states that He alone is immortal, the meaning being that He inherently is the only one to possess it and be able to bestow it on others. And within this idea may be that He is the great Uncreate - from everlasting to everlasting, without beginning or end. And he lives in unapproachable light (i.e. in heaven) whom no one (i.e. any mortal) has seen nor can see. And, of course, honor and might should be forever ascribed to Him.

But a case can be made for vv. 15,16 applying to Jesus, especially considering the K.J.V. or R.V. The end of v. 14 refers to the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ - "which in his times he shall show, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings and Lord of lords". These last 2 phrases in the book of Revelation are assigned to Jesus in ch. 17:14 - "These shall make war with the Lamb, and the Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings...." Verse 16 - "who only hath immortality" would then mean that he is the only one to be granted immortality in the Bible's time period - the first begotten from the dead; the firstfruits of those who have slept. (Angels somehow received it or were created that way, but that is another story - one not supplied in the pages of Scripture.) "Dwelling in light which no man can approach unto, whom no man hath seen nor can see" would then equate to heaven where Jesus now is and man is not given access to. The honor and everlasting power that is Jesus' can be easily seen in the last half of Rev. 5 where the angels, etc. proclaim "Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, riches, wisdom, strength, honor, glory, and blessing" (v. 12). This is followed by a major endorsement of this seemingly by all beings in heaven and earth (Rev 5:13,14).

So which way to go? I really can see it either way on this one.

6:14    keeping the commandment ‘without spot’ likens the Christian to an acceptable animal sacrifice Num 28:3

1Tim 6:11 What is meekness? Psa 37:11 tells us the meek shall inherit the earth. DOes being meek give the picture of a little shrew sat up a corner being quiet? Are we to sit there being quiet and shrewlike? Meek is a person who is teachable and able to be influenced by Gods word a meek person will change to one that puts Gods word into practice and stands out as a light to this dark world. That is a strong person on many accounts, one who accepts he needs to change to please his God, one who accepts he is wrong and God is right and one who walks away from the filthy conversations of this world for that he will inherit the earth. So a meek person then is actually strong, so meek is not week!

6:9     In speaking of men drowning Paul is continuing his metaphor of being a shipwreck from 1Tim 1:19

Desire to be servants, not masters

Many people expected Jesus to condemn the Roman taskmasters. He didn't. Likewise we would probably expect the gospel to liberate us from all servile work, especially if we work for other believers. We would expect the New Testament to condemn slavery and remove the social hierarchy of master and servant. It doesn't. Notice that instead of condemning masters, in v1-5 the emphasis is placed on the servant to accept his or her position and not make a fuss. According to this passage it is the worker, slave, or servant that is most at risk of disobeying God in this matter. In v2 we're told to teach servants to serve their masters. In v4 it says that servants who seek to use the Bible to elevate their own status are doing so out of pride. In v5, the most stark assessment of all:

"Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself." 1Tim 6:5

So putting this verse in context, we see it is the servants that Paul is writing to, that are falsely "supposing that gain is godliness". How often the same could probably be said of us? Do we make a virtue out of climbing the social ladder, when no such virtue exists? Do we feel God has blessed us only when things go well at work, forgetting that His primary blessings are gifts of a spiritual dimension: Godfearing friends, spiritual wisdom, a stable family life based on obedience to Him.

There are many occasions in scripture where Godly men and women have entered into service for their own eventual good, for example Joshua, Moses' servant, and Jesus the servant of all. If we want to follow Jesus, it means that being a servant is the most desirable role of all.

6:7      Paul’s comment here reflect exactly what Job said – Job 1:21

6:1   The way we speak and behave does have an impact on the way in which those around us think of our Father. The pattern is set by Israel who, by their behaviour, caused God to be reproached by others – Isa 52:5. Surely we do not want to fall into the same condemnation do we?

1Tim 6:5    Those who are indifferent can easily afford to ignore disagreement, and to preach cordially of the virtue of “agreeing to differ.” This is no characteristic of the Ecclesia of the Living God. It contends for the Faith once delivered to the saints, and obeys Paul’s command to “turn away” from the perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds.

brOTHER ROBERTS - SEASONS OF COMFORT

6:17      There was, and always will be, variations in the financial status of fellow believers. Some will be wealthy, others less so. It is worth noting that the warning is that the rich should not pace confidence in their riches and think of themselves better than others. They are not told to share what they had – though doubtless many did. God is less concerned with social justice as we know it and more concerned with fellowship and unity across the social classes of believers.

6:1      An example of the way in which behaviour can cause God’s enemies to “blaspheme” is seen in David’s adultery with Bathsheba. That behaviour, says Nathan, caused God’s enemies to blaspheme – 2Sam 12:14.

6:10       Having possessions is not a problem in itself. There were many characters in the bible who were wealthy. It is the attitude that matters. Could we walk away from all that we possess? There will, if we are still alive at the return of Christ, come such a time. A fellow believer once said “keep a light hand on material possessions”.

6:7-8 The warning is clear. We should focus on the fact that we came into the world with nothing and will leave with nothing. This should help us to see the transient and temporary nature of possessions. A valuable thing to realise in this society where possessions and acquiring things is encouraged.

6:4 the word translated “doting” <3552> is only used here in the New Testament. It carries the sense of “sick” which gives a clearer understanding of what is meant by “doting”. Those who were as Paul spoke were actually sick – spiritually. That is because their focus was not on godliness but rather on highlighting their own views.

6:3 “the words of … Jesus Christ” indicates that Timothy ad access to at least one gospel record for they are the only place where one can find Jesus’ words.

6:4 In seeing that the brother who disregards the words of Jesus – in favour of his own ideas – is “proud”. The requirement laid on us is to tremble at God’s – Isa 66:2 -  word, not try to mould it into our pre-conceived ideas.

6:8 the society in which we live strives to breed dissatisfaction with the things that we poses. A major purpose of advertising and marketing is to persuade us that what we poses is insufficient or inadequate. Paul’s words to |timothy here should be sufficient to warn us against such thinking.