Comments for July 16

v. 10 - The word used for 'fastened' here gives an extra barbaric aspect to this act. It suggests that it was thrust through with one large stake. v.12 tells us that it was Saul's sons as well that were treated this way. Bethshan, it would appear, was in the part of Asher that was owned by Manasseh (Josh.17:11), and not in Philistine country - so this act was done to shame Israel, rather than to glory over their victory before their own people. Hence the reason that there is no opposition in v.12.

v.10 - In telling us that the body of Saul was fastened on the wall of Bethshan we learn the extent of the Philistine domination at the end of the reign of Saul.

v.4,5 - We see in the armourbearer an amazing show of dedication here to his master. We are not given the insight to know his motives, but we can take the lesson, that we too should be prepared to die with our master out of sheer dedication to him, as we did at our baptism. We see also, in a way, I suppose, the thief on the cross here, who died in faith with Jesus, copying his death in a true state of faithful dedication.

31:11 Again we come across the inhabitants of Jabesh-Gilead. We met them before (1 Samuel 11:1) and now Saul is dead, they make the arduous journey across into enemy territory to recover his body and the body of his sons. Such was the love of the men of Jabesh-Gilead for Saul. This further reinforces the suggestion made in our comments on 1 Samuel 11 that Saul's ancestry on his mother's side was in Jabesh-Gilead.

:9 The way that the Philistines cut of Saul's head and paraded it through the land of the Philistines and put his armour in the house of Ashtaroth mimics what David did with Goliath's head and armour (1 Samuel 17:51, 54)

31:1 The mention that the Philistines were fighting Israel and the slain fell at Mount Gilboa provides a sad insight into the diminished extent of Saul's kingdom and the extent of the Philistine dominion.

Mount Gilboa is in the Jezreel plain in the Galilee. The Philistines were centred in the Gaza strip. This indicates that the Philistines were in control of the whole of the coastal plain, Israel being confined to the hill country of central Israel.

V.4 David worked a reminiscence of this sorry business into one of his later psalms, which has a good deal to say about the fate of the wicked. " Their sword shall enter into their own heart, and their bow shall be broken." Psa 37:15

Saul, the first king of Israel, was killed in battle. It took three attempts, though;  the Philistine archers, his Israelite armourbearer, and finally the Amalekite (2Sam 1:13-16).  Saul however should have utterly destroyed the Amalekites, and then told lies about his sparing some of them (1Sam 15). Surely this was God punishing him.

Vs.11-13 The men of Jabesh-Gilead revered Saul because he saved them from Nahash the Ammonite (1Sam 11:11).  Saul was probably motivated to do this as his mother was from Jabesh.

The men of Jabesh retrieved the dead bodies of Saul and his sons from Beth-Shan. They built a funeral pyre as an act of respect.  This was not to cremate the bodies as this was not a practice in Israel.  Rather, it is more likely that spices were burned to produce a smoky perfume as a sign of honour.  It is possible that the bodies became singed by this but not cremated.  Afterwards the bones were buried.  Had the bodies been cremated then these would have been ashes not bones. 

Consider another example of this action: Asa, a respected king, was honoured in this fashion (2Chron 16:13,14).  However, Asa's grandson Jehoram, who was not respected, was not honoured in this way (2Chron 21:19).

V.6 We see Providence at work here with the death of Saul's three sons. If they had not been killed (particularly Jonathan) and survived their father an obstruction would have been made in the path of David to the throne.

31:6      That Saul and his three sons died in the battle cements the fact that the kingdom was not to pass by descent to one of his sons. We know that Jonathan realised that David was to rule after his father – 1Sam 23:17 -  but we have no indication of what his other sons thought.

V.4 Saul committed suicide.  Only four other suicides are recorded in the Bible:  Samson (Judg 16:30); Ahithophel (2Sam 17:23); Zimri (1Kin 16:18); Judas (Matt 27:5).  We could possibly count Abimelech as a fifth, but he received assistance (Judg 9:54). 

Ahithophel, Zimri, and Judas killed themselves believing that continuation of their lives was hopeless.  Saul and Abimelech died to alleviate perceived shame.  These all died for selfish reasons.  Only Samson did it for someone else.  He prayerfully asked Yahweh for the opportunity to silence His enemies.  Yahweh granted Samson's wish, gave him the strength to carry it out, and marked him as one of the faithful (Heb 11:32).  

31:4-6 The difference between what is recorded here about the death of Saul and what we read in 2Sam 1:1-10  might cause some to be concerned as to which is the true account. The account in this chapter is the Divine record – no man is speaking it. In 2 Samuel 1 it is the record of a man. A man who thought he would receive honour for what he claimed.

Saul at this point may have been able to escape; but with his three sons slain, he would have remembered the words of the witch at Endor, and feeling that he could not face the shame and disgrace that would have waited him if death did not come, he committed suicide. The king failed spiritually, also failed militarily; having lost his crown, he also lost his life. We see in his life a sad and terrible lesson for all who have been called to reign with Christ in the future.

31:13   The seven day fast for the death of Saul and his sons matches the fast of the children of Israel for Jacob – Gen 50:10

V.1 Mt. Gilboa only rises to a height of just less than 1700 feet.  Only the upper reaches of the mountain are jagged. The mountain and its surrounding uplands contain plentiful vegetation.  I remember walking in the area among beautiful wildflowers.   Saul's battle against the Philistines would have been fought on the uplands.  And so, one can envision him in the ugliness of death, lying surrounded and adorned by the natural beauty that the Yahweh created. 

31:7 This battle was not simply a set battle in the plain of the Jezreel Valley. The death of Saul and his sons signalled a further expansion of the Philistine dominion of the land of Israel.

Vs.9,10 The head of the king of the enemy became a trophy for the Philistines (1Chron 10:10).

V.12 We are not told whether the heads of Saul’s sons were cut off, but it is probably that they were not.

V.13 Later, David recovered the remains (2Sam 21:12).

31:2 Whilst Jonathan has figured in the narrative extensively Melchi-Shua is only found on one other occasion – 1Sam 14:49– in the description of the sons of Saul. Doubtless he was active with Saul but his activities were irrelevant in the purpose of God. So he is not mentioned

31:10 In putting Saul’s armour in the house of ‘Ashtaroth’ we see similar language to that of David’s actions when he slew Goliath, the champion of the Philistines – 1Sam 17:54,

Compare 1Sam 31:1, as the men of Israel flee before the Philistines with 1Sam 26:5. Here Saul's army was 'encamped around him' yet, as David points out in 26:15, they could not keep watch over Saul to protect him. We see the same problem in 31:1 when they flee the field of battle leaving Saul's sons to be struck down. The connection with Jacob in Gen 32:1 is interesting considering the allusion to Jacob's death in Gen 50:10 previously mentioned.

31:4  Saul, for the first time in the Divine record, calls the Philistines “uncircumcised” Both Jonathan 1Sam 14:6 and David 1Sam 17:36 referred to the Philistines as uncircumcised as they saw their relationship with Israel as it really was. They were not in covenant relationship with God. Saul, on the other hand, only calls them uncircumcised when he sees the possibility of them abusing him. As ever Saul’s thoughts were for himself. Not God.

31:8   Right from the time that David was anointed to the end of Saul’s life, despite the fact mentioned here that Saul had three sons, we only hear of the exploits of Jonathan. Maybe an indication that Saul’s other sons were in no way willing to identify with david, the Lord’s anointed. The man after God’s own heart. 

This is a monumental chapter but today I just want to draw attention to v7

*"And when the men of Israel who were on the other side of the valley, and those who were on the other side of the Jordan, saw that the men of Israel had fled and that Saul and his sons were dead, they forsook the cities and fled; and the Philistines came and dwelt in them."*

Where this verse mentions "the other side of the Jordan" it means the tribes of Gad, Reuben and half of Manasseh who had settled there rather than settling in the land with the rest of Israel, as God wished (Num 32). As we can see here, it turns out this area of land was hard to defend against invading armies. God in His wisdom knew this. In effect, the tribes who settled there lost their homes as a result of not following God's specific instructions. The lesson for us is that when we don't entirely understand God's instructions we should follow them anyway, trusting that God can see the future more clearly than we can.

31:3-6 The events of these verses could be known only to those present. Thus we see a clear indication that the words of Scripture are God’s record, not man’s, of events that took place.

31:9    In taking Saul’s armour they are behaving like David did when he killed Goliath. Though, whilst the Philistines took Saul’s armour and publicised what they had done round the land of the Philistines David simply put Goliath’s armour in his tent 1Sam 17:54.

31:7    To understand the significance of the fact that the Philistines dwelt in the villages in the Jezreel Valley a map should be consulted and the location of the valley in relation to the Philistine territory should be considered. They, it seems, controlled the whole of the coastal plain!

31:1     this is exactly the opposite of what God, through Moses, said would happen – DDeut 28:7– a clear indication of Saul and Israel’s disobedience.

31:12 The men of Jabesh – in honour of Saul – risked their lives to recover the bodies. Now they “buried” the bones. Giving Saul a proper burial where his ancestors came from rather than taking his bones back to his home town of Gibeah in Benjamin

31:12The men of Jabesh – in honour of Saul – risked their lives to recover the bodies. Now they “burnt” the bones. This could not have been an act of dishonour. So we might conclude that cremation is not wrong.

31:3  the mention of “archers” here gives a clear indication as to what weaponry the Philistines had. it is incidental comments like this that enable us to build comprehensive pictures of a nation’s capabilities.

31:4 The glory of Israel was about to be killed. Saul was the Lord’s anointed. But notice his concern. It was not for the things of God. It was himself. Notice the repeated use of “me” in this verse.

31:12  We might conclude that the Philistines were seeking Saul and his sons so that they, as they might have thought, could extinguish the leadership of Israel and thus demoralise them. One wonders whether they were aware that David had been anointed as a replacement for Saul.

v.10 - Considering the problems there were in the early church persuading the Jews to recognise that circumcision was no longer a requirement to be in covenant relationship with God, this verse must have been a very emotive curse - to be accused of 'their ear is uncircumcised' is more than just saying 'they won't listen'. Isa.28:12,13, Eze.3:18-21, Matt.3:7.

v.6-8 - Even though Yahweh had determined to bring the Babylonians against Jerusalem there was still an opportunity for them to repent - hence v8 'be instructed ...lest I make thee desolate'. Again we ask. Do we listen to the chastening hand of God?

v.2 - The comely and delicate woman is soon condemned for her violation of God's ways. Lam.2:1,13

Jesus used these words to encourage his disciples to lay aside the weights of the world and accept the strictures of taking up the cross. It seems paradoxical that taking up the cross will give rest. However it does now give rest from the anxieties of the world and in the kingdom we will enter into the 'rest' prepared for the servants of God (Hebrews 4:9)

:12 Here we have yet another quotation from the curses of Deuteronomy 28:30

6:2 Jerusalem here, is a comely woman. By the time she is in captivity(Eze 16) she is a depraved woman who has sold herself.

V.30 "Reprobate silver" Silver so full of alloy as to be utterly worthless (Isa 1:22) The children of Israel were fit only for rejection.

V.1 Jeremiah poetically describes aspects of Jerusalem's forthcoming destruction.  Fleeing from the danger of impending doom is a natural re-action and Jeremiah is playing on this.  He appeals to Benjamin to flee Jerusalem because Jerusalem was in Benjamin's territory, close to the border with Judah (Judg 1:21).  

The town of Tekoa was located about ten miles south of Jerusalem, in Judah.  However, I think Jeremiah was not referring to the town specifically but rather to its meaning, which is place of setting up a tent.  Thus, the call was to flee Jerusalem and set up its tent in another place, out of danger.  

Jeremiah also advocated setting a signal fire to warn Beth Hakkerem.  Beth Hakkerem means house of the vineyard which signifies Yahweh's people. They would become despoiled (v.9). 

However, Jeremiah is not necessarily advocating that Judah should physically flee and set up its tent elsewhere.  Rather he is using these figures to warn the people to repent and put their trust in Yahweh who will save them: for He is the true tent of safety (Psa 27:5).

V.14 The cry of peace is reminiscent of the Day of the Lord that Paul talks about (1Thess 4:2,3).

Why didn't Judah and Benjamin listen?  God said over and over again that a strong enemy would come against them, (Jer 6:22-25), but they did nothing about it. Let’s make sure that WE listen to the Lord’s words.

6:25  The way that Jeremiah speaks of ‘fear on every side’ is rather like the way that Ecc 12:5  speaks of the state of a man as he ages. So Jerusalem is an old man who is about to die, that is the analogy that the prophet is making.

Jer 6:13-15 - from the least to the greatest, false prophets and corrupt priests covetous, greedy for gain, practising deceit ("justifying the wicked for a reward" which Christ condemned in the parable of the unjust steward Luke 16:11-15; Isa 5:23); the prophets told the people and leaders what they wanted to hear falsely prophesying peace (Jer 14:13-16) or victory when there would be war or destruction; they had no shame. Jer 6:14-15 God's remedy for lying and no shame (Jer 6:16;Matt 11:20-30). Some of the above gleaned from The Ministry of Jeremiah by C.C.Walker.

6:15 In questioning ‘were they ashamed’ and answering ‘they were not at all ashamed’ Jeremiah is returning to the point he has already made in 3:3

6:1 ‘evil out of the north’ is the chilling warning that the Chaldeans are coming. Whilst Babylon is East of Israel the way that the Chaldeans came was round the fertile crescent and down through Lebanon, taking the fenced cities of Judah on the way towards Jerusalem

V.1 Both Tekoa and Beth Haccherem lie to the south of Jerusalem.  Physically, in the face of an invader from the north, the tendency would be to flee southward.  Jeremiah's warning is to flee.  However, he is indicating a flight from sin and Judah's evil ways.  He is advocating fleeing from iniquity to the safety of Yahweh.  Fleeing physically from Jerusalem would not guarantee safety, but fleeing to Yahweh would.

6:10 The uncircumcised ear that the prophet speaks of matches the uncircumcised heart of Jer 4:4.

FIRST AID

If we had a good friend, who through a serious accident began to bleed to death, what would we do? No doubt we would rush in with all the first aid skills we could muster. We would do everything we could to stem the bleeding. We would call an ambulance and warn the patient not to aggravate the injury because any extra aggravation would result in death.

What we would not do is to rush in with a child's sticking plaster and say, "You'll be alright now. You'll be better in a few minutes." But in those few minutes they will be dead because they haven't received the treatment they needed to keep them alive.

God describes Judah as having a deadly wound. They were not bleeding to death, but sin was killing them. They even had the spiritual doctors on hand - priests, Levites and prophets - but they didn't take it seriously. God said, "They dress the wound of my people as though it were not serious. 'Peace, peace,' they say, when there is no peace." (Jer 6:14)

How seriously do we take sin? It is no less deadly than someone bleeding to death, or dying of AIDS, or terminal cancer - it just does not look as severe or obvious. If we would not leave someone to die physically, why would we leave them to perish eternally? Shouldn't we give them the opportunity to live? Wouldn't we rather give them the opportunity to save their life rather than saying "You're ok. God loves you," when we know they will perish in their sins?

v 10,11 First Principles>Kingdom of God>Was overturned>History of fulfilment
Go to Deut 28:49 to see more details of the history of Israel and its overturning.

V.3 The shepherds with their flocks refers to the leaders of invaders and their armies (Jer 4:17).  The invaders in question would be the Babylonians.

V.4 Invading armies would avoid attacking at noon, the hottest part of the day.  However, The Babylonians would be so keen in their campaign that they would gladly attack at noon.

V.5 The Babylonians’ eagerness to destroy Jerusalem would carry them also into the night hours.

V.8 Even at this juncture, Yahweh would be willing to have His people repent.

V.9 The Babylonians were to scoop up the remnant who had not been killed and cart them into captivity (2Kin 24:14).

V.11 Old, young, man, or woman, God is no respecter of persons (Acts 10:34).

V.16 The old (ancient) paths are the ways of Yahweh; true worship.

V.17 One of the trumpet’s  functions was to warn the people (v.1; Joel 2:1).

V.22 All the major invaders of Yahweh’s people in the Land came from the north: The Assyrians came against Israel and took them captive (Isa 10:5; Zeph 2:13); The Babylonians, referenced in this verse; and Russia and its confederates will invade Israel, in the end times (Eze 38:15).

V.26 Yahweh’s people will ultimately mourn for an only son when Jesus returns (Zech 12:10).

Is the old better?

The advice in v16 is a real challenge to many of us; me included. It says:

"ask for the old paths, where the good way is, and walk in it"

Most of us want progress, not relapse. We want to press on to new things, not fall back to the old. We feel that what has already been understood before us, can't be nearly as important as that which has yet to be revealed. For example, how many of us will read an old classic rather than a newly released novel? When we learn an instrument, will we use the tune book that taught our Grandma, or a new method from the music store?

And the gospel seems to be partially to blame for this attitude, because we read of the new wine in (Matt 9:17) and the new covenant (Luke 22:20). But the key is to discern the difference between new and re-new. It may surprise us that these are actually old testament quotes (Joel 2:19, 3:18, Amos 9:13, Jer 31:31). When we look at the Gospel Jesus taught we find that it was wholly based on the old testament; even the principles laid out in the old law of Moses. So it was a re-newing. A bringing back to basics. Yes, it was presented in a wholly new, fresh, vibrant way in the person of the Lord who demonstrated these principles so well. But non-the-less they were old principles. Ancient principles.

So in Jer 6:16 Israel is asked to regress, fall back, turn around from their "progress" along the wrong path. There is no doubt that they saw it as positive progress, an indication of which is that they had modified God's incense recipe to use exotic foreign ingredients (v20). But God wanted them to recapture the holiness they once had under Solomon and Hezekiah, with their worship ordered just as God had designed. And so for us the uncomfortable possibility that we may personally be progressing very nicely along the wrong path, away from God rather than towards Him. God's request to us is "listen to the call" (v17) to examine our path, and heed God's exact words (v19), re-new our worship according to His recipe (v20), find the old trusted paths and progress in them (v16) and then we will find rest in our worship.

Verse 13 in the NIV reads "From the least to the greatest, all are greedy for gain; ...." how true is this of the consumer society in which most of us live and are affected by!
      

6:10 The way Jeremiah speaks of the uncircumcised ear is picked up – Acts 7:51 – by Stephen when testifying about the risen Christ.

6:17    ‘we will not hearken’ is a direct rebuttal of God’s command in Deut 6:3

6:26     The ‘only son’ <3173>, that the people mourn for is, in fact, Messiah.  The word is used to speak of Isaac – Gen 22:2, 12, 16 where it is translated ‘only son’ and in prophecy Jesus in Amos 8:10 and Zech 12:10 where, again, it is translated ‘only son’.

6:6    This is one of a number of places where God speaks of a siege of Jerusalem. The “mount” is echoed in Jesus’ words in Luke 19:43

6:22   Whilst Babylon was to the East of Israel she is described as from the “North country”. This is because all invasions of Israel by countries to the East travel round the fertile crescent and invade from the North. 

DECISIONS, DECISIONS!

We have a son and daughter who have been in the midst of making life decisions recently. One was planning a trip overseas, and the other was deciding whether education, a job, or missionary work is what she should be doing during this year. I have felt like that too, and it is hard to know what to do.

It seems Israel were in a similar place. God's advice to them was this: "Stand at the crossroads and look; ask for the ancient paths, ask where the good way is and walk in it, and you will find rest for your souls." (Jer 6:16).

So, here are three things that could help make those decisions:

1. Stand at the crossroads and look. Don't just rush on. Take time to consider the options, and make a wise choice.

2. Ask for the ancient paths. What would Jesus do? What would David or Abraham have done? What would your parents recommend? And above all, ask God for those answers.

3. Ask where the good way is. Of all the options we have, which is the best - from God's perspective? Ask Him, and He will help reveal it to you.

Let us choose God's ways - the best ways - and walk in them. 

6:30      In saying that the people are “reprobate silver” Jeremiah is re-presenting what God had already said by an earlier prophet – Isa 1:22

OUTLINE OF JEREMIAH

PART TWO -- THE PROPHECIES TO JUDAH (JEREMIAH 2:1 to 45:5)

I. The Condemnation of Judah (Jeremiah 2:1 to 25:38)

   B. Second Sermon - Judah To Be Judged (Jeremiah 3:6 to 6:30):

      43. Jer 6:1 - "Benjamin<1144>" may refer to the men of Judah just as Ephraim stands for Israel (Jer 7:15); Jerusalem, though the capital of Judah, was geographically in the tribe of Benjamin (Josh 18:16-28;Judg 1:21); "Bethhaccherem<1021>" could be modern "Ramat Rachel" which is south of Jerusalem and north of Bethlehem or "Ain Karim" which would be west of Jerusalem; "Tekoa<8620>" (Amos 1:1) which is 12 miles south of Jerusalem and 5 miles south of Bethlehem; the disaster out of the north would be Babylon with perhaps a faint echo of the Gogian host.

      44. Jer 6:2-3 - the comely and delicate daughter of Zion would have shepherds (the enemy from the north) devouring the good of the land.

      45. Jer 6:4-5 - the determination of the enemy of the north to attain victory.

      46. Jer 6:6 - trees cut down to construct siege works against Jerusalem.

      47. Jer 6:8 - (KJV) "my soul<5315>", in what sense does God have a soul? Perhaps the ESV warning reads more clearly, "Be warned, O Jerusalem, 'lest I turn from you in disgust, lest I make you a desolation, an uninhabited land."

      48. Jer 6:9 - gleaning the remnant of Israel as one gleans the last grapes from a vine.

   B. Second Sermon - Judah To Be Judged (Jeremiah 3:6 to 6:30):

      49. Jer 6:10 - they have uncircumcised ears and aren't listening to God's warning (Matt 11:15;Luke 8:18;Acts 7:51-53;Jer 4:4;Rev 2:7,11,17,29;Rev 3:6,13,22).

      50. Jer 6:12 - their houses turned over to others (i.e. Babylonians) along with their fields and wives (Deut 28:30).

      51. Jer 6:16-19 - repentance would be their last chance to escapep ruin; V16 the unheeded appeal to seek the ancient paths in order to find rest for your "souls(<5315> - if a soul was immortal and ghostlike would it get tired and need rest?" (Matt 11:29); V17 the watchmen were the godly prophets (Eze 3:17;Hos 9:8) but they weren't listened to; V19 they rejected God's law and later Christ (Matt 5:17).

      52. Jer 6:20 - "Sheba<7614>" supplied incense to much of the ancient world (Jer 7:21); incense from Sheba but to what purpose?

      53. Jer 6:20-21 - V21 stumbling blocks (Jer 6:19;Eze 3:20;Eze 7:19 stumbling blocks were simply the fruit of their devices; Jesus crucified was the great stumbling block for the Jews 1Cor 1:23;Isa 8:14;Rev 17:14).

   B. Second Sermon - Judah To Be Judged (Jeremiah 3:6 to 6:30):

      54. Jer 6:22-26 - VS 22-26 description of Jerusalem's destruction by the Babylonians; V22 a great nation from the north (Jer 25:1-18), refers to Babylon but could it faintly echo the Gogian host? V25 terror on every side (Jer 20:4,10;Jer 46:5;Jer 49:29) so avoid the fields and the roads; V26 mourning as for an only son (echoes Zech 12:10-14) as the destroyer is imminent.

      55. Jer 6:27-30 - Jeremiah had to persist in his testimony; God's people would not be refined/purified as a fine metal, they were unrefined ore (1Pet 1:7;Job 23:10); V27 Jeremiah was a tower and a fortress (Jer 1:18); V30 "the Lord hath rejected them".

6:28  Israel are likened to brass and iron – a description a later prophet – Eze 21:18 – uses to speak of the same people who had been taken into captivity. So we see that the words of Jeremiah were not heeded.

6:1       this is the only time in the prophets that “children of Benjamin” is used. So we might conclude that Jeremiah is speaking specifically to a group of  those living in Jerusalem

6:25     Fear on every side here and in  49:29 is based on the name Magormissabib in  20:2

6:7 The prophet returns to the idea of “violence and spoil” – Jer 20:8 – when he speak of what he has said and how what he said had little effect on the people.

6:4-69 Jeremiah now, in Israel’s hearing, gives what would be instructions to Babylon as to how they were to attack Jerusalem. Chilling words indeed for those seeking refuge in Jerusalem.

6:8 God did depart from Israel. Ezekiel saw in vision the departure of the glory of God – Eze 10:18. Wat Ezekiel saw was a consequence of the people not taking heed to Jeremiah’s warnings.

6:15 Like the contemporary prophet – Zeph 3:5 – the nation was not shamed by their evil behaviour. We ask “Why?” and answer the question for ourselves. They were not ashamed and could not blush because they did note even realise that what they were doing was wrong because they were not instructed in the ways of righteousness. The priests did not teach them and they did not read God’s laws for themselves. The lesson is clear. We must read scripture for ourselves even if we have faithful teachers instructing us.

6:10 The despair of “to whom shall I speak?”! Her had a message but there was no one willing to listen. The people were no better than the uncircumcised nations – those who had no knowledge of God.

Have you ever been disappointed that when you had something to say there was nobody who wanted to listen to you?

Spare a thought for the despair and sadness of the prophet and his God.

6:24 When the Chaldeans came against Judah it was not as if those in Israel had no idea what they were like. They had heard of the way that they had conquered other nations and showed no mercy. This, of itself, should have caused the nation to return to Yahweh because showing mercy was one of his characteristics –Exo 34:6-7.

v.4 - The word tabernacle <4633> occurs here and on 19 other occasions in the New Testament (listed at the end). An interesting one is Luke 16:9 where it is translated 'habitations' in the context of what the mammon of unrighteousness are, by inference, not able to supply. This, along with the refs. in Hebrews, leads us to a greater understanding of Rev.21:3, where the whole argument culminates. [here, Mark 9:5, Luke 9:33, 16:9, Acts 7:43-44, 15:16, Heb.8:2,5, 9:2,6,8,11,21, 11:9, 13:10, Rev.13:6, 15:5, 21:3].

v.5 - It is said of Jesus that the Lord was well pleased with him on two occasions. At his baptism and at the transfiguration. [Matthew 3:17 17:5 Mark 1:11] This highlights the importance of those two events. Peter refers to is in his exposition of the transfiguration. [2 Peter 1:17] The language is drawn from [Isaiah 42:1]
v.9 - There are a number of occasions when Jesus tells His disciples that they should not make him known. [Matthew 8:4 16:20 17:9 Mark 7:36 8:30 9:9 Luke 5:14 8:56 9:21] On this occasion he does not want the disciples to advertise that he is the Messiah. It is not that Jesus does not want people to know that he was the Messiah but rather he wanted the people to recognise this for themselves from the things which they saw him do and heard him say.

17:3 Whilst we might think that the appearance of Moses and Elijah may be somewhat arbitrary they occur together in Malachi 4:4,5 in a prophecy about the work prior to the coming of Jesus.

We may discuss what actually happened - whether Moses and Elijah were actually there or whether it was 'just' a vision. It is instructive to note that the disciples are not presented as being concerned about that. Rather they are concerned with what Scripture says against the background of what the scribes say (Matthew 17:10)

There are startling similarities between the account of the transfiguration, and the receiving of the law by Moses. The obvious one is that both men ascended a mountain, received word from God, and came down with their faces shining from beholding His glory. In v5, God proclaims for a second time that He is well pleased with His son, but this time He adds "hear ye him!".

Starting at the formation of the nation of Israel, God had been trying to get them to listen to him. It started with the ten commandments written in stone tablets, and carried on right through the law and the prophets. Israel had always been hard of hearing. God was finally sending His own son, and telling them "hear ye Him!" (Mark 12v6). Jesus was the last, best, and most perfect way that God could get His message through to His people.... the message that He was a gracious and loving God who was worthy to be served. This is why Jesus was called "the word made flesh" (John 1v14). He was a living, breathing, human demonstration of God's word and His character. If they didn't heed that, then what would they heed? (Luke 16v31)

A further point to ponder:

Hebrews 3v19 and 4v6 tell us that Israel could not cast out the people dwelling in Canaan "because of unbelief". Do you think there are parallels with Matt 17v20?

17:11-12 This prophecy is to have two fulfilments.  John the Baptist came "in the spirit and power of Elijah" Luke 1:17 as the first fulfilment of this prophecy. The second fulfilment will be when Elijah himself, raised from the dead, will come and preach to Israel.  So the prophecy in Mal 4:5-6 had a fulfilment in John the Baptist and will be completely fulfilled at the time of the return of Jesus. 

V.20 The disciples had not sufficiently taken to heart the comfort they should have derived from the assurances which their Lord had given them.Matt 7:7-10, Matt 10:8, and had not persisted in prayer. On the subject of little faith we have many references. Matt 6:30, Matt 8:26, Matt 14:31, Matt 16:8

V.1 After six days, Jesus took Peter, James, and John up a mountain.  Mark's record would agree with this (Mark 9:2), while Luke says it was after eight days (Luke 9:28).  Why the apparent discrepancy?

V. 21 This verse is found in the KJV but not included in more modern versions.

17:19 The disciples had already been given authority to cast out devils – Matt 10:8 – so they may well have wondered. Maybe they thought that having been given the authority they simply needed to do the work, not realising that the continuing power came from God.

17:9     Jesus now introduces, for the first time in Matthew’s record the idea that he is going to die and rise again.

V.5 Moses represented the Law; and Elijah represented prophecy. But, Yahweh endorsed only His Son.  All the things under the Law, and all prophecy pointed to Jesus, the Messiah (Luke 24:44).  Jesus is the focal point of all creation, and is the only one who can save (Acts 4:12).  Yahweh has given Him all power (1Cor 15:27). 

Jesus will return shortly to earth to judge, to destroy evil, and to reign in righteousness (1Cor 15:25; Rev 11:15; 22:12).  The present times are evil and becoming more turbulent.  These are signs that the Lord will soon be here (Luke 17:26; 21:26).  Before He returns we are told that we can expect worsening conditions (economic, political, social etc.).  Only those who are Christ's can be assured of salvation (Dan 12:1).  Is your name written in the book (Rev 21:27)?

17:5 This is the second time that God has voiced these words about Jesus. The first being at his baptism – Matt 3:17

Vs.1-8 Perhaps Peter, James and John were chosen to accompany Jesus because they would become important leaders for Him. Peter would be the apostle to the Jews (Acts 4:8); James would be the leader of the main ecclesia at Jerusalem (Acts 21:17,18); John, the favoured apostle, would be given the privilege of receiving the Apocalypse (Revelation) (Rev 1:1).

The transfiguration was both a look into the future and a lesson for the present.  Through this vision, Jesus is seen with Moses and Elijah in a luminous display.  Moses represented the Law, while Elijah represented the prophets. 

In one sense, the transfiguration was an insight into the future when both Moses and Elijah (who represented the faithful of old) would be resurrected to abide for ever with Jesus in His kingdom.  Their clothes being white as the light represented the garb of the Redeemed (the bride of Jesus; the righteous of all ages) (Rev 19:18).

The lesson for the present was to establish Jesus as the only Savior of mankind (Acts 4:12).  Moses and Elijah were both Christ-types who made intercession for the people (Exo 32:10-14; Rom 11:2). But, Jesus would become the greatest intercessor of all (Heb 7:25).

After the three were displayed, Yahweh spoke and endorsed Jesus as the one the disciples should hear.  Jesus fulfilled the Law and the prophets (Matt 5:17). That is the reason the disciples found Jesus alone, and that the representatives of the Law and the prophets, Moses and Elijah, were gone.

Jesus was the greatest prophet (Acts 3:22). Jesus also superseded the Law and became the subject of the second greatest Law (Matt 22:37-39). (For a greater understanding of this, e-mail me for The Parable of the Good Samaritan).

17:27 The ‘piece of money’ was worth one shekel. This is based on Exo 30:13  where each person counted had to pay half a shekel – the fish covered both Peter and Jesus.

Is the mountain in v1 the same one used in the lesson of v20?

17:14 We should remember that whilst Jesus, Peter, James and John were on the mount the remainder of the disciples were at the foot of the mountain and things were happening to them.  Completely unaware of the events on the mountain top they struggled with the charge that they had been given Matt 10:8.

Matt 17:1-8

"...and he (Jesus) was transfigured before them..."

We may read the parallel accounts of the Transfiguration in Mark 9:2-8 and Luke 9:28-36.

From the day that Peter confessed that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God (Matt 16:16), Jesus began to show his disciples that he must suffer many things and be killed, but be raised from the dead on the third day (verse 21). Peter scorns this prediction, and it is in this context the Transfiguration is presented, confirming Peter’s confession, and that Christ must die in order to enter into his glory.

In all three accounts we read that Jesus was accompanied by Peter, James, and John up to a high mountain, but it is only in Luke that we read the purpose was to engage in prayer (Luke 9:28), and that while Jesus prayed to his Father, the experience of the Transfiguration occurred (verse 29). Jesus was a man of prayer and he often went apart to pray (cf. Matt 14:23; Mark 1:35; Luke 6:12), but on this occasion he took with him three of his disciples.

As Jesus prayed, his facial appearance changed and his clothes became glistening white at which time Moses and Elijah appeared. When Moses was in the presence of God receiving the Law, his appearance was also altered (Exo 34:20-35). Elijah, on the other hand, represented the prophets of the Old Testament, but not just a prophet, but the leader of the sons of the prophets in his day (2Kin 2:3). These two men were held with greatest prominence and esteem by the Jews, therefore it was necessary for Jesus’ disciples to see this vision of Moses and Elijah discussing Jesus’ upcoming death and understand that with his death the force of the Laws revealed and taught by the Old Testament prophets ended (Col 2:14-17). Had Peter fully understood the significance of these events, he would not have said what he said (Mark 9:5-6). He wanted the Old Testament prophets to stay that perhaps they may continue to learn from all three teachers, but God overshadowed them with a cloud causing them to fear as they entered into it, and told them they were to listen to His son only, after which they saw no one, but Jesus. Clouds often indicated the LORD’s presence (Exo 12:21-22; 33:9-10). The Transfiguration was a miraculous confirmation that God was speaking through Jesus, as surely as He had in the past spoken through Moses and Elijah (Heb 1:1-2). Jesus, the son of God, was the law-maker and prophet of the New Testament or Covenant (Acts 3:20-24; Col 1:18). The three disciples, named in all three accounts, demonstrated the three witnesses that Jesus is who he claimed to be (see Deut 19:15).

The word, “transfigured” is the Greek word, metamorphoo, # <3339>, and means to “change, transform.”  As a verb it also means to change the outside to match the inside. In the case of Jesus’ transfiguration, the outside garment of glistening white matched Jesus’ inner nature. Jesus displayed the Shekinah glory of his Father, God’s voice attesting the second time to the truth of his sonship (Matt 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22).

The Transfiguration gives us a unique glimpse into the divine character of Jesus, who being in the form (morphe) of God also took on the form (morphe) of a servant (Phil 2:5-11). Christ’s life – his words, deeds, his silences, sufferings, his manner of being and speaking was a reflection of the Father. Jesus could say, “he that hath seen me hath seen the Father” (John 14:9), and the Father could say, “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.” The Transfiguration also gives us a foretaste that it is through much tribulation we will enter the kingdom of God (Acts 14:22), and at Christ’s glorious coming, if we heeded him, he will change (transfigure) our lowly bodies to be like his glorious body (Phil 3:21).

Matt 17:9

“And as they came down from the mountain, Jesus charged them, saying, Tell the vision to no man, until the Son of man be risen from the dead.”

I read a lot of the pros and cons on whether the Transfiguration was literal or not, and sometimes we can get so bogged down trying to figure it out that we may miss the profound messages of the Transfiguration itself contained in verses 1-8, which also strengthened Jesus for his upcoming crucifixion.  The message is, of course, of the utmost importance. Having said that, I will present reasons why the Transfiguration truly was a vision.

For one, Jesus said it was! A vision is not material reality.  According to Strong’s Concordance the definition of vision, # <3705>, horama, is “a spectacle (espec. supernat.): sight, vision.” The Transfiguration was a prophetic vision, which would be realized in the future.

Peter used this same Greek word for the vision he had of unclean beasts made clean (Acts 10:3,17,19; 11:5). It was not real, but a supernatural revelation of future events.

Paul had a vision, horama, of a Macedonian man asking him to come to Macedonia. This was a future event (Acts 16:9).

The Lord spoke to Paul in a vision, horama, telling him in the near future no one would hurt him (Acts 18:9-10).

In the book, NAZARETH REVISITED by Robert Roberts, he writes on page 323-4 (Logos Publications): “…In his own person (Jesus), he would show in advance the glory of his power and coming of which he so frequently spoke. How powerfully it (transfiguration) affected the minds of the three apostles who beheld it is manifest from the words of Peter…” (2Pet 1:16-18). “The event thus referred to, occurred immediately after the conversation about what men thought of Christ. Christ prepared them for it by saying, ‘Verily I say unto you, there be some standing here which shall not taste of death till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.’ The transfiguration was a vision of this, in a realistic presentment…” (Words in parentheses and highlight added).

In the book, Christadelphian Answers, a compilation of the writings of the various pioneer brethren, it states on page 81 (THE Herald Press), “THIS incident is frequently cited as evidence of the separate existence of an immortal soul, it being contended that as Moses died and was buried (Deut 34.5.6) he must have had a ‘double’ to have appeared with Elijah and Christ on the Mount of Transfiguration (Mark ix.4). But those who so contend omit to notice that Christ said that what they saw was ‘a Vision’ (Matt xvii.9); that is, a pictorial representation of the Kingdom of God, in so far as it represented Jesus exalted over the Law as represented by Moses; and above the prophets as represented by Elijah.”

Moses was made a ruler and deliverer of Israel; Elijah, the restorer of all things, but God made His son “both Lord and Christ” (Acts 2:36). In vision both they and Jesus were seen in glory of the resurrection, an event to which Moses and Elijah have not yet attained (Heb 11:39-40). This vision was granted to these three disciples after Jesus had spoken of the glory of immortality in the coming Kingdom still in the future.

In Scripture visions represent future events, and are not to be taken literally. The Transfiguration is no more literal than Joseph’s dreams were (Gen 37:5-10). God reveals things to come by dreams, visions, in figures and parables, and the same things are often revealed again and again by different dreams, visions, or in different figures and parables (Psa 89:19; Dan 8:2; Hos 12:10; Hab 2:2-3; Acts 2:17; Heb 9:9,24). Would you conclude from any of these passages that they are literal? Visions in Scripture are just that – visions, and are always mentioned as such (2Cor 12:1).

Matt 17:1-13

A reader writes concerning the events of the Transfiguration:

“The Transfiguration was not a vision. Moses and Elijah were present in body.  Jesus was transfigured before the 3 disciples while fully awake and Peter carried on a conversation with Jesus believing the event was real.”

My reply:

According to Christ, the Transfiguration was a vision (Matt 17:9), and that of his future glorification, and of the future of the coming Kingdom of God. What the apostles saw was real, but not something that actually happened right there and then in their time.  Jesus was not yet glorified, but received a vision of his glorification. Christ’s glorification was to actually happen after his death and resurrection, Christ being the first-fruits of the brethren that died to be raised and after glorified, or made immortal (Rom 8:29-30; 1Cor 15:20,23,43-44). It is impossible then, that Moses (representing the Law) and Elijah (representing the Prophets) actually appeared in their literal glorified bodies (Luke 9:31 cf. Heb 11:39-40) before Christ, but they will be glorified in due time sharing in the last great Old Testament prophecy of the Second Coming of Christ (Mal 4:4-5). How appropriate then that they appear with Christ at the Transfiguration! Scripture does not contradict itself, nor will God ever go against His own decrees.

It would seem to me that your general understanding is that to be able to have a vision we have to be fast asleep, and since the apostles were fully awake and conversations took place, the vision was not a vision. God spoke to His people in many different ways, including by dreams, trances, and visions. Dreams occur when one is asleep; a trance is not a dream, but is a state of altered mental disposition while awake; a vision occurs while one is awake, which may include being in a trance, but does not have to be. In a similar fashion we have the apostle John who being in the Spirit heard, saw and talked concerning the visions given him of the future by our Messiah, and wrote them down (Rev 1:10-11). In a similar fashion, the apostle Peter being in a trance, heard, saw, and talked while he was having his vision (Acts 10:9-19).They were active participants in their visions. Likewise, we read in Num 24:4, “…Which saw the vision of the Almighty, falling into a trance, but having his eyes open”! The apostles’ spiritual eyes and senses were opened even if just for a few moments, enabling them to glimpse into the future. This vision strengthened them for the days ahead, for “without a vision, the people perish” (Prov 29:18)! The apostles did not yet fully understand that Christ had to suffer many things and be crucified (Matt 16:21-23).

It was necessary that they be awake to see the Transfiguration, just as it is for us to stay awake, and not sleep as do others (1Thess 5:6). Later, Peter, himself, described this event as a revelation of Christ’s future coming kingdom, and testified of his full understanding of it (2Pet 1:16-19; cf. 1Pet 1:9-12). John could go on to say, “Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is” (1John 3:2) in his Shekinah glory as shown to him in the Transfiguration.

17:4 Peter’s response here shows a lack of appreciation of what was happening. But he had to say something. Jesus does not answer his response because there was no need. However when peter asks a question again – Matt 18:21 – Jesus sees a need to answer and so does.

Matt 17:1-8.

17:23   Whilst Jesus had known for some time that he was going to die his disciples had been shielded from that information. Now they are told about Jesus’ death they are “sorrowful” but clearly did not appreciate the significance of what Jesus had said. 

17:20   Faith that could move mountains is referred to again by Paul –1Cor 13:2

It was after six days that Jesus went  up the mount with the three disciples Matt 17:1 before he was transfigured. Now the transfiguration revealed the Lord Jesus Christ in the Kingdom. It was  necessary as it made the work of the Lord Jesus a reality. They spoke about His decease and the way in which He brought many sons and daughters to glory. It strengthened our Lord for the way of the cross, so that He could see beyond the pain and the suffering to the glory that should follow. But why do we have after six days?  It's because after six days (6000 years) of man being upon the earth we have the establishment of the Kingdom, when Jesus sits and reigns on the throne of David and the saints are glorified, when the Lord Jesus will see His seed and be satisfied

17:15  In saying that his son fell into the ‘fire’ and ‘water’ we see the son as a picture of Israel. They did not trust God and so the promise of Isa 43:2 was not seen in their (his) lives

17:5     The whole transfiguration experience was a little like Moses receiving the Law on Sinai. The use of the phrase “’voice out of the cloud’ reminds us of Exo 19:16 when Moses received the Law.

17:2     Whilst  we might think the evidence of an eye witness was the most powerful testimony we could have Peter tells us that there is something even more reliable than an eye witness account. It is the testimony of Scripture – 2Pet 1:19

17:24-26  Notice he shift tom Peter to Simon and back to Peter again. Simon Peter was his name – Matt 4:18. The Pere, the “rock” had not been listening “Simon” to Jesus’ teaching so was being reminded of that by Jesus’ use of Simon rather than the “Peter” that the tax gatherers had used.

17:5 “this is … well pleased” is quoted – 2Pet 1:17 indicating that by the time that Peter wrote to his audience Matthew’s gospel was in circulation and well known.

17:20 The Lord Jesus here uses language from Job 9:5: “Which removeth the mountains”. Job 9 also links with Christ walking on the waters (see Bro. Peter Forbes on Job 9:8 and Matthew 14:25 in comment for Dec. 7th, 2011). Both examples relate to faith (see Mt. 14:31) and strike a tension with Job’s words: “yet would I not believe …” (Job 9:16).

17:1 the “mountain” here   is called “the holy mount” in 2Pet 1:18. The transfiguration forms a major theme in 2Pet 1. You may care to look for the other links with Matt 17:1-6

17:2-6 the transfiguration must have been an amazing experience for Peter, James ad John. An unforgettable experience. What more could one want having been an eyewitness to Jesus in his glory?

Well there is something more amazing than that eyewitness event. Peter was inspired to write about his experience at the transfiguration  - 2Pet 1:14-18 – and said that the written testimony of scripture is more credible than what he saw with his own eyes – 2Pet 1:19-21 – because scripture is given by inspiration of God.

17:19  it is evident that the disciples who remained at the foot of the mountain had tried to cure the bod. We might conclude also that they had effected miracles already or else they would not have tried on this occasion.

17:6  Peter – 2Pet 1:18– reminds his audience that the voice was clearly heard by him and, by implication, the other two with him. But Peter then continues by asserting that the written words of scripture are more credible than his own eyewitness evidence – 2Pet 1:19-21

CLOSER THAN YOU THINK
When the people came around collecting the temple tax, Peter insisted that Jesus would be one of those who would also be paying. I am sure he thought he was right until Jesus had a quiet word with him. "When Peter came into the house, Jesus was the first to speak. ‘What do you think, Simon?’ he asked. ‘From whom do the kings of the earth collect duty and taxes – from their own children or from others?’
‘From others,’ Peter answered.
‘Then the children are exempt,’ Jesus said to him." (Matt 17:25-26).

Peter had a lesson to learn. The temple was God's house. Jesus was the Son of God. Being the Son of God, Jesus was then free of paying the tax for the house of God.

Then came another lesson. Jesus continued, "But so that we may not cause offence, go to the lake and throw out your line. Take the first fish you catch; open its mouth and you will find a four-drachma coin. Take it and give it to them for my tax and yours." (v.27). Jesus didn't have to pay the temple tax because he was the Son of God - and with the four-drachma coin he exempted Peter as well. Peter was also a son of God. What a wonderful lesson! Peter's relationship with God was a much closer relationship than he ever imagined!

How close is our relationship with God? Are we also his sons and daughters?