A true elder brother in the parable of the prodigal son?

The Prodigal God: Recovering the Heart of the Christian Faith

by Timothy Keller

We are using this book in our Covenant Group bible study, studying the Prodigal Son parable in Luke 15:11-32. This book by a Timothy Keller is quite good but there is one interpretation of this passage we have not encountered before. 

In my previous studies, I remember moving from a focus on the younger son to the elder son, a focus on the homecoming of the wayward to the selfish and unforgiving elder brother. 

But Keller brings it even further. He posits a view that in this parable, there is an implied lesson on Jesus being the true elder brother, someone who woulf go all out to search and bring back the younger brother back to the father, back to the family. 

While it is not unreasonable to have such a reading of the passage, can we go that way in proper exegesis of the passage?

I want to try to get to the bottom of this. 

pearlie 

NT Wright's Online Courses

I was aware of NT Wright's upcoming lectures on Romans and thanks to Kar Yong's reminder, I just checked it out only to realize that he has several MOOC lectures already running in udemy.com and here am I, a MOOC proponent never realizing that my favourite writer is actually running MOOC lectures. But they are not free though, like the other MOOC lectures I that have been following, which explains why I did not know. I have not registered myself in udemy.com yet because they do not give an option to take any courses free.

He has now six courses made available, including the Romans one which doesn't seem to be listed yet in udemy.com though you can access it from his own website. Check them out here in his website where you can send in requests for discounts. The link to the Romans one is here.

• Simply Jesus
• Simply Good News
• Worldviews, the Bible and the Believer
• Paul and His Letter to the Philippians
• Paul and His Letter to the Galatians
• Paul and His Epistle to the Romans

Check out this 20-min video of his Introduction to Romans and see if it will whet your appetite. 

pearlie

Introduction to 1 Corinthians

I will be leading bible study tomorrow in CG and since we are beginning on 1 Corinthians, I thought it will be useful for me to spend some time with an introduction to the letter especially on its historical background.

I got this deck done, though I must later add in sources of info and photos I included in there, and maybe even notes and references for more information.

Will update this post when I get it done.

pearlie

A dangerous fallacy

Our preacher spoke about Watchman Nee in his sermon yesterday and he gave Nee's books high commendation, which I feel is worrying.

I have heard many times from reputable theological speakers and scholars say that Nee's theology is not very sound. And though I have not read anything by Nee, I would take these scholars' word for it.

When I brought this up amongst my friends, one of them commented that even though Nee is not theologically trained, it is good to read something different, something more spiritual and experience based.

I find that a dangerous fallacy.

When we read and learn about God and his truth, his gospel, we must only take God's word for it. Yes, we interpret what he says to understand it better and yes, we interpret it hermeneutically to apply his truth in our lives to live as his children. But we still interpret Scripture with Scripture, not based on our spirituality or experience (what "spirituality" really means warrants another long discussion altogether).

I'm not saying that our spirit and experience are not important. They are but they must rest on the Holy Spirit and the Word of God.

I was reading James M Hamilton's commentary on Revelation for devotion today and what he says here is relevant:

We must know the gospel, know our Bible, and know Christian theology so that we can tell the difference between someone who increases our faith in Jesus by telling us the truth about his greatness and someone who makes us feel good about ourselves by giving us pep talks and “encouragement” to rely on our own resources."

Do what the Bereans did when we listen to sermons and when we read Christian literature: "And the people of Berea were more open-minded than those in Thessalonica, and they listened eagerly to Paul’s message. They searched the Scriptures day after day to see if Paul and Silas were teaching the truth." (Acts 17:11, NLT)

That is one thing we do not do enough. We do not spend enough time meditating and studying God's Word. We do not need something different. We need the very Word of God. We need to dwell in it, to mull in it, to wade in it, to swim in it.

It's time we pull up a chair, sit, read and study Scripture.

pearlie
Source: 'Revelation' by James M. Hamilton Jr.; R. Kent Hughes, gen. ed.

The World of 1 Corinthians

Our church will be looking at 1 Corinthians both in our sermons and CG bible study materials.

I have done 1 Corinthians before in my classes but I have forgotten most of it and it will be good to get into it again. With that, I went searching for the commentaries I have which I can read and refer to.

Too bad the Preaching the Word series do not have a volume on 1 Corinthians yet.

But I have these in electronic form:
- 1 Corinthians, Tyndale New Testament Commentary by Leon Morris
- 1 Corinthians, Augsburg Commentary on the New Testament by Roy A Harrisville
- 1 Corinthians, Anchor Yale Bible Commentary by Joseph A Fitzmyer

And these in print form:
- The First Epistle to the Corinthians, New International Greek Testament Commentary
- 1 Corinthians, Crossway Classic Commentary by Charles Hodge

As much as I needed those books in class back then, I'm feeling it's an overkill for the context I'm in right now.

But as a true bibliophile, I went looking for more! And I found this book which I remember Rev Dr Kim Kar Yong, my lecturer was using during class:


The World of 1 Corinthians: An Exegetical Source Book of Literary and Visual Backgrounds
by Matthew R. Malcolm

I have enjoyed the historical background study in all my biblical study classes, and this book should be a gem to have. What more, Malcolm states that, "In recent decades, 1 Corinthians has perhaps received more investigation and speculation regarding historical backgrounds than any other biblical book."

I will certainly be planning to buy a copy of this book real soon.

pearlie

Jesus never used the title "friend" for himself

I am in the process of choosing worship songs for this Saturday's church worship service when I was looking at this one by Matt Redman, "Once Again."

Whilst I could use the song, I am not all too comfortable with it, because of these two areas, especially the second one.

For one, I felt the phrase "once again", which is also the title of the song, hence its focus, is superfluous. Why once again? Why is it necessary that once again I am thankful or once again I lay down my life or once again I am full of praise for him? Why once again? I just am...alright, I suppose he meant it to be a never ending rendition of thankfulness and praise to God.

And secondly, I'm not sure if I would use the word "friend" for Jesus. Don't misunderstand me, I do regard the Lord as my friend but I felt that the meaning of the word friend now is more sentimental than it was then in the New Testament times. Therefore, by singing "thank you for the cross, my friend," I feel like I'm not honoring him and his sacrifice for me on the cross.

I remember I was at a bible conference several years ago when D.A. Carson commented that Jesus never referred to himself as our friend. And that is true. Jesus called us his friends but did not refer to himself as our friend. But of course, we can say it is implicit because friendship works both ways. But isn't it interesting he never called himself our friend?

With that I went searching for a journal article on the topic and found one titled, "Jesus as Friend in the Gospel of John," written by Gail R. O'Day. And this is what I learnt, and I quote:

Even though there is a consistency of vocabulary across the centuries used to discuss friendship in antiquity, there is no consistency of emphasis or definition...Each ancient writer, including the New Testament writers, developed the friendship traditions in different ways depending on his or her own community setting. (And what more in comparison to its usage in our time now?)

The Gospel of John is a pivotal text for the discussion of friendship in the New Testament. The vocabulary of friendship, especially the noun philos and the related verb phileöy is found at key moments in the narrative.

The word "friend" in John carried many associations for John's first readers. Modern readers cannot completely recapture those associations, but they can at least recognize that John did not create the theme of friendship out of whole cloth. Awareness of cultural embeddedness helps modern readers see that friendship is not a universal term for all times and cultures. Most contemporary friendship greeting cards, for example, adorned with roses, kittens, and butterflies, do not exhort the card's recipient to "lay down one's life for a friend." Jesus' words in John 15:13 seem unprecedented for a modern friend.

Two friendship motifs from the Greco-Roman world provide a promising framework for regarding Jesus as friend in John: Jesus' love for others that is embodied in his death and Jesus' boldness in speech and action...frank speech was encouraged as a mark of honest instruction, dialogue, and training...not engaging in flattery to further their own ends.

Jesus' friendship is the model of friendship for the disciples, and it makes any sub-sequent acts of friendship by them possible because the disciples themselves are already the recipients of Jesus' acts of friendship.

(Comments in parentheses mine.)

So you see, our modern understanding of friendship may not do justice to the friendship that Jesus was referring to.

As such, I am not too comfortable in singing it simply, "thank you for the cross, my friend"...but then it does describe the first motif above, him laying down his life for us.

pearlie
Source: Gail R. O'Day, "Jesus as friend in the gospel of John", Interpretation (April 1, 2004, p144)

DA Carson is back in KL (9-11 Sept 2013): The God who is There

pearlie

Politics in the Bible

I caught this on CNN.com today. A very interesting look at the Cyrus Cylinder, an ancient clay cylinder, on which is written a declaration in Akkadian cuneiform script in the name of the Achaemenid king Cyrus the Great.

In this TED talk, Neil MacGregor, the director of The British Museum, talks about how the cylinder symbolizes tolerance as it plays its role over history from the time of Cyrus up to when the cylinder was found in the 19th century as evidence to the Cyprus event in the Hebrew Scripture, to when Israel becomes a state, to now in the political history of the Middle East.

What does all this mean to us?

I had Genesis 14:1-24 for  devotion today and I have to admit that I skimmed through the reading of the passage. I don't even understand contemporary politics very well let alone who Amraphel king of Shinar, Arioch king of Ellasar, Chedorlaomer king of Goiim, Bera king of Sodom, Birsha king of Gomorrah, Shinab king of Admah, Shemeber king of Zeboiim and Zoar king of Bela were. I have read through the entire Bible before and I don't even remember there are these kings mentioned in the book of Genesis!

And as I read -- or skimmed through rather -- the passage, I began to wonder why Moses was so detailed here when he was so brief in the other accounts? I have come to learn that as much as I am not so drawn to politics, it is one of the most important things that shaped our lives. It is politics and history of the nations as we have it that shaped the lives of our biblical forefathers. It is how Jesus has stepped into our confused and troubled world as he came as a helpless babe, as a saviour of all mankind.

Our story that is our history, is laden with politics. And I need to pay more attention to it, past and present.

pearlie

One Down, One More to Go

I finally sat down to work on my assignment. I have been procrastinating it like there's no tomorrow. I am glad I got down to work on it today from 11am to 11pm and completed the one on the Gospel of Mark, with another one to go.

I should hit the iron while it is still hot, which means I must do this again tomorrow. Though I would need more than a 12-hour stretch to complete the second one on 1 Peter.

pearlie

The Feeding of the 5000 according to John

The sermon text this past Sunday was taken from Matt 14:13-21 about the feeding of the 5000. I obtained an article from ATLA Serials, but based on John 6:1-15 by Gail R. O'Day, Professor of Preaching and New Testament in Candler School of Theology.(1)

I made a parallel comparison of the feeding account:


(Click on image to enlarge)

The professor's take on the John passage is interesting. I agree with her that comparing with the Synoptic Gospels, John tend to leave a lot of gaps and include several mentions that are not in the Synoptics:

1. The Passover was at hand (v.5)
2. The testing of Philip (v.6)
3. It was a boy who has the 5 loaves and 2 fish (v.9)
4. Jesus gave thanks for the loaves rather than saying a blessing (v.11)
5. The people saw it as a sign that Jesus is the Prophet who is to come into the world (v.14)
6. Jesus withdrew because he perceived that the people are about to come and take him by force to make his king (v.15)

Let me see what we have here:

1. The Passover
John mentions the Passover all across the Gospel (John 2:13, 23; 6:4; 11:55; 12:1; 13:1; 18:28,39; 19:14), unlike the Synoptics where it is only mentioned in the Passion passages, except Luke who related the journey to the Passover feast when Jesus was 12 years old.

In my view, the Gospel of John is not structured chronologically and hence his mention of the Passover, which is not limited to the Passion narrative, is a significant sign pointing to Jesus as the Passover sacrificial Lamb of God. And it is only in the Gospel of John, not the Synoptic Gospels, where John the Baptist proclaimed Jesus as the Lamb of God (John 1:29, 36).

2. Testing of Philip
I am not too familiar with the disciple theme in the 4 Gospels, except maybe in Mark where the disciples were unaware and blind to who Jesus is until Peter's confession in chapter 8.

What I am beginning to discover in John is that Jesus' focus on the disciples is in the revealing of Himself as the Messiah. This is in line with the general theme of the Gospel of John, the book of signs, i.e. the revealing of the Son of God, who is Jesus.

Right from the first miracle at Cana, the purpose of the miracle was accomplished as John said, "This, the first of his signs, Jesus did at Cana in Galilee, and manifested his glory. And his disciples believed in him." (John 2:11) We must take note that in this first sign or miracle, no one else other than Mary, the servants and the disciples knew about it. And John stated that Jesus has manifested his glory, and as a result his disciples believed in him.

At the end of John's Gospel, we find the account of doubting Thomas, not mentioned in the Synoptic Gospels. The disciples have met the risen Jesus except Thomas and when he was informed of it, he did not believe until he saw and touched Jesus' wounds. Jesus' respond to him and implicitly to us is so profound: "Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed." (20:29)

3. The Boy with 5 Loaves and 2 Fish
I find it interesting that only John mentions the boy. I believe countless sermons have been preached and Sunday School lessons taughton the generosity of the boy with the bare minimum he had, and lowly kind of food too. O'Day validly commented that the Gospel does not say that the boy offered his food to Jesus. Andrew just pointed out that a boy had them and that Jesus later had the food, which he distributed.

I may be wrong but I think the focus here is still on the disciples. Andrew is inadvertently saying that they have the food but it is not enough for so many people, and the food belongs to another person anyway. It shows the lack of faith in the disciples in who Jesus is.

4. The Giving of Thanks
I am not sure if there is much of a significance between the saying of blessing and the giving of thanks for the loaves and the fish. O'Day referred it to the difference in relation to the Eucharist, but I don't see the point there.

5. A Sign that Jesus is the Prophet
This is the very character of the Gospel of John, with it being called amongst others, the Book of Signs, by some scholars. John has used the miracle of the feeding of the 5000 as a sign to show that he is the Messiah, Christ, Son of God and the Light of the world.

6. The people wanted Jesus as king
Jesus is the promised Messiah but in the form of a suffering servant, the Lamb of God. The people wanted a second David instead, a political king.

What I learnt:

The Gospel of John is really about who Jesus is and who is this Jesus we should believe in, and what we should do about it. John says in 20:30-31, "Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name."

And the Feeding of the 5000 passage in John accomplishes that very purpose - the display of who Jesus is and the requirement of our faith in him as the Son of God, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world (note "sin" in singular form).

As Philip got tested, so will we be tested in our faith in who he is. We do fall into the temptation of taking Jesus and wanting Jesus to be other than who he is, the Christ and the Son of God. We do fall into the danger of limiting him to our needs and desires, as if his only job and purpose is to fulfill us in our small and insignificant lives.

He is more than that! Jesus is the Son of God, worthy of praise and worship. As much as we are given the right to a relationship with him, an intimate one no less, we still must treat it with seriousness, and approach him with awe and reverence, respect and honor.

He fed the 5000, now he wants to feed 7 billion.
With the bread of life that only he can give.

pearlie

(1) Gail R. O'Day, "John 6:1-15", Interpretation April 1, (2003): 196

The Fate of the Dead

I have several more assignments waiting to be completed and submitted before it is too late and the most immediate one is the Biblical Theology assignment on the topic, "The Fate of the Dead".

In our course of studying the bible, attention is usually on life and life eternal. I only realised not too long ago that the Old Testament has little interest about the fate of the dead and did not have much to say about it. Our belief in the resurrection is so ingrained in us that we would not have realised that in the Old Testament times, when you are dead, you are dead. Do you think that is the worldview of most people today, particularly the atheists? I have had conversations with friends who described life as a process, i.e. you live and then you die. My immediate thought was, where is hope but in Jesus?

I will work on the assignment beginning with the OT initial lack of interest in life after death; followed by the understanding of Sheol being the underworld in OT; with a mention of Enoch and Elijah being taken up with God; and the later Jewish thought about life after death. I will finish off with the New Testament's understanding about life after death, which became all the more clear at the resurrection of Jesus.

pearlie

The Plan or The Drama?

I have a book review to work on for my TEE module on Bible Theology. The list of books to pick from consists of:

(a) G Goldsworthy, According to Plan (IVP, 1991)
(b) T D Alexander, From Eden to Promised Land (IVP, 2008)

(c) M Strom, Days Are Coming (Hodder & Stoughton, 1989) [= The Symphony of Scripture (P&R, 2001)]
(d) E P Clowney, The Unfolding Mystery (IVP, 1988)
(e) V Roberts, God’s Big Picture (Paternoster, 2009)
(f) C G Bartholomew, The Drama of Scripture (Baker, 2006)

I have briefly checked out all the books, and decided on either Goldsworthy's According to Plan or Bartholomew's The Drama of Scripture. I bought both the book, started on them and like them both. Now I am not sure which one to pick. Though they speak of the same topic, i.e. the bible story as a whole, their approach is different.

Goldsworthy goes into it by giving an excellent and simple introduction on what biblical theology is and why is it important to us. He then tackled the storyline of the bible from the beginning right up to the end of the Old Testament but linking every theme to the New Testament, he completes the study by looking into the New Testament with "new creation" as the theme.

Bartholomew on the other hand approaches it using the model of a play, i.e. the Drama of Scripture. He divides it into 6 acts:
Act 1: God Establishes His Kingdom – Creation
Act 2: Rebellion in the Kingdom – Fall
Act 3: The King Chooses Israel – Redemption Initiated
Interlude: A Kingdom Story Waiting for an Ending – The Intertestamental Period
Act 4: The Coming of the King – Redemption Accomplished
Act 5: Spreading the News of the King – The Mission of the Church
Act 6: The Return of the King – Redemption Completed

I started reading The Drama of Scripture about a month ago but I stopped a third way through. Now that I try to pick it up again, I found that I have forgotten what I read. So I have decided set it aside and start on According to Plan instead. I find According to Plan much simpler but The Drama of Scripture more creative in its presentation. I am not sure yet which I will end up reviewing. We’ll see how it goes.

pearlie

The Word of God in all simplicity

But to deviate from the truth for the sake of some prospect of hope of our own can never be wise, however slight our deviation may be. It is not our judgment of the situation which can show us what is wise, but only the truth of the Word of God. Here alone lies the promise of God's faithfulness and help. It will always be true that the wisest course for the disciple is always to abide solely by the Word of God in all simplicity.
~ Dietrich Bonhoeffer

Ever since I delved into the study of the Word of God, I have become more sensitive to how it should be read, heard, handled and obeyed. But at this stage, from what I have seen and heard, it saddens my heart. The Word of God is seldom read, seldom preached (most of what is preached is the preacher's anecdote for the day, not the exposition of Scriptures), seldom studied, seldom discussed and as a result seldom obeyed.

But first, a very important question need to be asked: what is the Word of God? Most people these days will say that it also include what the Spirit "tells" them or impress upon them, which if you think about it, could be the reason why the bible is seldom read, preached, studied and obeyed. They are convinced that the Spirit "speaks" to them anyway.

But in this case, wouldn't it will be extrabiblical?

I agree that the Spirit do "speak" to us and "impress" upon us the truth, but I firmly believe that the Spirit reminds and teach us based on what we have learned from God's revelation, that is what is written in the Bible. The Spirit does not add to it, he helps us understand it. So, we still come back to the hearing, reading, preaching, studying and obedience of the written Scriptures, in all its depth and simplicity.

We must hear it read everyday.

We must read it for ourselves everyday.

We must study it.

Preachers must preach the Word, not just give anecdotes or may I say, not even what he thinks the Spirit impressed upon his heart. Preach the Word, it is already given to us.

And from what we hear, learn, study and preach, then we know what and how to obey.

pearlie

Hell

Ann kept reminding me recently that there aren't any coincidences when it comes to God. Lately, I have been wondering about stuff that is happening to me. This is one example, it happened several times already: that is before I read the book-I-am-attempting-to-complete-before-the-month-is-over-but-unsuccessfully, there is almost always a precursor event or discussion over the topic.

Someone was just telling me about a pastor who boldly preached about hell in a wake service. When I was told of the context of the event, I understood why he was compelled to do so. And today, when I got back to where I stopped, the title of the chapter was, "Hell".

Kreeft and Tacelli handled the chapter extremely well and I was stuck to the chapter soaking in all they had to say about the dreaded subject.

And I like this paragraph: one of the issues at stake in the Doctrine of Hell, which I feel applies also to the other doctrines.

"If we drop hell because it is unbearable to us, that presupposes the principle that we can change whatever doctrines we find unbearable or unacceptable; in other words, that doctrine is negotiable. Christianity then becomes a human ideology, not a divine revelation; a set of humanly chosen ideas and ideals rather than propositional data. There is then nothing new or surprising to learn. Doctrine becomes a nose of wax to be twisted into any shape we choose. Try this principle out in any other branch of knowledge and see whether it makes a difference." (Handbook of Christian Apologetics, Kreeft & Tacelli, 1994, p.283).

I find that most Christians I meet these days take doctrines and even Scripture as "wax to be twisted into any shape we choose". Some of us just could not accept the cold hard truth of God. God is not lovey-dovey but his love and justice comes together.

From my encounter with people, I find that amongst the most "dangerous" words to start a sentence when discussing about Scripture is "I think ..." as well as "To me ...". As much as we are called to "think over", "consider", and "reflect" on the Word of God (2 Tim 2:7), we need to be careful that we do it wisely and let the Lord reveal his Word to us rather than us digging into the words figuring out or even imagining what we think they mean.

Paul continues to say in 2 Tim 4:3, "For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions".

But having said this, I have also come to the stage where I find myself asking if I am missing something. I hear people saying that they have prayed to the Lord and that is what was revealed to them, but it just does not sit right with me. Am I missing something here?

Oh! how great is our responsibility in the studying, understanding and the applying of God's word.

pearlie

Proverbs in the NT

Someone sent me a proverbial saying. I checked for its meaning and realised that it is found in Matthew 7. Now I realised there are a whole lot of proverbs in the New Testament, aren't there? Where else other than in Matthew 7?

pearlie

Theological Candyland

You might have noticed I have just added a list on the right panel - Theological Candyland - a term I borrowed from Faith by Hearing, where I have been updating my collection of audio mp3s. I am currently listening to Gordon D. Fee's Reading and Studying the Bible for Life.

There are just so much resources out there - we just need to know where to find the good ones. I have listed several sites that provide excellent resources in expository preaching, sermons and theology & biblical studies.

Hope you will find gems as well and make full use of them to strengthen your foundation and relationship with the LORD.

Blessings!

pearlie

Talents and Bread

We have come a long way. We now have biblical discussion via sms. Melissa and I spent the evening exchanging thoughts over the Parable of the Talents in the Gospel of Matthew. She wanted to know my thoughts with regards to the talents - what I thought they were. To me, the point of the whole parable is the kingdom of God and the talents was not the main point. We concluded that with whatever that God has given us, have we been investing them on the kingdom of God.

At the same time I was preparing for bible study on the Gospel of John. We have had too long a break since December and now back to John 6:22ff, the passage on the bread of life. We had a very animated discussion. I really love this group of bible-loving individuals. We range from an age of 40 to over 80. I overheard one of them commenting that she had fell sick but she did not want to miss any sessions. Kudos to her love for the Word of God.

Several interesting discussion points:

(1) Someone highlighted v.25: When they found Him on the other side of the sea, they said to Him, "Rabbi, when did You get here?" If you read the few verses before that, the more expected question would be "how did you get here?" So why did they ask Jesus "when" instead? What were their intention of question? Based on Jesus' reply who knows their hearts, we presume that they asked "when" because had they know where Jesus were earlier, they would have gotten more of his bread, which they would not have to work for. Their concern was for physical gratification, as is evident in the remaining portion of the passage.

How often in our prayers, our vision is so narrow as to only be concerned about our physical lives here on earth?

(2) On v.60 On hearing it, many of his disciples said, "This is a hard teaching. Who can accept it?" We laughed when we came to this verse because after discussing long and hard over the previous verses, which was a roundabout discussion between Jesus and the people, we find this verse, this is hard teaching!. We were also grappling with it trying to understand what Jesus was telling them. But what I realise now is that the people did understand what Jesus was saying, about the eating of the flesh and drinking of the blood. They knew that it was bringing Christ himself into their own, abiding in Him as one who was sent from God. But to them it was hard to accept, as verse 60 clearly indicate. They could not accept who Jesus said he was. To them he was only the son of Joseph and Mary whom they knew.

How often we ignore the Lord's leading because it will be hard for us to fit his plan into our lives? How often we subconsciously say: Jesus I know what you are telling me to do, but I have my life to live and it is going somewhere, I don't want you messing it up.

pearlie

Hosea: Immediate curses and distant blessings

I must mention that I begin work today in year 2009 and it was a good day. Well of course it is; it's a Friday! But nonetheless, it was a great day at work, and I thank the Lord for it.

I also began the day by adhering to my plan of reading the bible more faithfully. I have decided to read the minor prophets and started with Hosea.

The book of Hosea is a book of both predictions of destruction and restoration. Hosea was called by Yahweh to prophesy the destruction and exile of Israel at a time when Israel was at the height of its prosperity. The content of Hosea may be divided roughly into three categories: evidence, curses, and blessings.

1. The evidence which takes up 2/3 of the book demonstrate that Yahweh's covenant with Israel has indeed been broken.

2. The curses, taking 1/4 of the book, were the immediate punishment to be meted out to Israel due to the evidences.

3. The blessings, which is only less than a tenth of the book, are announced for the distant future. The era of restoration which the Mosaic Covenant promises will follow after the punishments for covenant-breaking have run their course.

I know we now have the saving grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, who paid for our death on the cross and resurrected to our eternal communion with the Father, but how often we expect ourselves to be delivered immediately from our wilful disobedience only to realise that we first have to face the consequences of our sins, or do we? Do you think that the message of immediate punishment and distant blessing apply to us?

pearlie
Stuart, Douglas. Word Biblical Commentary: Hosea-Jonah. Dallas: Word, 2002.

My eyes have not seen it, yet

I have blogged several days ago about the books I want to read. Of the six books I picked up, I started with this one: Now my Eyes have seen You Images of creation and evil in the book of Job by Robert S. Fyall It turned out, this is book is beyond me at this point of time. I realised I need to be quite familiar with the book of Job before even attempting it. To start it off, I am having problems with Job itself, which is why my interest in getting books about the book. Maybe this is not the one to start with. I have read about half the book. For the rest of it, I only managed to scan through. So, I consider myself done with it, for now, until I have a better grasp of Job. What's amazing with Job is that when I first read it, I could not understand why the respond from the four friends were not accepted. To me, they make sense. It soon occurred to me that, what make sense may not be right. We may think we know, but in fact, we don't. For example, in a recent event, someone said something I had problems with. It makes sense but if you think about it, it does not. The person said that if in a group of 10, 9 of them are happy and 1 is not, something is wrong with the one. On the other hand, if 9 of them are not happy and 1 is, something is still wrong with the one. I am not sure what it was based on, I simply feel it is not right. Because there is equal possibility that something is wrong with the 9 and not the 1. In the same way I think it applies to Job's friends. They did not know why Job suffered and rather than lovingly attending to him, they accused him of a lot of things. And in the same way, we too need to be mindful of the "advice" or "help" we offer to those who are suffering. Sometimes, it would be best to just be with them - offering them our presence and heart rather than our words. Job's friends could have done better if they continued in their initial silent wait with Job as he struggled to understand his calamities. pearlie

The History and Theology of the Exile: Day 4

We completed the module today with the Priestly Writings the Chronicler History and the Historical Period Immediately After the Exile.

I have benefitted immensely from the classes in the realisation that the exile played a major role in a large part of the Old Testament so much so that we need to read these portions of Scripture with a good understanding of the exile in mind.

God has revealed to us through Scripture His working and presence through human history in the lives of the Israelites. I am beginning to ask myself: have I been reading Scriptures in a sanitised manner, i.e. whatever it is, it is all God's doing? Or it is a telling of what man is capable of doing and how God has chosen to intervene and direct their lives? I say that because we often live our lives trying to discern God's voice and sometimes that is not easy to do - we often ask if that is really what God says or what we are trying to convince ourselves. I think it is the same with the people in Scriptures - to discern God's voice and to decide to listen to which prophets amidst all the havoc surrounding them.

pearlie