Comments for August 14

v.3 - Quite clearly it was not the physical building that would last for ever, but the kingdom and the power of God that was represented in the temple. This temple lasts for ever only through Christ, and through him we too are and will be part of its everlasting nature. Eph.2:21, 4:13-16.

v.25 - These are the passages where we are told that 'three times in a year' the males were to present themselves. Exodus 23:14,17 Deuteronomy 16:16. And we see the only occasion during the time of the kings when this is recorded as having happened. 1 Kings 9:25 2 Chronicles 8:13

v.22 provides an interesting contrast to yesterday's Jeremiah comment

9:7-9 In quoting Deuteronomy Solomon, by the Spirit, is showing Israel how that the words of Moses have been fulfilled in their lives because of their faithlessness. This, then became an exhortation and warning for the future.

:4 In calling Solomon to 'walk before me' God is asking Solomon to be like Abraham (Genesis 17:1) Whilst Abraham walked through the land Solomon was settled in that same land. The 'walk' was not a physical walking through the land. It was a way of life.

1Ki 9:13 ‘Cabul’ we often too readily assume means something like ‘disgusting’. We should first remember Hiram’s character, he was ‘ever a lover of David’ and had worked for Solomon for 20yrs

(v1). See 2Sa 5:11, 1Ki 5:1-2, 7-8, 10. I suggest his unhappiness at these 20 cities (one for each year of his service to Solomon v1) was not because of any shortcoming in the cities but because he saw them as implying ‘payment for services rendered’, service which had been readily and freely given out of love for David and his God. Now see Ps 105:18 where the same Heb. word cabul’ [03525] is translated as ‘fetters’ [03521] which had been applied to Joseph when in Egypt.

Hiram sees these cities as ‘fetters’ binding him as a slave to Solomon. So, as you cannot refuse a gift of cities, he sends Solomon payment for them, he is no longer under obligation. For all Solomon’s wisdom he was not always good at ‘man-management’ and could cause offence. We must too learn to read peoples feelings and motives.

9:2 The first time that the Lord appeared to Solomon is seen in 1Kin 3:5. That was at least seven years earlier (1Kin 6:38)

V.20-22 While it is true that the native born Israelite was not enrolled as a labourer, yet he was required to serve the king in a supervisory capacity. The forced labour was raised from the remnant of the Canaanites who otherwise would have been available as servants for the people.

Vs.11,14 The etiquette of the Near East saw a gift given being matched by a gift in return. And so, Solomon gave Hiram twenty cities as a return gift for the 120 talents of gold Hiram had sent him.

Vs.12,13 Unfortunately, the cities that Solomon gave Hiram did not please him.  Hiram called them cabul .

Josephus says that the term cabul is Phoenician and means displeasing. Holman says that cabul is a Hebrew play on words meaning as nothing.

What is clear is that Hiram did not like this gift. These cities seem to have been small and run down, unlike the glorious Tyre in which Hiram lived.

After Hiram had refused to accept these cities, Solomon had them fixed up and gave them to Israelites (2Chron 8:2).

Although it is not recorded, Solomon probably gave Hiram another (acceptable) gift to fulfil Near East etiquette.

9:24  Solomon showed an odd mixture here. Whilst he built a house for the daughter of Pharaoh he realised that she did not really have any part in the things of God. Hence he located her house outside the city of David for that very reason 2Chron 8:11.

The reign of Solomon was to see the result of the work of David develop into a kingdom which was characterised by peace, through conquest and wealth, concentrated mainly in the palace. The nation was now united, not only in the acknowledgement of a single ruler, but also in worship at a central sanctuary. So long as this condition existed, all was well, but as soon as pressures began to build up, then the unity of the nation was not as might have been anticipated.

9:5 In saying that He would "establish the throne of thy kingdom" God is reminding Solomon of the promise that He had made to David – 2Sam 7:12.

Vs.3,5 Yahweh promised two things that would last forever:

(1) The temple in which He placed His Name (v.3).

(2) The throne promised to David (v.5).

Jesus is the temple (John 2:19-21); and He will reign on David's throne when He returns (Luke 1:32).

However, Jesus' personal role as living temple and king is limited.  After the Kingdom Age is completed, all things will revert to Yahweh (1Cor 15:25-28).  

Yahweh is the ultimate king, the one rejected by Israel (1Sam 8:7).  His Name, placed in His Son, shall also live on in His chosen saints (the Redeemed) through the Kingdom Age and beyond (Rev 14:1).

9:11-13        It might seem that Hiram was displeased with the cities that Solomon had given him because they were of little value. However there is another view that we can take of Hiram’s attitude. He had willingly helped Solomon build the temple and his men had been paid what Hiram felt was appropriate – 1Kin 5:6  

-          Further the cities, being in the land of Israel, were part of what God had defined as His kingdom. Hiram, understanding this and being content with the payment he had received reproves Solomon for his behaviour. So Hiram is criticising Solomon’s behaviour rather than disdaining the worth of the cities.

9:3 Whilst the house was built according to the pattern given David and the promise was that Solomon would build the house there was to be no presumption that God was obligated to sanctify it. His willingness to accept the work of Solomon is an indication of God’s grace towards Solomon and the nation of Israel.

v 4-9 First Principles>Kingdom of God>Was overturned
1. The right of Israel to be called God's Kingdom was dependent on their obedience. Go to Exo 19:5 for more details.

Vs.4-9 Yahweh shows the blessings of obedience in vs.4,5.  And, He shows what curses will result from disobedience in vs.6-9.  Notice, Yahweh spends twice as long emphasising the curses than He does in outlining the blessings.  This is a consistent pattern that Yahweh uses to punctuate the gravity of disobeying Him.  For example, in the famous chapter of blessings and curses, Deuteronomy 28, you will notice that the curses are twice as long as the blessings.

V.15 This verse is much clearer in the ESV than in the KJV.  The levy (KJV) was not a monetary tax, as some suppose.  It was forced labour (ESV).

 In order to have his construction projects fulfilled, Solomon needed lots of labour.  And so, he drafted workers.  This forced labour amounted to 30,000 men, about 2% of the population (1Kin 5:13).

Vs.16,17 Gezer was captured by Joshua and given to the Levites (Josh 21:20,21). At some point, subsequently, the city reverted to Canaanite hands.

V.26 Eloth should not be confused with present-day Eilat.  At the time of Solomon, the Sea reached much further inland than it does today.  

The port of Ezion-geber (meaning man’s backbone) was probably situated about 10-15 miles (16-24 km) north of where the port of Eilat stands today. That is because the Red Sea used to cover the marshes of the Arabah. The sea does not reach as far inland today, and the marshes have, subsequently, dried out.  

9:26 Whilst we think of a ‘navy’ as comprising of military ships this is not necessarily implied in the Hebrew word <0590> as this word has its roots in a Hebrew word <0579> which relates to conveyance and not warfare. Further the way in which Solomon used his ‘navy’ indicates it was for trade and not warfare.

9:26  Israel had been in the land for quite some time by now, right through the time of Joshua and the Judges and Saul and David and to date there has not been mention of a ‘navy’ of trading ships. Trading on this scale with other nations had never happened before.  Solomon is establishing Israel as a major nation in the then known world.  A pattern of the coming kingdom of God. Not that the kingdom of God centred on Israel will be a major trading nation but rather it will be in communication with all the nations of the world, not with trade, but with the dissemination of the laws of God.

1Kin 9:26-28

“And king Solomon made a navy of ships in Ezion-geber, which is beside Eloth, on the shore of the Red Sea, in the land of Edom. And Hiram sent in the navy his servants, shipmen that had knowledge of the sea, with the servants of Solomon. And they came to Ophir, and fetched from thence gold, four hundred and twenty talents, and brought it to king Solomon.”

When we read the account of 2Chron 8:17-18, we see that this is another trip. On this trip 450 talents of gold were given, the total of which we read in 1Chron 29:4. Many trips were made to Ophir, and Hiram and Solomon engaged in extensive exchanges (1Kin 5:8,11). There were two fleets, the navy of Tarshish, and the navy of Hiram (1Kin 10:22).

9:5-6   Another occasion when God reminded Solomon that His blessings were conditional upon obedience. 1Kin 6:11-12 made a similar point.

9:3      When the Lord said “mine eyes and mine heart shall be there perpetually” He is reminding Solomon of the promise that he had made in Deut 11:12

A city of Canaanites

Solomon had been having trouble with Gezer. It was one of the last places where Philistines had given David trouble, and where Giants lived (see 1Chron 20:4). Though it was an Israelite city, Israel had failed to drive out the Canaanites from there during their conquest of the land, and were paying the price for it (Josh 16:10). Presumably, these Canaanites had now grown in numbers and influence so much that the city was effectively theirs again. Perhaps we could take a lesson from this. The bad influences we cut down and almost remove at times of spiritual enthusiasm can easily come back again and begin to dominate our lives.

9:10    It is worth noting that the events now described took place half way through Solomon’s reign. 

9:17    The comment that Solomon built cities for his chariots should cause us to wonder whether the possession of chariots (which would be pulled by horses) was an acceptable thing for Solomon to do.

9:16   Gezer was part of the inheritance of Joseph – Josh 16:2. However, even by the time of the Judges the Canaanite still lived in Gezer – Judg 1:29. So when Pharaoh drove out the Canaanite he was doing what Israel had not managed to do.

9:3         Given that God had “heard” Solomon’s prayer – that is accepted it – we do well to learn from the prayer the sort of thing that God is pleased with in prayer that we might imitative such things in our own prayers.

9:24    We should not think that “millo” is a village. Rather it is a wall, it seems, around Jerusalem that is being spoken of here.

9:16-17 Gezer was a city of refuge - Josh 21:21 – so we may see this as a factor which prompted Solomon to rebuild it.

9:27 Notice, the kingdom of God has been established and the Lord is ruling from Jerusalem in the person of Solomon. It is a little like the kingdom. A gentile nation is associated with Solomon and provides him with ships and mariners. In like manner during the 1,000 year reign of Jesus nations will associate with Israel in working in the kingdom.

9:6-9 We have noted in the past that Deut 28 and 29 were quoted by God to Solomon. If Solomon had written a copy of the law as required by all kings and was reading in it daily he would have read those words a number of time already in his reign. Now Yahweh is given them a very specific relevance to Solomon. This, of course, is true of all scripture. It is relevant for daily living.  We do well to remember than when we read parts that we think are rather tedious or challenging.

9:2-3 this second appearance was after the temple had been finished and dedicated. We should consider carefully how often God appeared to individuals. We read, for example, the life of Abraham, and read of angels or God speaking with him but often there are many years between the visits.

9:4 And so God reminded Solomon about the need to walk before Him – 1Kin 3:4 – being one of the places where Solomon was so instructed.

The lesson for us is clear. There is a need for us to be reminded of our responsibilities often.

9:11-12 It would appear that Hiram, on not liking the cities that Solomon gave him, returned them to Solomon –1Chron 8:2

v.14 - The Rechabites, who were Kenites, and therefore included into the Children of Israel because of their relation by marriage to Moses (Judges 1:16), were the descendants of Rechab who was the father of Jonadab. They were obviously a people with great regard to tradition and the like, as they had, for some generations, kept this vow of drinking no wine and being nomadic in their nature. They are then used as an example to the rest of Israel.

The way in which Yahweh uses the Rechabites to instruct the men of Judah is a powerful lesson for us. Would God be able to point us out as examples of obedience to the will of our Father for others to copy?

v.8-10 tells us that these folk lived a very strict life - a life of discipline and self-denial.

35:7-9 The way in which the Rechabites dwelt as strangers - for that is what is implied in being tent dwellers - shows that they held to their life style because, like Abraham, they realised they were strangers and pilgrims (Hebrews 11:13) which was a very pertinent point for those who did not want to go to Babylon.

OBEDIENCE
One of the qualities God looks for in his people, almost above all else, is obedience. Several times in the Bible we read quotes like, "To obey is better than sacrifice." In the time of Jeremiah there was just about no-one who obeyed God. But one family, the Rechabites, were an exception to the rule.
Their Father had given them some instructions that they must not drink wine, build houses, plant vineyards, but always live as nomads in tents. The Rechabites did exactly as they were commanded. When Jeremiah was told to test them and make them drink wine, they refused, choosing instead to obey their father.
So God lifted them up as an example to faithless Israel showing that the Rechabites were commended and blessed for obeying their natural father, when the children of Israel wouldn't obey either their God or their natural parents. The Rechabites were given the promise of serving God for ever because of their faithfulness.
Obedience is still that quality that God wants from us. So let us follow the example of the Rechabites, to be committed, obedient and faithful for the rest of our lives.

In learning that Jeremiah is speaking in the time of Jehoiakim we have gone back in time from the previous chapters. Jeremiah's prophecy is not recorded in chronological order though obviously his message was delivered chronologically there must be a reason for the ordering of the chapters in the prophecy differently from the order in which the words were spoken. Whilst I have no explanation for this we would be better employed finding that reason rather than trying to 'organise' Jeremiah's prophecy into the 'correct' order.

35:14 Remember we have seen before (25:3)  that the prophet speaks of rising early. Actually Jeremiah is the only prophet who makes this point.

To impress upon Judah the full extent of their wickedness, Jeremiah was commanded by God to visit the company of Rachabites that had taken refuge in Jerusalem and bring them before the elders of Judah, and offer them wine to drink. The Rechabites were Gentiles who had embraced the Hope of Israel, and had followed the commandment of one of their leaders to abstain from wine. The attitude of the obedience shown by the Rechabites was in great contrast to the state of disobedience manifested by the people of Judah. Jeremiah impressed this upon the leaders gathered together to witness his action, by pointing out how these Gentiles had proved themselves more righteous than the Israelites.

Vs.8-10 The stringent lifestyle of the Rechabites is reminiscent of the Nazarites. They were true to the commands of their father Jonadab. Yahweh used them as an example of loyalty to Israel. It was Jonadab (Jehonadab) who helped Jehu cleanse the house of Ahab (2Kin 10:15,23).

It is interesting that Jonadab accompanied Jehu in his chariot. Rechab, in Hebrew, means chariot. Could Rechab have been a charioteer in the employ of Israel? Since the Rechabites were Kenites (1Chron 2:55), could it mean that they were metal workers for the chariots? Kenites means smiths, and this nomadic tribe was engaged in itinerant metal work throughout the region.

V.18-19 The LORD promised to reward the desert tribe of the Rachabites, not because of their peculiar ways and practices, but because their faithfulness to the precepts of their father was a firm rebuke to infidelity and hypocrisy among His people, or wherever it may exist. The same promise applies to us today, if we are prepared to turn our backs on the things around us and are faithful to the precepts of our absent king. 

One family obeyed their father, Rechab, but the whole family of Israel would not obey God, their Father. So again, as we saw yesterday, the lesson is obvious.  If they would not obey the Lord God, then the whole house of Judah would be taken captive, whereas the Rechabites would be preserved as a family before God for ever (Jer 35:719).

35:14  In saying that the prophets spoke ‘rising early’ we are not simply being told that the prophets were early risers. Rather they were focused on doing God’s will and did it without delay. So Abraham – Gen 21:14  rose early when he took Isaac to sacrifice him, even though doubtless Abraham had a heavy heart.

35:4 The bringing of the Rechabites into ‘the house of the Lord’ was to show their witness to the Jewish leaders and priests who were there the faithfulness of the sons of Rechab. Their personal testimony would be more powerful than Jeremiah just recounting their faithfulness. In taking them to the house of God and making the request we must appreciate that Jeremiah must have known that they were faithful. If they had taken the wine then Jeremiah’s point would have been destroyed.

The Rechabites obeyed the commands of an earthly father, but Israel had disobeyed their Heavenly Father. A modern comparison that perhaps we all can relate to; is the dedication of the Mormons, who spend two years doing door to door preaching, and the ways of a large number of the youth today, who do nothing but get into trouble with the laws of the land.

V.7 Yahweh used the Rechabites as an object lesson for Judah on loyalty.  The Rachabites were true to their father Jonadab in the matter of never drinking wine.  However, it seems, by living in Jerusalem, they might have violated another of Jonadab's commands, to always live in tents. 

If they did live in houses, the Rechabites, probably, considered that safety and preservation trumped mode of accommodation.  This is reminiscent of the Law's commandment not to work on the Sabbath (Lev 23:3). 

But, as Jesus points out, this Sabbath commandment can be overridden if safety, preservation of life, and well-being are at stake (Matt 12:10-12).

35:1 So we are now back in the time of Jehoiakim. We must remember that Jeremiah’s prophecy is not in chronological order. However rather than trying to re order it to make it fit our understanding of how a book should be chronological we ought to try to work out why God gave it in the way that He did.

V.2 The Rechabites were of the family of Moses' father-in-law Jethro (Judg 1:16).

35:18-19 There is an ironic contrast here. Whilst Zedekiah would be told – Eze 21:27 - ‘I will overturn ... it shall be no more’ the Rechabites were told that they would continue to exist.

Vs.14-16 Yahweh contrasts the loyalty of the Rechabites to their father Rechab, with the disloyalty of Judah to their father, Yahweh.  

Vs.16,17 Because of Judah’s disloyalty to Yahweh, they would be punished.

Vs.18,19 But, because of the Rechabites faithfulness to the commands of their father Rechab, Yahweh established a place for them in His presence.

Going to break bread on Sunday is a trial for us. I always seem to get victimised by one Camel in particular, a vindictive beast that manages every week to find a way of getting to me, spitting, treading on toes, accidentally sitting on the car... you name it. And that's after we've queued for what seems like hours to get into the car park. We then drive past row after row of mules, camels and goats tied to the fence; carefully steering through the flock of sheep who every week become more reluctant to move out of the way. The new family always give us a cheerful wave as if all this is perfectly normal.

Then there's the problem with the bread. This new family don't seem to mind tucking in to three helpings of potato salad each at tea time, but do have some peculiar aversion to bread. The first time they turned up, as you can imagine, was such chaos that we didn't even notice this. But as the weeks went by and they appeared to be becoming a permanent fixture, I really felt I had to go and have a word. "Look, Jon" I said. "This thing about not eating bread. Can't you make an exception at the breaking of bread service? You're part of our fellowship, so why this abstinence? And these animals really don't fit in well with the city. Can't you get a mortgage for a smallholding to keep them in?" Well, I must say that I was expecting an uproar, or at least an unpleasant argument. After all, there's seventeen men in that family, and only five of us. But he just sat down with me and explained the whole thing to me, patiently, from beginning to end. It turns out, now I had taken the time to listen, that they believe from the Bible that eating bread made with yeast is wrong. And they shouldn't get in debt. In fact, they had vowed on it generations ago.

I still don't particularly agree with their interpretation of scripture. But I sure do admire their gentle determination and their consistency. And, I guess, so does God (v18-19). Sometimes we come across people who do things different to us. We don't immediately understand their motives, and we can become unkind in our assumptions. We may try to change them. But how do we know they haven't made a vow, or a private agreement with the Lord to "do this" or "not do that"?

35:16 The way in which we have seen, in this chapter, the way in which the Rechabites had observed a promise that their fathers had made to their father is now cited as an example to the rebellious Jews in Jerusalem who will not keep to the words of their fore fathers who assented to the words of God in Deut 27:18. They were willing to take the benefits of being the children of those men but were unwilling to accept the responsibilities.

35:19  In a time of siege and potential warfare God could assure Jonadab’s line would continue. Such is the power of our God.

35:12-14         Doubtless the sons of Rechab were not thinking that their commitment to the instruction of their father would be an example to others. They were just keeping the words of their father. So when Jeremiah cited them as an example of faithfulness doubtless they were quite surprised. How about ourselves. Do we do things ‘to be seen of men’ Matt 23:5 – of to please our father?

35:17  In saying that the inhabitants of Jerusalem “have not heard” God is saying that they had closed their ears to the word of God as Isa 6:10 prophesies.

35:4  The record in 2Kin 24:14 shows us that Maaseiah is the son of Huldah the prophetess. 

 A MAN OF GOD

At times Jeremiah must have felt like one of the only faithful people left in Jerusalem. He seemed to be surrounded by people who had chosen to rebel against God rather than to submit to Him. Little by little God showed Jeremiah that he wasn't the only one. When he was told to test the Rechabite family, God revealed a whole family who were very faithful.

At the same time, there was another faithful person mentioned that I had previously missed. Jeremiah needed a place to meet the Rechabite family, so we read, "I brought them into the house of the LORD, into the room of the sons of Hanan, son of Igdaliah, the man of God." (Jer 35:4). Here was another Israelite, Igdaliah, and his family who were faithful to God.

Igdaliah was called the man of God. He doesn't have a book named after him, nor any prophecies or miracles recorded about him, but he was, nonetheless, a man of God. He must have been a man who was dedicated to God, who served the LORD well, who stayed doing God's business, a man of prayer that God could use when everyone else went astray.

Wouldn't it be great to be called a man or woman of God by God himself? Titles like that don't come by accident. If we want to be known as a man or woman of God, we need to be one now. Start today and be committed to living faithfully for God.

;19 God shows his integrity by keeping his word in that we read in the days of Nehemiah. 

35:10-11         So until the Chaldeans came against Judah the Rechabites, it seems, did not live in Jerusalem. However for fear of the Chaldeans they moved into Jerusalem. However they had not compromised their commitment to their father’s command. There are times when commitments can be modified due to circumstances. We must be careful to ensure that we do not slavishly follow rules with no regard to changed circumstances.

35:2,6  We should be careful not to think that because the Rechabites are used as an example of faithfulness that drinking alcohol is prohibited. The point is that the Rechabites obeyed the instruction of their father even though it went against human preferences.

OUTLINE OF JEREMIAH

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

IV. The Present Fall of Jerusalem (Jeremiah 34:1 to 45:5)

   A. Messages Before the Fall (Jeremiah 34:1 to 36:32):

      3. Jeremiah 35 - The lesson from the Rechabites -

         a. Jer 35:1-11 - the prophet Jeremiah and the Rechabites -

            i. V1 - occurred during the reign of Jehoiakim so chapter 35 is chronologically before chapter 34.

            ii. VS 1-5 -Jeremiah brought the Recabite family into the House of the Lord and offered them wine.

            iii. V2 - the Rechabites were Gentiles who had embraced the hope of Israel; V2 the Rechabites were a tribe descended from the time of Moses (1Chron 2:55;Num 10:29-32;Judg 1:16;2Kin 10:15,23-25); V2 the Rechabite family were good examples to faithless Israel.

            iv. VS 3-8 - the Rechabite family's fruit was their works (Gal 5:22-25) and their house was to be with their father. 

            v. V3 - the Rechabites lived among others as nomads; V3 "Jaazaniah (<2970> Jah hears)", "Habaziniah (<2262> light of Jah)".

            vi. V4 - "Hanah (<2605> he is merciful)", "Igdaliah (<3012> magnified of Jah, or Jah is great)", "Maaseiah (<4641> work of Jah)".

            vii. VS 6-11 - The Rechabite family refuses wine and due to Babylon'sinvasion sought safety in Jerusalem (2Kin 10:15,23-25;Judg 1:16;1Chron 2:55;Gen 15:18-19;Lev 10:8-9;Num 6:2-4;Luke 1:15;Heb 11:9).

            viii. V6 - "Rechab (<7394> rider)".

            ix. Jer 35:6,10,19 - "Jonadab (<3122> Jah is willing)".

            x. Jer 35:8,14,16,18 - "Jonadab (<3082> Jah is willing)".

   A. Messages Before the Fall (Jeremiah 34:1 to 36:32):

       3. Jeremiah 35 -The lesson from the Rechabites -

          b. Jer 35:12-19 - the prophet Jeremiah and the people of Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem -

             i. VS 14-16 - the Rechabites were obedient to their natural father (Exo 20:12;Eph 6:2-3) unlike Judah and Jerusalem who weren't even obedient to their heavenly father.

             ii. V15 - Juda and Jerusalem didn't pay any attention to the prophets God sent to them.

             iii. VS 17-19 - Judah and those living in Jerusalem were to be punished, but Jonadab son of Rechab was promised that he will never fail to have a man to serve God.

             iv. V19 - When Christ returns to earth Jonadab with his followers will rise from their graves and be clothed with immortality; V19 "stand (<5975> to stand, remain, endure,take one's stand)".

35:2       The period of time that Jeremiah is commanded to record is about 22 years! So maybe we have an indication here that Jeremiah only spoke his words originally and now God is requiring him to write it all down as well. Clearly an example of inspiration – God gave Jeremiah the words to say in the first place and now tells him again what he had said.

35:17   The contrast with the sons of Rechab is so clear. They heard and obeyed their father. The nation Jeremiah was speaking to did not hear or obey.

35:3     The separate life of the Rechabites must have been noticed for many years by the Jews living near to them. However their example was not learnt. I suppose they were viewed as a bit of an oddity by those living securely in towns and villages. But their way of life was good because they sought to distance themselves from the ungodly in the land. Is our way of life different from those around us?

35:2 From 1Chron 2:55 we see that the Rechabites were related to Moses’ father in law.

35:4-11  Faithful obedience is a strong witness. The sons of Rechab obeyed their father’s instruction because he commanded them. They did not obey him so that he or others would notice their obedience. It seems that they lived outside the city in tents. Some might have thought their behaviour rather extreme.  Obedience was second nature to them. Is that us? Do we see ourselves as strangers and pilgrims as they did?

35:7 Were the Rechabites “strangers” that is living in a land that was not theirs? Abraham lived in the land promised to him as a sojourner – Heb 11:9– The problem with the Jews in Zedekiah’s days was that they saw the land as their personal possession – not as something that they would, by faith, afterwards receive. We can be so focussed on the here and now that we forget that we are strangers on the earth looking for a permanent inheritance.

35:5-6 The trial of the commitment of the Rechabites which was presented “in the house of the lord” would be a powerful testimony to the priests who were not willing to keep the covenant that their fathers had made with God.  Do we look to faithful fellow believers and receive encouragement form their unfailing commitment?

v.3 - 'shining' and 'white as snow' link us back to Psa.104:1,2 and Dan.7:9, and forward to the resurrected Christ in Matt.28:3, Paul's vision in Acts 9:3-5 and Cornelius' vision in Acts 10:30.

In each gospel that speaks of it, the transfiguration immediately follows the promise of not tasting death before seeing the kingdom of the Son of man. And not only so, but Peter:- 2 Peter 1:16. When speaking of this scene, declared that it was a manifestation of the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. He says that the word of prophecy was confirmed to them by the view of His majesty; so that they knew that whereof they spoke, in making known to them the power and the coming of Christ, having beheld His majesty. In fact it is precisely in this sense that the Lord speaks of it here... It was a sample of the glory in which He would come, given to confirm the faith of His disciples in the prospect of His death which He had just announced to them. 'The Son of man coming in His kingdom' is a reference to the vision of:- Daniel 7:13,14

:12 When Peter, James and John, said, speaking of Elijah, that he 'cometh first and restoreth all things' we have a phrase which is picked up in the early preaching of the apostles - [Acts 3:21] The 'restoration' spoken of the is the establishing again of the kingdom of God - this was the issue in the minds of Jesus after his resurrection [Acts 1:6]. That the kingdom is to be 'restored' of course, indicates that it used to exist, which it did when the kingdom of Israel was on the earth.

:4 There is only one other place in Scripture where Moses and Elijah are mentioned together (Malachi 4:4-5) which may well have fuelled the disciples questioning about the coming of Elijah (9:11)

What does Jesus mean about cutting off the hand, or the foot, or gouging out the eye? Here in verses 42-50 Jesus repeats the same symbol three times with different parts of the body, and each time quotes a passage from Isaiah 66v24 "Their worm does not die, And the fire is not quenched".

Jesus uses two symbols to demonstrate the destruction that will come upon someone who causes "one of these little ones to stumble". Being thrown into the water (v42), or being thrown into the fire (v43, 45, 47). Earlier in the chapter, we have a boy who had been thrown into the fire and water by an evil spirit to destroy him (v22).

The malady of the people of Israel, and the boy, was the same. The Israelites were going to be destroyed by the judgment that God was about to pour upon them for their sinfulness. We know this is the context, because Jesus quotes Isaiah 66 which speaks of this. Likewise, the boy was going to die at the hands of this spirit. Both of them desperately needed the intervention of Christ.

9:50 'have peace one with another' is one of the phrases of Jesus which is quoted 1Thess 5:13 by Paul.

V.27 We all need his hand in our lives, to lift us up.(To be raised to immortality) Christ on many occasions extended his hand to save people. To Peter; Matt 14:21; Peter's mother in law, Mark 1:31; Jairus' daughter, Mark 5:41

V.21 Jesus did not need the information from his question to affect a cure, so why did He ask it?  He was using the episode as an object lesson to instruct Israel.

This man's son had possessed an evil spirit since being a child (infancy).  Israel, God's son had possessed an evil spirit of rebellion since infancy (Deut 9:7; Psa 78:8; Isa 64:2-5; Jer 5:23; Eze 2:3 etc.). As the man's son was healed through faith, so God's (national) son could be also (v.23). 

Mark 9:2 - after six days would come a day of rest. 2Pet 3:8 - notes a day with the Lord is as a thousand years. Perhaps we have a foreshadowing of the future millennial rest.

Vs.49,50 Salt is a preservative which has the quality of being hygroscopic (ability to absorb water from the air).  Being the salt of the earth implies absorbing the water of the Word. 

Jesus was the Word made flesh (John 1:14) and following His commandments ensures hydration (John 7:38).  Failing to absorb water makes salt a useless commodity.  Failing to absorb the water of the Word renders one useless in the sight of the Lord.

9:17 The fact that those at the bottom of the mountain had no idea of what had happened on the mountain when Jesus was transfigured confirms that it was a very private vision.

9:22 It might seem a casual point that the ‘spirit’ cast the boy into the ‘’fire’ and ‘water’. Jesus’ miracles are designed to show that he was Christ working with God’s power. Many of the miracles - possibly all of them - show the fulfilment of Scripture. On this occasion the words ‘fire’ and ‘water’ are lifted from Isaiah Isa 43:2 Isaiah told Israel that God would redeem them and preserve them from ‘fire’ and ‘water’.

V.1 properly concludes the discourse of Mark 8:34-38.

V.2 six days differs from Luke's eight days (Luke 9:28). The actual time spent up the mountain was probably six days, while two days were used to travel to and from the mountain.

V.5 Peter wanted to make three shelters, one each for Jesus, Moses, and Elijah. This showed equality between the three which was unacceptable to Yahweh. It was quickly demonstrated that Jesus was supreme - over the Law (represented by Moses); and the prophets (represented by Elijah) (vs.7,8).

V.29 has and fasting in the KJV. This phrase is not found in some manuscripts, and is not used in modern versions.

9:18    The way in which the boy ‘pineth away’ shows that his illness was representative of Israel who were disobedient to God – Lev 26:39. Jesus’ healing of the boy typified the spiritual regeneration of the nation of Israel.

9:7 ‘this is my beloved son’ echoes the words spoken by God at Jesus’ baptism – Mark 1:11

V.1 Jesus seems to be telling his disciples that some of them will remain alive until He returns to earth to set up His Kingdom.  However, we know this cannot be the case.  All the disciples met violent deaths, except, possibly, John who was exiled to Patmos and probably died there. 

The phrase taste of death (KJV) could be referring to the death upon rejection at the judgement.  Jesus' discourse in John might clarify what this phrase means (John 8:51,52).  Jesus promised His disciples a place in His Kingdom, which meant that they would be immune to the taste of death (KJV) (Luke 22:30). 

However, the qualification some could be a reference to the fact that Judas will not be in the Kingdom.  If he is brought back for judgement, he will be rejected, probably receive a glimpse of the Kingdom like so many others (Luke 13:28), and then the taste of death (KJV) will be permanent. 

Another explanation could be that Jesus is foretelling His transfiguration in vs.2-8. This event was a glimpse of the coming regal glory of Jesus.  The some, who witnessed the occurrence, were Peter, James, and John.

Vs.19,29 Jesus berates the disciples for their lack of faith. Then, He proceeds to tell them that prayer is necessary for healing. The two elements of healing that Jesus describes are: 1) faith 2) prayer (James 5:15).

V.37 Dealing the brothers and sisters of Jesus is the same as our dealing with Jesus Himself. We had better be very careful how we treat our brothers and sisters in Christ. At the judgment, Jesus will have a full accounting of our dealings with them.

9:25 The healing of the one with the ‘dumb and deaf spirit’ is one of the many times that we see the prophets being fulfilled in Jesus’ healing – Isa 35:5,6

Notice in v33-37 how Jesus brings his teaching home to his disciples. First he observes them in daily life. He finds something wanting in their knowledge. Then he delivers his teaching. Reinforces it with his own example and a visual aid. Then repeats the teaching but includes reference to the visual aid, helping them to remember.

Mark 9:2-13

Please read my notes on Matt 17:1-13, July 16th, on the Transfiguration to which the reader replied. Thank you.

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 9:31cf. 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 appearwith 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 visionof 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 knowthat, 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.

9:32    We are within a few months of the death of Jesus. He has explained to the disciples more than once that he is going to die. Their lack of understanding and their subsequent silence on the matter must have saddened Jesus who was in need to comfort.

9:30-31            Notice that the reason for Jesus now wanting people to know he was there was because he was going to Jerusalem to die. We might have, if we were in his position, allowed the people to delay our journey.  But not Jesus. He was focused on that which his Father wanted him to do.

9:39-40         Jesus’ statement in these two verses does not indicate that right teaching does not matter. At this time there was only one Jesus and one message – the one casting out devils must have heard Jesus talk about the kingdom of God and, believing it, sought to further Jesus’ message, not a variant message.

9:27  In taking him ‘by the hand’ we are being directed to Isa 51:18 where Isaiah says that of the leaders in Israel there was no one to ‘take the hand’ so God provided the saviour.

9:11     The question that the disciples asked demonstrated that they did not understand what had happened. However they were keen to know the significance of the event. So their question relates to what they saw and what others said about Elijah. When we don’t understand something in Scripture do we just pass on or do we try to work out what is meant?

9:1       we should not underestimate the magnitude of the transfiguration. Jesus said it was the kingdom of God – clearly in figure. This is what all Jews were looking for. The kingdom of God. Though what the select disciples experienced was doubtless rather different from what they expected the kingdom of God to be.

9:2   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

9:12 These words of Jesus being “set at nought” is exactly the way he is spoken of in Acts 4:11

Mark 9:42

“And whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck and he were cast into the sea.”

We live in a world that is so conditioned with “having rights,” that this verse in itself, ironically, becomes offensive! This can be difficult to follow because we are not generally prone to giving up rights in order to appease others. The word, offend, # <4624>, skandalizo, is “stumbling, or entice to sin.” It comes from the word, skandalon, # <4625>, the word Paul used in 1Cor 1:23 wherein the preaching of Christ became a “stumbling block” to the Jews.

The context of these passages tells us there are malicious behaviours or conducts that can bring about an offence that leads to sin. It is not always in our power to prevent unknown stumbling blocks. However, when known, we must certainly avoid them and this is in context with Christ’s reprimand (cf. Rom 14). Some stumbling blocks may be more conceptual, or perceptual, but we still have to deal with them in the right spirit without any intention to entice one to sin. 1Cor 8:9-13 makes very clear that to use our freedom to embolden a weaker brother or sister to sin against their conscience might draw behaviour their conscience opposes and, thus, offends, # 4624. This kind of enticing behaviour and total disregard for the feelings of others may well put a stumbling block before the person. It is contrary to the spirit of Christ and merits Christ’s rejection if unrepented of. 

Then there are stumbling blocks created in the mind serious enough for people to refuse to listen. The teaching of the resurrection was a stumbling block/offence to the Sadducees (Acts 4:1-3; cf. Gal 5:11). There are things people will construe as offensive concerning Biblical teachings (e.g. immortality of the soul), but this kind of stumbling block is unavoidable.  The Truth must be proclaimed and done so in love.

Then we have the bad-tempered, difficult, cantankerous person who can create problems and abuse many passages of Scripture on the grounds of being “stumbling blocks.”  Though s/he has a right to his/her conscience, s/he does not have the right to mistreat anyone whose conscience is not the same. This kind of person’s expectation is submission to his/her conscience, disregards the conscience of others, and uses Matt 18:6,7; Mark 9:42; Luke 17:1-4, as a form of manipulation and control. This too is contrary to the spirit of Christ and merits rejection if not repented of. It is, therefore, incumbent on us to discern the differences, obey God, not man (Acts 5:29), but always within the bounds of love with the intent to gain.

We live in a world of stumbling blocks, full of offenses over so many ideas. Whichever side we find ourselves on, attitude is critical on the part of both parties, because the offended in exercising his/her right may well create a cause for offense and become the stumbling block (cf. 1John 2:10). It is a behaviour we don’t expect from believers in the Truth, as it causes a barrier in the relationship (cf. Col 3:12-14; Col 4:2-6). It demonstrates a lack of love, making ourselves more important than God’s will would have us treat each other.

9:12 The disciples had seen Jesus heal people and that he had, wherever he went, a crowd following him. So the idea that he would be “set at nought” must have really puzzled them. Could they consider the possibility that the crowds that followed Jesu would turn against him?

9:1 The transfiguration provided the disciples with a vision of the kingdom and Jesus in glorified power. Possible Psa 145:11 is hinting this.

9:2-7 We might ask “for whose benefit was the transfiguration”? It was witnessed by Peter, James, John and Jesus. However it seems only  Jesus understood the significance of the event. He spoke with Moses and Elijah about his “decease” – Luke 9:31. It seems the impact of the event was only seen by the disciples later. The fact that God chose to show Jesus the glory is clearly and indication that Jesus needed to be shown a vision of the kingdom to sustain him.

If that were true of our saviour it must be so much more true for us, his followers. Where there is no vision, the people perish.  Prov 29:18

9:10 Even though Peter James and John had heard the voice of God speaking and seen Jesus glorified the disciples still are puzzled. Their puzzlement does not seem to relate to what had been seen but on the words about being raised from the dead.

9:6 There was an earlier event – the giving of the Law at Sinai – where the experience terrified the people at the foot of the mount when a voice rang out – Exo 19:6.

Mark 9:49,50

“For every one shall be salted with fire, and every sacrifice shall be salted with salt. Salt is good: but if the salt have lost his saltness wherewith will ye season it? Have salt in yourselves, and have peace one with another.”

“WE need not be discouraged because of the stolid indifference of the people to the truth. Flesh and blood is naturally swinish and unimpressible by the thoughts of God. The world, which is choked with religion, such as it is, is made of this stiff-necked material. It is in the state of an inebriate who has caroused himself into ‘delirium tremens,’ or a snoring apoplexy. Its excitation or brain-congestion can only be relieved by copious depletion. To preach the truth to it is like telling fables to a deaf man; putting a jewel in a swine’s snout; or casting things holy to dogs. This is the nature of the flesh and blood world—it is only evil, and that continually. But all the individuals of this perverse race are not so absolutely controlled by the evil thereof as to be incapable of sobriety in word and deed. The race has some ‘honest and good hearts’ yet, which are as salt, preserving it from total and irretrievable corruption. They require, however, to be salted with wisdom, and persecution, or fire, for the truth’s sake, to make them fit for the Master’s use.”

John Thomas, The Faith in the Last Days, p. 241