Nicodemus--John 2

Henry Ossawa Tanner, Jesus and Nicodemus, 1898

A few things convict me greatly in my faith. One is that Christians should know their Bibles well enough to articulate the context of favorite scripture passages. I think it does the Word of God a disservice to pull it apart into bite-sized quotes that can be slung around--sometimes rather carelessly--for this or that occasion.

John 3:16 is such a passage. All of the 4-6th grade students in my Sunday School class could quote this verse from memory. I bet none, excepting my own daughter possibly, could provide the context and tell me that it was spoken in a conversation Jesus had with Nicodemus. In fact, last time Nicodemus came up in our Sunday School, none were familiar with him at all. But, that's another post!

So, this morning, I am settling into John 2 and the story of the conversation between Jesus and Nicodemus. Here are some notable pieces of commentary, along with my observations:

He was a Pharisee, a member of the Sanhedrin, and a teacher. (BKC)

"Nicodemus later rebuked the Pharisees for condemning Jesus without hearing Him (Joh_7:50-51), and he helped Joseph of Arimathea bury Jesus (Joh_19:39-40)." -BKC

I admire the way Nicodemus goes directly to Jesus to get to the bottom of things---albeit at night, which shows a sense of caution, discretion, and perhaps fear--but he does go.

Nicodemus begins his visit with a statement:

"...we all know that God has sent you to teach us."

Jesus' enigmatic reply elicits questions:

Jesus replied, “I tell you the truth, unless you are born again,[a] you cannot see the Kingdom of God.”

Nicodemus said to him, "How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother's womb and be born?"

Is Jesus refuting Nicodemus' statement that they all know that God has sent him to teach them?

Joh 3:9 Nicodemus said to him, "How can these things be?"

What does Jesus mean by his response in John 3:11?

"but you do not receive our testimony"

 And afterwards by his quite long sermon-like reply? This is where John 3:16 happens...in the midst of a complex explanation to Nicodemus about being born again, about believing or being already condemned, about the difference between light and darkness, the difference between flesh and spirit.  The explanation presents riddle upon riddle.

The Word does not share Nicodemus' reception or any further questions.

The Bible Knowledge Commentary suggests that Jesus was pointing Nicodemus to reexamine truths that he should know:

"The titles “Rabbi” and “Teacher” are polite and flattering on one hand, but they showed Nicodemus’ inadequate comprehension of who Jesus is. The words “from God” are in an emphatic position in the Greek. The signs had pointed out Jesus as God’s Man (God was with Him), and Nicodemus wanted to talk to Him as one Rabbi to another.

Nicodemus asked… how this spiritual transformation takes place. Jesus answered that Nicodemus, as the teacher of Israel (the Gr. has the article “the”), ought to know. The Old Testament prophets spoke of the new Age with its working of the Spirit (Isa_32:15; Eze_36:25-27; Joe_2:28-29). The nation’s outstanding teacher ought to understand how God by His sovereign grace can give someone a new heart (1Sa_10:6; Jer_31:33)." 
But Nicodemus was ignorant of the realm of which Jesus spoke. He represented the nation’s unbelief and lack of knowledge. Jesus, like the prophets, spoke to the nation about divine themes but the Jews rejected His witness. “Witness” (or testimony; martyrian) is a common word in John’s Gospel (see the chart at Joh_5:33-34)." -BKC

Before this, I'd always thought of Nicodemus as the "good Pharisee," and he was in many ways. But, this is also a helpful reminder that Nicodemus was imperfect, just as we are, trying to figure it all out in real time, working through the lens of our own weaknesses and preconceptions.

Robertson's Word Pictures notes that Nicodemus addressed Jesus with a degree of respect inherent in his title of address:

"Rabbi (Rabbei). Technically Jesus was not an acknowledged Rabbi of the schools, but Nicodemus does recognize him as such and calls him “My Master” just as Andrew and John did (Joh_1:38). It was a long step for Nicodemus as a Pharisee to take, for the Pharisees had closely scrutinized the credentials of the Baptist in Joh_1:19-24 (Milligan and Moulton’s Comm.)."

"to Try, to Make Proof of..."

The Temptation of Christ, J. Kirk Richards

I'm lingering in the temptation stories of Christ again this morning. 

How could Christ be tempted if he could not sin?  Was this a legitimate temptation if the choice was not a choice? My band of Biblical commentators gravitate toward an exploration of the Greek word for tempt, peirazō.  Strong's defines it as "to test (objectively), that is, endeavor, scrutinize, entice, discipline: - assay, examine, go about, prove, tempt (-er), try."  Jamison, Fasset, and Brown go on to point out that this is the same word used in the temptation of Abraham.   Hmmm, that story always hit me a bit funny also, perhaps because it doesn't seem loving or fair to tempt a person to evil.

Also, I think of Job's journey, another temptation story that isn't an easy one to reconcile. Here Satan claims that Job is faithful only because God has provided physical blessings and placed a hedge around him. Satan taunts, "put forth thy hand and touch all that he hath, and he will curse thee to thy face."  The wording of God's response is curious:  "Behold, all that he hath is in thy power..."  The statement alludes to Satan's present dominion over this world, but does not suggest that God has a hand in the evil.

This idea of God tempting anyone, by our modern understanding of the word, seems antithetical to His character, so it must be my understanding of the word or my understanding of the nature of temptation that is flawed.

In the archetypes of literature, a test or a series of tests is a common motif;  Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, Beowulf, and the Odyssey, come to mind as quick examples.  Let me stop and clarify that I am not beginning from a man's perspective on this---suggesting that the temptation archetypes are built into the scriptures by man.  I believe the scriptures were inspired and created by God.  But the archetypes are there all the same.  I wonder if they reflect a pattern, a DNA of our own self discovery, that God has placed in our hearts which is reflected through these literary motifs.  They appear again and again and again because they are part of our collective and inherent struggle and story. 

But, back to idea of temptation, or "trying" if you prefer.  Part of the rub is that I don't think we care to think of ourselves as needing a test.  We'd prefer to be sufficient without help and testing.  Also who enjoys the thought that we are made better through testing and difficulty?   I think the key to the mystery is a piece of the larger puzzle of beauty from ashes and refinement through tribulation.

Even then, it does send me into a tailspin to wonder how Christ could be tempted if he was unable to sin by his very nature.  It doesn't take long for my mind to bump up again its limits on this one. When I was young, I recall thinking that it was really no sacrifice for Christ to die when he knew that his Father would "save" him.  If I'm completely honest with myself, I still struggle with this at times.  If you know the outcome and rule the universe, betrayal and death doesn't have the same sting, I reason.

Faith, to me, is not an absolution of all doubt.  It is wrestling with the doubt and making a conscientious decision to come to a certain point with my intellect and then leap into the gap trusting His hand with the difference.  It is entirely reasonable that as a finite creature, I cannot understand an infinite God and all of His ways.  I see His hand more clearly in other areas and this allows me to exercise faith in the weaker, mysterious areas of my spirit.   

And, after all, perhaps this brings me back, in a way, to temptation---to testing---to my own testing and trying.  There must be areas of struggle in which we can prove ourselves, like Christ.  I won't come to the bottom of this enigma before I come to the bottom of my morning coffee, but it's worthwhile to ponder all the same.

In the Wilderness

Right now I am reading about the early ministry of Christ.  Some of the events seem episodic.  If I was a liberal critic, I would suggest they are folkish--following patterns.   But, I am a believer---in Christ, in the purity of the Scriptures as a source of doctrine and not of man's manipulations.  Though I do not always understand the source and intent of scripture, I press on to better understand my God through them.

Perhaps part of the problem is that narrative events do not explain themselves, and I long for context and explanation.  I prefer the letters of the New Testament because of they are by nature an explanation, directed toward Christians to help them understand their God and their faith.  

In the gospels, we are given bones and must construct the flesh.

Christ's temptations in the wilderness cry out for flesh.  Why does his professional life begin by a baptism and this journey into the wilderness?  Why the detailed temptations and conversations with the devil?  The feel of this dialog brings me back to Job and the wrestling of God and Satan over Job's fate.  Perhaps it is that I shrink from evil, don't wish to acknowledge the spiritual wrestling.

The individual temptations impart lessons.  Here are excerpts from the BKC commentary:

"The first test pertained to the matter of sonship. Satan assumed that if He were the Son, perhaps He could be persuaded to act independently of the Father... It is better to obey God’s Word than to satisfy human desires."

"The second test by Satan appealed to personal display or popularity. This test built on the first, for if He is the Son of God and the Messiah, nothing could harm Him...Here Satan made a subtle suggestion to Jesus as the Messiah. In effect he was reminding Jesus of Malachi’s prophecy (Mal_3:1), which had led to a common belief among the Jews that Messiah would suddenly appear in the sky, coming down to His temple. Satan was saying, in essence, “Why don’t You do what the people are expecting and make some marvelous display?"

 "Satan’s final test related to God’s plan for Jesus. It was and is God’s design that Jesus Christ rule the world. Satan showed Jesus the kingdoms of the world with all their splendor. These kingdoms presently are Satan’s, as he is “the god of this Age” (2Co_4:4) and “the prince of this world” (Joh_12:31; cf. Eph_2:2). He had the power to give all these kingdoms to Jesus at that time — if only Jesus would bow down and worship him. Satan was saying, “I can accomplish the will of God for You and You can have the kingdoms of this world right now.” This of course would have meant Jesus would never have gone to the cross. He supposedly could have been the King of kings without the cross. However, this would have thwarted God’s plan for salvation and would have meant Jesus was worshiping an inferior."

"Interestingly Satan’s temptations of Eve in the Garden of Eden correspond to those of Jesus in the desert. Satan appealed to the physical appetite (Gen_3:1-3; Mat_4:3), the desire for personal gain (Gen_3:4-5; Mat_4:6), and an easy path to power or glory (Gen_3:5-6; Mat_4:8-9). And in each case Satan altered God’s Word (Gen_3:4; Mat_4:6). Satan’s temptations of people today often fall into the same three categories (cf. 1Jn_2:16)."

The Temptation on the Mountain, DUCCIO di Buoninsegna; 1308-11

Jesus and Prayer

Prayer is difficult, especially in our rushed and ready culture.  We heedlessly bypass activities that necessitate patience, waiting, meditating, and introspection with good hopes that we will have time for such another day.  The screaming demands of each day drown out the whispers of reflection.

Prayer, for me, is a form of decompression and processing. It forces me to stop and frame the events of my life and the thoughts of my heart with an eye to God's hand in things. What is His perspective on this situation?  How is He working through it?  What is the correct posture of my heart on this matter?  How can I intercede for others?  What attitudes and thoughts need cleansing, purging, or redirecting?  All this, and a counter-full of dishes awaits me...more glaring, immediate.  

But, despite his brief window of ministry on earth, Christ prioritized prayer. He folded it into every significant event.  He blocked off this time even when the crowds pressed and authorities plotted against him.  His intentionality and consistency in this regard should evoke not just admiration but a desire to pattern our own prayer lives in this way.

The Believer's Bible Commentary notes the many instances of prayer throughout Christ's life:

The prayer life of our Lord is a dominant theme in this Gospel. He prayed here, at the outset of His public ministry. He prayed when He was becoming well known and crowds were following Him (Luk_5:16). He spent a whole night in prayer before choosing the twelve disciples (Luk_6:12). He prayed prior to the incident at Caesarea Philippi, the high-water mark of His teaching ministry (Luk_9:18). He prayed on the Mount of Transfiguration (Luk_9:28). He prayed in the presence of His disciples, and this called forth a discourse on prayer (Luk_11:1). He prayed for backsliding Peter (Luk_22:32). He prayed in the garden of Gethsemane (Luk_22:41, Luk_22:44).

Humility

From my quiet time this morning---I thought this passage on humility by John Ruskin lovely and worth contemplating:

"I believe the first test of a truly great man is his humility. I do not mean by humility doubt of his own power, or hesitation of speaking his opinions; but a right understanding of the relation between what he can do and say, and the rest of the world’s sayings and doings. All great men act only know their business, but usually know that they know it; and are not only right in their main opinions, but they usually know that they are right in them, only they do not think much of themselves on that account. Arnolfo knows he can build a good dome at Florence; Albert Durer writes calmly to one who has found fault with his work, “It cannot be better done”; Sir Isaac Newton knows that he has worked out a problem or two that would have puzzled anybody else; only they do not expect their fellow-men, therefore, to fall down and worship them. They have a curious under-sense of powerlessness, feeling that the greatness is not in them, but through them; that they could not do or be anything else than God made them—and they see something Divine and God-made in every other man they meet, and are endlessly, foolishly, incredibly merciful."

Regarding Ruskin's quote above, I wish I was "endlessly, foolishly, incredibly merciful." Humility is inherently winsome and easily spotted among false affectations.  One hallmark is that there is no self-gain and the focus in on another's best interests without thought of how it may impact oneself.  

John the Baptist was humble---a mere platform for Christ, a preparing, the "opening show." For a long awaited son and precursor to a Savior, from a humanistic perspective, the manner and cause of his death is capricious and ignoble.  He died too soon, he died as the result of his candor and humility.

Humility is not a popular sentiment in our self-reliant and self-promoting culture. It's difficult to catch of glimpse of one's soul in this regard---like looking in the mirror and trying to see you how others see  you.  I find it painful to think about personally--it's easy to spot pride in others, difficult to spot it in oneself and elusive to weed out.. Just when you feel you've managed to rip out a few deep-seated roots in one's heart,  ten more have bloomed anew.

It also reminded me of an excellent short meditation on humility I read this summer by Andrew Murray (1828-1917).

Andrew Murray's work is available free online here.

John the Baptist

John the Baptist, Guido Reni, 1637

Some thoughts on John the Baptist:

1. John was unpretentious and cared not for the opinions of men he didn't respect.  He dressed simply, wildly, and for function. He preached his message in the wilderness not the cities.   He told the high and low alike to repent and bear fruit.   Admonishing both the common crowds and lofty Herod, he didn't soften his message to assuage his audience or save his skin.

2. John joins the long list of men and women who did noble work for God but did not receive their reward on earth.  "That a man so worthless should be permitted to cut short the labours and the life of so holy and useful a character, and that, too, in order to gratify the revenge of an abandoned adulteress, and to reward the vain exhibition of a giddy damsel, must, no doubt, at first appear strange." -James Foote

Beware of judging our work on earth by the world's standards.  If we are different, if we are long suffering, if we have our eyes on rewards in Heaven, then it's not logical or reasonable that we should also expect rewards on earth.  The two are rarely on the same page in the world's present condition.

"Therefore if you have been raised up with Christ, keep seeking the things above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God. Set your mind on the things above, not on the things that are on earth. For you have died and your life is hidden with Christ in God.…"

-Colossians 3:2

Thank God for Luke

Each gospel has a distinct flavor.   Mark is "cut to the chase" with urgency.   Matthew is comprehensive and historical.  John is the wildest---poetic, big picture.  But, thank God for Luke because he reminds me most of myself.  If I was given the task of writing a gospel, I suspect I would proceed very much like Luke:  these are the things I've observed--- these are the things I've been told--now let me write them down so "that you may have certainty concerning the things you have been taught." (Luke 1:4).  Luke was not loosey-goosey or an optimistic romantic about life.  He recognized the need for an "orderly account," and rolled up his sleeves to "geter done."

As a doctor, I imagine Luke was a thoughtful observer of people and life.  His preface
"it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you" is measured and unassuming.  There are things that "seem good to me also" that are of the Lord, but I proceed with caution.  Too many people start with "thus saith the Lord through me" in a presumptuous way.

F.D Maurice comments:

"Some may cry, “Was he not then taught by the Spirit of God?” I imagine that he who described the Day of Pentecost, and referred the whole existence and work of the Church to the Spirit of God, had quite as awful a feeling of His government over himself as any of us can have. The freedom of his language shows me how strong his feeling was; our sensitiveness and unwillingness to connect the Spirit with the operations of the human intellect, indicate the weakness of ours. We ask for distinctions about the degrees and measures in which the Spirit has been or will be vouchsafed. The Evangelists make no such distinctions. I think they dared not."

I agree---give me the cautious recorder over the assuming types any time.

What else can I gather about Luke?  He was from Antioch, Syria.  He followed Paul around and was single.  He was with Paul in Rome toward the end of Paul's life: 2 Timothy 4:11: "Only Luke is with me."

St. Luke, Paolo Veronese, 1555  Luke's iconographic symbol was the ox, a symbol of sacrifice.

He is mostly affirmed by historians and archaeologists as being an accurate recorder of events and details.  As with most anything, the newer criticism casts doubt on some aspects of his work.  Medieval and Eastern Orthodox Church tradition holds that he was the first icon painter and that he made icons of Mary.  However, there seems little historical basis for this. Interesting, his relics reside in three different locations: his body is in an abbey in Padua, in Northern Italy.  His head is in a cathedral in Prague, Czech Republic.  And a rib resides in his tomb at Thebes, Greece.

Luke is the sole recorder of the Good Samaritan and the Prodigal Son---how much poorer our souls would be without these touchstones of the faith.  According to Catholic Online, he records 6 miracles and 18 parables that occur no where else in the gospels. Also, without Luke the record would be much thinner on the early history of the Church.  His "Book of Acts" was originally contiguous with his gospel.  They were separated into two books later.  

An obvious end note that I mention because it had slipped past me, but Luke was NOT an eyewitness of the events of Christ's life, nor was he a disciple.  He is considered one of the 70 apostles. Fuzzy thinking had me thinking he was a disciple at least, and I guess in the broadest sense he was, but he was not one of the original 12.  

What About Mary?

“Christ was born of a woman, that neither sex might despair.” -Augustine

My meditation on Luke 1 continues as my thoughts turn to Mary, mother of Jesus, this morning.

On her deity:

"Deify her, and, besides other things, you wrong the whole human race; you depose her from her rightful place at the head of Christian women; you cheat Christ’s sisters of their sweet queen, and say, in effect, that you can do nothing with a pure life and a humble spirit but make an idol of it. Give us back the mother of our Lord; we want her here with us on earth, that our maidens and our matrons, feeling her to be one of themselves, may learn from her, in each event of life, how to receive God’s will about themselves." E.T. Marshall

As I grew up Catholic, I have a particular suspicion of super Biblical beliefs. I find no precedence for the special role that Mary has been assigned by the Catholic Church. In fact, this singling out goes against the entire thrust of New Testament theology. Didn't Paul and the disciples resisted any inclination to elevate themselves? They always redirected the focus back to Christ. Why would Mary be any different?

Mary's nature as revealed by the scriptures is marked by repetitive humility and caution. Here are her thoughts and words as recorded by Luke:

Philippe de Champaigne, 1644

"But she was greatly troubled at the saying, and tried to discern what sort of greeting this might be." Luke 1:29

And Mary said to the angel, "How will this be, since I am a virgin?" Luke 1:34

And Mary said, "Behold, I am the servant of the Lord; let it be to me according to your word." And the angel departed from her. Luke 1:38

Mary's song:

And Mary said, "My soul magnifies the Lord, 
and my spirit rejoices in God my Savior, 
for he has looked on the humble estate of his servant. 
For behold, from now on all generations will call me blessed; 
for he who is mighty has done great things for me, and holy is his name. 
And his mercy is for those who fear him from generation to generation. 
He has shown strength with his arm; he has scattered the proud in the thoughts of their hearts; 
he has brought down the mighty from their thrones and exalted those of humble estate; 
he has filled the hungry with good things, and the rich he has sent away empty. 
He has helped his servant Israel, in remembrance of his mercy, 
as he spoke to our fathers, to Abraham and to his offspring forever."  -Luke 1:46-55

Mary's image has drifted far from the sum total of her words.  Her sky blue clothing, Anglicized features, and mature age are our super Biblical interpretations.  The first recorded prayer to Mary dates to mid 3rd century.  The belief in the assumption of Mary dates to the 6th century.  The issue is difficult to sift through and centuries old.  As much as I'd like to find reason within the Catholic teachings or be able to completely dismiss them, I find myself somewhat in-between.  The Catholic teachings are too far from the Bible, but when reading through their explanations, they soften them to the point where I subsequently soften my own hard-nosed distaste for "Mariology."

Here's one Catholic priest's understanding of the role of Mary in their tradition. I do find his three categories of respect in worship helpful: Latria, Dulia and Hyperdulia.  Thinking it through more precisely, my objection may be to time/focus spent on praying to the saints and to Mary.  My concern, which many of the 174 comments on this post reflect, is the need to keep our eye on THE ball, Christ.  

Luke 1

The nativity narrative in Luke is like an old friend---comfortable and easy to take for granted.  Extraordinary events seem ordinary after dozens of encounters.  To keep things fresh, I'm back to the page for some intellectual accountability.

5 things to think about in Luke 1

1. Fulfillment of a hope may be long delayed but not dead.   Zechariah and Elizabeth were both blessed.  As a faithful priest, he had the privilege of seeing the beginnings of the Messiah.  And his son ushered this event in.   Elizabeth had the joy of bearing a child...a son with an incredibly honorable role to play.

2. God may interrupt your everyday plans for something better in His economy.  As John Wayne put it: "Sit loosely in the saddle of life."   Mary and Joseph were engaged and surely had their own dreams for the future, but the Lord had grander plans, and they embraced them.

3. The heavenly realm monitors events on earth.  As much as we'd like, we cannot peer into Heaven.  But the obstruction is one-sided, like a two-way mirror.   Luk 1:13  But the angel said to him, "Do not be afraid, Zechariah, for your prayer has been heard, and your wife Elizabeth will bear you a son, and you shall call his name John. 

4. Doubt is common--even among the righteous.  Luk 1:18  And Zechariah said to the angel, "How shall I know this? For I am an old man, and my wife is advanced in years." From Gabriel:

Luk 1:20  And behold, you will be silent and unable to speak until the day that these things take place, because you did not believe my words, which will be fulfilled in their time." 

5. Answers to our requests (Zechariah asked for a sign), may be granted---to our detriment.

Zechariah got his sign, but also became temporarily mute.  God's economy is tight.

Alexander Ivanov, 1806-1858
"And there appeared to him an angel of the Lord standing on the right side of the altar of incense." Luke 1:11 

Kings--Part 6

Last Batch of Kings

I18--Hoshea-Hoshea assassinated Pekah. He ruled in Samaria for 9 years and began his reign in the 12 year of Ahaz of Judah.  Last king of Israel, conquered by and jailed by Assyrians.

J12-Hezekiah--Ahaz's son, he was 25 when he became king and reigned for 29 years.  He co-reigned with his father Ahaz for 14 years. His mother was Abijah, daughter of Zechariah.  He tore down altars, broke Moses' bronze serpent because people had been sacrificing to it.  The text states that he was "faithful to the Lord" and that he "trusted Him."  He revolted against the king of Assyria and refused to pay tribute to him.  Hezekiah is also credited with conquering the Philistines. 

J-13  Manasseh--55 years, only son of Hezekiah, 12 years old when began reign, first king to not have a direct experience with Israel who had gone into captivity.  Re-instituted pagan worship and undid reforms of his father.  The Assyrians put a ring in his nose, but he repented and prayed to the Lord.  The Lord heard him and brought him back to Jerusalem.  He rebuilt the outer wall in Jerusalem and instituted some level of turning away from pagan worship.  They still used pagan altars, but worshiped only God at them (2 Chronicles 33).

J-14  Amon--2 years, son of Manasseh, very into pagan practices which ultimately led to a revolt against him and his death.  Began reign at age 22, wife's name was .  He was assassinated by his servants, and 8 year old son, Josiah became king in his stead.

Note:  Jeremiah prophesied through the reign of Josiah and his sons, until the fall of Judah to Babylon into captivity.

J-15  Josiah--31 years, became king at age 8 after father, Amon, assassinated.   He is know for a major effort to compile the law and Judaic reforms, especially the Deuteronic Reforms. Josiah tore down pagan places and altars.  He had four sons, three of whom followed him in reign.

Josiah, despite being a very thorough reformer, ended up dying in battle because he chose not to listen to the King of Egypt, Neco.  Neco was on mission to attack the Assryians and tried to avoid fighting with Josiah. But Josiah disguised himself and went into battle, got killed.  The King of Egypt then put Jehoahaz, his son, in his place.

J-16  Jehoahaz/Shallum--3 months, son of Josiah, was 23 when became king.  Installed by the King of Egypt, Neco after his father died in battle.  He did what was evil. The king decided to put Eliakim in his place and jailed Jehoahaz in Egypt to keep him from ruling in Jerusalem, where he died.

J-17  Jehoiachim/Jehoiakim/Eliakim--11 years, son of Josiah, 25 years old when became king.  He did what was evil.  He levied a tax on the people to pay the tribute demanded by Neco.  According to Jeremiah, he made people build his palace for free (slave labor).

During the reign of Jehoiachim, the Lord tells Jeremiah to stand in the courtyard of the temple and declare His message.  Jeremiah was obedient and told the people that the temple would be destroyed and predicted doom for the people.  They responded by mobbing him and threatening to kill him.  The official of Judah responded by holding court at the new gate of the temple.  Jeremiah testified before all that his message is from the Lord, do to me what you will.  If the people turn, they can still be saved.  The officials then listen to Jeremiah and defend him by reminding them of when Micah prophesied during Hezekiah's reign and the people turned and repented to avert disaster.  Uriah was also prophesying at this time and predicted the same thing Jeremiah did.  Jehoiachim heard what he was saying and chased him all the way to Egypt, dragged him back, and killed him by the sword.  Nevertheless Ahikim advocated for Jeremiah in court and averted death.

Nebuchadnezzar invaded Judah during this time. Jehoiachim paid tribute to him for 3 years but then rebelled. Then the Lord sent bands of raiders (Moabite, Babylonian, Ammonite, Aramean) to destroy them as had been predicted.

J-18  Jehoiachin/Jeconiah/--3 months, son of Jehoiachim

J-19  Zedekiah/Mattanyahu--11 months---then Judah conquered by Babylon, exile

Isaiah 55--A fat soul

I sometimes dread reading the prophets but have disciplined myself to study them. The genre of prophetic literature has its own code--its own expectations and jargon. A piece of understanding the prophets requires understanding the code. But, personally, I enjoy them best when I get lost in the poetic imagery. 

Isaiah 55 is a beautiful passage to wander and get lost in. I'm writing to "pick some flowers" along the way and take time to study them:

"...eat ye that which is good, and let your soul delight itself in fatness." -Isaiah 55:2

A fat soul? Give me that! A soul that feasts well on God and His promises becomes fat, sated.

More well-fed imagery:

"And in this mountain shall the LORD of hosts make unto all people a feast of fat things, a feast of wines on the lees, of fat things full of marrow, of wines on the lees well refined." Isaiah 25:6

I love these promises of fatness and fruition.

Sometimes my soul is heavy with the sad things of life---losses, people I miss who have gone on, selfish people who manipulate me in subtle ways, the longing for richer friendships, more time with my children, longer time....a release from the pressures of the daily grind.

This is the opposite--to have a soul fat with the promises and hope of Him would be a lovely burden.

There is much of Revelation and John's thoughts there in Isaiah:

That he who blesseth himself in the earth shall bless himself in the God of truth; and he that sweareth in the earth shall swear by the God of truth; because the former troubles are forgotten, and because they are hid from mine eyes.  Isaiah 65:16

For, behold, I create new heavens and a new earth: and the former shall not be remembered, nor come into mind.  Isaiah 65:17

I used to feel a sense of panic about the former things being gone or forgotten, but to completely lose the sadness that is sometimes in my heart for the little tragedies of my lifetime and the enormous tragedies of this larger world---that these sadnesses would be completely forgotten and not remembered---what bliss!

Here's another:

And he will destroy in this mountain the face of the covering cast over all people, and the vail that is spread over all nations.

He will swallow up death in victory; and the Lord GOD will wipe away tears from off all faces; and the rebuke of his people shall he take away from off all the earth: for the LORD hath spoken it. -Isaiah 25:7-8

I think Paul also alludes to the swallowing up death in victory in 1 Corinthians. John in Revelation speaks of the tears God will wipe from our faces.

His Word, Isaiah 55

It's odd to think of the Word as having magical properties. The secular word magical gives me the creeps but thinking it through, isn't magical among the synonyms for supernatural? And as a Christian, I am admittedly reluctant to make room for the supernatural---I hold the supernatural at arm's length, inspecting it long and hard.

Here's one of my favorite passages about the Word, from Isaiah:

"For as the rain and the snow come down from heaven and do not return there but water the earth, making it bring forth and sprout, giving seed to the sower and bread to the eater, so shall my word be that goes out from my mouth; it shall not return to me empty, but it shall accomplish that which I purpose, and shall succeed in the thing for which I sent it." -Isaiah 55:10-11

This is from the Cambridge Commentary:

This purpose of salvation is embodied in the word which goes forth from Jehovah’s mouth. The “word” is conceived as endowed with a self-fulfilling energy (see on ch. Isa_9:8); and its silent but irresistible efficacy is set forth by a beautiful comparison from nature. The same idea was expressed in ch. Isa_40:8.

I love the phrasing "silent but irresistible efficacy; " the momentum of the Word is a spiritual cycle as certain as the more physical cycles. Water flows from the mountains to the seas, evaporating into the air and cycling back through cloudy rains. His Word has this same certainty in its course.

From the Biblical Illustrator, I like the way his commentary captures the actively working nature of the Word in our spiritual lives. It becomes a piece of the fruit of our lives:

Yet another word that I have taken separately, because I think it really is separate. It is a stronger word than the former—“maketh it bring forth, and bud.” I feel inclined to use here the literal Hebrew word, “and sprout.” That is to say, the rain and the snow not merely touch the dust into generation, but come again in the grass, the flowers, the fruit-age. And the Word of God has come from Him to touch the failure of human life, and it has been returning to Him laughing with the harvest of ransomed souls. The Word was incarnate in the Christ supremely, and in a less and different degree, but nevertheless as truly, God’s Word has been re-incarnate in human lives in all the passing centuries.

Also:

That the Word of God is prosperous. The word “accomplish” means it does something, it makes something, it realizes something; and the Hebrew word “prosper” literally means it “pushes forward.” It is a great dynamic force.

Nature/Agricultural Imagery in Isaiah

Isa 1:29  For they shall be ashamed of the oaks which ye have desired, and ye shall be confounded for the gardens that ye have chosen.
Isa 1:30  For ye shall be as an oak whose leaf fadeth, and as a garden that hath no water.
Isa 1:31  And the strong shall be as tow, and the maker of it as a spark, and they shall both burn together, and none shall quench them.

And the strong shall be as tow
The tinder, and the spark
“The strong shall become tow, and his work a spark, and both shall burn together”—a vivid picture of the doom of transgressors, since the mighty man is made combustible, and his own act is that which kindles the flame.
(T. W. Chambers, D. D.)

The fire of judgment that consumes sinners does not need to come from without; sin carries within itself the fire of wrath. (F. Delitzsch.)

Isa 1:28  But rebels and sinners will be completely destroyed, and those who desert the LORD will be consumed. 

Isa 1:29  You will be ashamed of your idol worship in groves of sacred oaks. You will blush because you worshiped in gardens dedicated to idols. 

Isa 1:30  You will be like a great tree with withered leaves, like a garden without water. 

Isa 1:31  The strongest among you will disappear like straw; their evil deeds will be the spark that sets it on fire. They and their evil works will burn up together, and no one will be able to put out the fire. -NLT

4  The LORD will mediate between nations and will settle international disputes. They will hammer their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation will no longer fight against nation, nor train for war anymore. isaiah 2:4

Affinity in Nature

From the Biblical Illustrator:

"God finds vindication in nature:

I well remember two funerals going out of my house within a few brief months during my residence in London.

There were cards sent by post and left at the door, in all kindliness; but one dark night when my grief overwhelmed me I looked at some of the cards and could find no vibration of sympathy there. I had not felt the touch of the hand that sent them. I went out into the storm that moaned and raged alternately, and walked round Regent’s Park through the very heart of the hurricane. It seemed to soothe me. You troy I could not find sympathy there. Perhaps not, but I at least found affinity: the storm without seemed to harmonise with the storm within; and then I remembered that He who sent that storm to sweep over the earth loved the earth still, and then remembered that He who sent the storm to sweep over my soul, and make desolate my home, loved me still. I got comfort there in the darkness, and the wild noise of a storm on an autumn night, which I found not in cards of condolence, sincere as in many instances the sympathy of the senders was. Ah me! when man not only failed to sympathise, but also forgot all gratitude and rebelled against his Heavenly Father, I can imagine God looking out to His own universe, to the work of His own hand, and seeking vindication, if not sympathy, as He spoke of man, his rebellion and folly."  -D. Davies, Biblical Illustrator

peculiar

"For the Lord will rise up, as he did at Mount Perazim,
he will rouse himself, as he did in the Valley of Gibeon
to accomplish his work,
his peculiar work,
to perform his task,
his strange task."

Isaiah 28:21

"God’s judgment of his own people is called “his peculiar work” and “his strange task,” because he must deal with them the way he treated their enemies in the past."  -net notes


Isa 28:23 Give ear, and hear my voice; give attention, and hear my speech.

Isa 28:24 Does he who plows for sowing plow continually? Does he continually open and harrow his ground?

Isa 28:25 When he has leveled its surface, does he not scatter dill, sow cumin, and put in wheat in rows and barley in its proper place, and emmer as the border?

Isa 28:26 For he is rightly instructed; his God teaches him.

Isa 28:27 Dill is not threshed with a threshing sledge, nor is a cart wheel rolled over cumin, but dill is beaten out with a stick, and cumin with a rod.

Isa 28:28 Does one crush grain for bread? No, he does not thresh it forever; when he drives his cart wheel over it with his horses, he does not crush it.

Isa 28:29 This also comes from the LORD of hosts; he is wonderful in counsel and excellent in wisdom.

from the Believer's Bible Commentary:

"Isaiah then inserted a word of comfort into this message of woe and judgment. The judgment would last for only a short while as it was designed to purge the people. A farmer must crush his crops to get the desired results. For example, caraway and cummin, aromatic herbs, are beaten out with a rod or stick, not threshed, because their seeds are so small. Grain is ground by millstone, after the wheat stalks are threshed. Various crops must be treated differently so no one step (plowing, harrowing, planting, or threshing) is done continuously.

Similarly God would bring about judgment but not forever. He is the Master “Farmer,” who knows how to handle each “crop.” Therefore the Southern Kingdom should submit to Him because He is wonderful in counsel (cf. Isa_9:6) and magnificent in wisdom (cf. Isa_11:2).

As Herbert Vander Lugt points out, the prophet illustrates

the way God deals with His children by citing three aspects of a farmer's work. First, he declares that the plowman doesn't continue breaking the ground indefinitely, but stops when it is ready for planting (v. 24). Likewise, our trials are brought to an end as soon as they have accomplished His purposes in our lives. Then the prophet says that the farmer sows his seed with discernment, scattering the cummin but putting the wheat in rows (vv. 25, 26). This assures us that the Lord carefully selects the discipline especially suited to our particular need. Finally, Isaiah portrays the laborer threshing his crop. With extreme care he beats out the dill with a light stick, and strikes the cummin with a heavier flail. For the wheat he employs a wheel just heavy enough to avoid crushing the grain (vv. 27, 28). Thus the Almighty uses the gentlest possible touch for our condition, never allowing an affliction to be greater than we can bear."-Believer's Bible Commentary

Hosea--Neither, Nor, Nor...

In chapter 4, The Lord's complaint against the Northern Kingdom is three-fold:

1. Neither faithfulness (KJ--truth)
2. Nor loyalty (KJ--mercy, ESV--steadfast love, NLT--kindness)
3. Nor do they acknowledge the Lord (knowledge of God)

No one likes doom and gloom, thus my impulse is to "get through" the prophets, as if they were a desert in marathon race.  However, my second impulse is that these three disappointments aren't complaints that I should rush by.

He desires faithfulness.  Loyalty.   Acknowledgement.  

His specific complaints were:
*don't keep your vows
*commit adultery
*steal
*kill
*lying
*violence

The result:

even the land will mourn and its inhabitants

Hos 4:6  My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge; because you have rejected knowledge, I reject you from being a priest to me. And since you have forgotten the law of your God, I also will forget your children.

Hosea, a Beginning Exploration

Understanding the Backdrop

From Ellison via Constable's Notes:

“For us alliances between nations are such a commonplace of life that we can hardly imagine a nation standing alone . . .

“It should have been fundamental, however, for Israel that no foreign alliances were possible. The reason was quite simply that in those days the secular state did not exist, and so in practice it was impossible to distinguish between a state and its gods. In an extant treaty of peace between Rameses II of Egypt and Hattusilis the Hittite king it is a thousand of their gods on either side who are the witnesses to and guarantors of it.[86] So even a treaty on equal terms with a neighbouring country would have involved for Israel a recognition of the other country’s deities as having reality and equality with Jehovah. To turn to Assyria or Egypt for help implied of necessity that their gods were more effective than the God of Israel.”

Breaking up fallow ground is what a farmer does when he plows land that has remained untouched for a long time, even forever (cf. Jer. 4:3). This is a figure for confessing sins and exposing them to God when they have remained unconfessed under the surface of life for a long time.-Constable

"Throughout the book you will see that he refers to Israel and Ephraim. Ephraim was the largest tribe in Israel and sometimes the whole nation was referred to as Ephraim." -Bible.org

“And in that day, declares the LORD, you will call me ‘My Husband,’ and no longer will you call me ‘My Baal.’" -Hosea 2:16 ESV

This commentary from the NET notes granted me more insight into the double meaning of the word husband and baal as used in this verse:

"There are wordplay on the terms אִישׁ (’ish) and בַּעַל (ba’al) here. The term אִישִׁי(’ishi, “my man, husband”) is a title of affection (Gen 2:23; 3:6, 16) as the counterpart to אִשָּׁה (’ishah, “woman, wife”). The term בַּעְלִי (ba’li, “my lord”) emphasizes the husband’s legal position (Exod 21:3; Deut 22:22; 24:4). The relationship will no longer be conditioned on the outward legal commitment but on a new inward bond of mutual affection and love. -NET notes

The nuances of meaning point to the intimacy of the relationship and to the liberation and enlarging scope of the relationship in the future. To some extent, are we all constrained in our relationships with God and with each other?  At least to the extent that it depends upon our abilities.  We have moments of unfaithfulness to God--some more than others--yet He continually forgives.  He made a way past this through His Son, loving us as Hosea loved his wandering wife.  It's a powerful picture.

Pawns?

One of my abiding questions in this book and in larger Bible is---are we merely pawns in the hands of a sovereign benevolent God?  How to reconcile the bizarre reality of a God who asks a man to marry a prostitute as an object lesson?  It reminds me of unsettling elements in the book of Job. Why is a "good" man allowed to be tested? Why were these prophets put through the wringer? Why are we sometimes put through the wringer? I feel like it's all pieces of a much grander question of God's dominion over man. What about the "innocent" children in both of these stories that are pulled into the whirlwind of their parents' lives? What about the people in this world that endure the sins of others or of the nation of their birth?

And, how does God view our lives and our individual hopes and aspirations? To what extent are the individual threads of our lives inherently subjugated and folded into His sovereign plans.  An orthodox view seems to suggest entirely.  Yet we are also called to act and be involved.  It's the whole question of free will vs. predestination over again and confusing. This is about all I can make of it when I push myself into uncomfortable places.

“To the modern Western mind, it might seem unfair that the priests’ mothers and children should be punished for their sins. But the concept of corporate guilt and punishment was common in ancient Israel and is frequently reflected in the Hebrew Bible.”[55] Chisolm via Constable

Isaiah 10-11

I'm forcing myself to slow down as I read the prophets---really I'm learning to slow down through the entire Bible reading process. There is great satisfaction in making headway through the Bible, even a type of spiritual pride can emerge--a sense that I am "faithfully mastering this text."  But the reality is, I'm not, and it's not designed to be mastered.  Instead, the hope is that it will shape and master me.  This requires a huge shift in perspective.

A hope is that the Word will seep into me. And seeping takes time without substitute. If I want a strong cup of tea, I must leave the bag in...no dunking and dipping will achieve the same effect.

Isaiah 8-11 requires savoring. After a few readings, subtle aspects of God's character become clearer. Chapter 10 clarifies powerfully that we are mere tools in His hand and should not misunderstand our role in the progress of time and events:

"But the king of Assyria will not understand that he is my tool; his mind does not work that way." Isaiah 10:7

"After the Lord has used the king of Assyria to accomplish his purposes on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem, he will turn against the king of Assyria and punish him—for he is proud and arrogant. He boasts,
“By my own powerful arm I have done this. With my own shrewd wisdom I planned it."Isaiah 10:12-13

"But can the ax boast greater power than the person who uses it? Is the saw greater than the person who saws?Can a rod strike unless a hand moves it? Can a wooden cane walk by itself?"Isaiah 10:15

God allows us to have our moments of sway in the world, just as he did the King of Assyria.  The warning here is not to confuse a moment of power with our own abilities.  He is sovereignly over every rise and fall of things.

Kings--Part V

I13--Zechariah

I14--Shallum

assassinated Zechariah in public, reigned 1 month, then assassinated by Menahem.

I15--Menahem, assassinated Shallum, killed the entire population of a town that refused to surrender.ripped open pregnant women.  Reigned 10 years in Samaria.

King Tiglath pileser of Assyria invaded land, Menahem, paid him off by extorting money from Israel. 

I16--Pekahiah

son of Menahem, ruled 2 years.  The commander of his army, Pekah, conspired against him. With 50 men from Gilead, he went to the Citadel in Samaria and assassinated him.

I17--Pekah

He began his reign in the 52nd year of Judah's king Uzziah's reign.  He reigned in Samaria 20 years.  During his reign, the king of Assyria came back, conquered towns and took Israel captive.

J10--Jotham

Son of Uzziah, was 25 when began reign, reigned 16 years.  He rebuilt the upper gate of the temple, was good--like his dad--except did not destroy pagan shrines.  He conquered the Ammonites, buit towns in the hill country and towers/fortresses in the woodlands.  During his reign, the Lord sent King Pekah of Israel and King Rezin of Syria to attack Israel.

J11-Ahaz

William Blake, The Flight of Moloch, 1809

Son of Jotham, co-regent with father for 12 years.  Full name is Jehoahaz (Ahaz is a contraction,-source BBC). He is described as a bad king.  The Believer's Bible Commentary goes so far as to suggest he was the worst king up to this point in Judah.  He increased worship of pagan idols, even "burned his son" as an offering:

"He followed the kings of Israel in his idolatry, even making his son pass through the fire. In the worship of Molech, it is believed that children were passed between the red-hot arms of the brass idol, signifying cleansing from evil and dedication to the god. Sometimes the children were actually killed and burned (Jer_7:31; Eze_16:21)." -Believer's Bible Commentary

Molech/Moloch, a name with various spellings, was an Ammonite god of fire. The consensus from other passages of scripture and commentaries is that the children were burned on the altar, not just "passed through fire." 

These sacrifices took place at Tapheth in the Valley of Hinnom which is outside of Jerusalem.

"...and he made offerings in the Valley of the Son of Hinnom and burned his sons as an offering."   2 Chronicles 28:3


The Valley of the Son of Hinnon was immediately outside of Jerusalem.  Later this valley was referred to as Gehenna and because of the evil that took place there, it became metaphorical of hell.

thought provoking Forum Board discussion of Gehenna

Sadly this location of pagan worship began with Solomon:


"Then Solomon built a high place for Chemosh the abomination of Moab, and for Molech the abomination of the Ammonites, on the mountain east of Jerusalem."  1 Kings 11:7

Here is a thoughtful attempt to understand Moloch, though I am not sure of the author's credentials, the entry seems well-researched. Moloch appears throughout classical and modern literature, including Paradise Lost and Allen Ginsburg's poem "Howl." His name is also tied to the modern day practice of abortion--which at first struck me as a stretch, but after contemplating this more, I think the suggestion may be appropriate as both actions are so desperately wrong and against God's high value on human life.

Pulling back to our text in 2 Kings 16:1-9, the Bible states that Ahaz allowed offerings on high places and under "every green tree," thus paganism spread under him.  

He refused to make an alliance with Syria/Aram (King Rezin) and Israel (King Pekah) to stave off Assyria.  As a consequence, these countries attacked Judah.  At one point, Israel brought prisoners of war back from a conquest.  The prophet Obed rebuked him and reminded Israel of their own sins.  Then, Israel relented and sent the prisoners back with provisions.

These countries had banded together to fight off Assyria and had attacked Judah to encourage Judah to join the alliance.  Instead, Ahaz sent tribute to Assyria so that they could be a vassal to Assyria and then asked Assyria to drive the others out.  He took money from the temple treasury to pay tribute to Assyria.

In 2 Kings 16:10-18 Ahaz visits the King of Assyria, Tiglath-Pilesar.  He admired the king's altar and sent a description of it back to the High Priest, Uriah, so he could recreate it.  When he came back, the new altar was ready.  He moved the old altar and replaced it with the new.  He also modified the basins and a covering.  Ahaz offered sacrifices at the new altar.

From Constable's Notes, regarding Ahaz's legacy:

"Ahaz reduced Judah to a new low politically and spiritually. The forces that influenced him were his culture and the people around him rather than God’s Word.

“When Ahaz dies about 715 B.C., he is succeeded by Hezekiah, his son. He leaves a legacy of appeasement and syncretism unmatched to this time. Assyria can count on him for money, loyalty, and zealous acceptance of their gods. Judah’s king seems genuinely pleased to serve a powerful master who can deliver him from regional foes. No doubt he feels safe, but the historian duly notes the ways in which he has exceeded Jeroboam’s wickedness. If Jeroboam’s practices are worth condemning, what will happen to a nation who rejects the Lord even more clearly?”[119]"  -CN

J12-Hezekiah--Ahaz's son, he was 25 when he became king and reigned for 29 years.  He co-reigned with his father Ahaz for 14 years. His mother was Abijah, daughter of Zechariah.  He tore down altars, broke Moses' bronze serpent because people had been sacrificing to it.  The text states that he was "faithful to the Lord" and that he "trusted Him."  He revolted against the king of Assyria and refused to pay tribute to him.  Hezekiah is also credited with conquering the Philistines. 

In 1 Chronicles 29, he begins his reign by restoring the temple doors, instituting a huge sacrifice and celebrating the Passover.  He sent runners throughout the kingdom to gather the people, even though many laughed.

 "All these things, the chronicler wrote, Hezekiah did wholeheartedly (a word used by the chronicler six times: 1Ch_29:9; 2Ch_6:14; 2Ch_15:15; 2Ch_19:9; 2Ch_25:2; 2Ch_31:21) and in strict compliance with the Lord’s commands (2Ch_31:20-21)." -bkc

Me: An interesting instance of a very good ruler coming from underneath a very bad ruler. Environment, heredity, and parenting is not destiny.

Diagram of Hezekiah's tunnel

I17--Hoshea-Hoshea assassinated Pekah. He ruled in Samaria for 9 years and began his reign in the 12 year of Ahaz of Judah.

"King Shalmaneser of Assyria attacked King Hoshea, so Hoshea was forced to pay heavy tribute to Assyria. But Hoshea stopped paying the annual tribute and conspired against the king of Assyria by asking King So of Egypt[a] to help him shake free of Assyria’s power. When the king of Assyria discovered this treachery, he seized Hoshea and put him in prison."-2 Kings 17:3-4

Summer Fruit

Basket of Fruit, c 1599, Caravaggio

A poignant interpretation of the agricultural imagery in Amos 8 by the Biblical Illustrator:

A basket of summer fruit

As God set before Amos a basket of summer fruit, as a sign or parable concerning Israel; so, at harvest-tide God sets before us a basket of summer fruit, to teach us lessons to our soul’s health.

1. In preparing the earth for a harvest crop, and our lives for a crop of holiness, we must expect hard labour, and often sorrow. Whether we cultivate the fields or our souls, we must do it in the sweat of our face, with hard labour. Both the ground and our nature need cultivation, and that implies labour, and frequently sorrow. After the great fire of London, a flower called the Golden Rocket appeared, and beautified places wasted by the flame, though it had never been seen in that district before. The seeds were lying in the ground, but it needed the fire to make them live and grow. Some times we need the fire of affliction to bring out the good in us. It is God’s love, not anger, which sends the fire. Our life needs clearing, purging, that it may bring forth new and better fruit. Some of us can only be saved “as by fire.”

2. We must plough deep. The man who wants a good crop will not just scratch the surface of the earth, he will drive in the ploughshare deep. So we must drive down the ploughshare of self-examination, we must break up the hard ground of pride and self-righteousness, where no good thing can grow. 

3. There must be sowing of seed. What we sow we reap. Our good deeds and our evil deeds bear their fruit here. Your words, your acts, your thoughts are seed; you may cast them forth carelessly, but like seed thoughtlessly dropped in the ground, they will grow, and if it be bad seed, you will be terrified at your harvest. Remember this,—You may not have sown bad seed, but if you have sown nothing for God, you will reap nothing from God. If you have no loving fellowship with God here, you will have none hereafter. Neglect of duty is a great sin. If we neglect our souls they degenerate, our spiritual natures grow weak. Let us learn to thank God, not only for bread which strengthens man’s heart, but also for the better bread of holy teaching which the harvest provides, bread to strengthen man’s soul. -H. J. Wilmot-Buxton, M. A., The Biblical Illustrator

So the Lord relented...

Among many of the grey areas in my Christian walk is the question of prayer.  The Word tells us that the Lord hears our requests to varying degrees. I remember some passages where the Lord turns a deaf ear to cries and recall others where He listens closely.  We can make choices that distance ourselves from Him through our actions and by the gradual hardening of our hearts.  He is not capricious in degrees of listening, but there are definitely degrees and precedence.

It would make an interesting study---clearly the prophets have a more direct line from Abram, through Moses and Samuel. Here, Amos successfully sways the Lord away from destruction by locusts:

In my vision the locusts ate every green plant in sight. Then I said, "O Sovereign LORD, please forgive us or we will not survive, for Israel is so small."  So the LORD relented from this plan. "I will not do it," He said. -Amos 7:2-3

From Constable's Notes:

"The prayers of righteous individuals, like Amos, can alter the events of history (cf. James 5:16-18). Some things that God intends to do are not firmly determined by Him; He is open to changing His mind about these things. However, He has decreed other things and no amount of praying will change His mind about those things (cf. Jer. 7:16; 11:14;14:11-12; Acts 1:11; Rev. 22:20). It is important, therefore, that we understand, from Scripture, what aspects of His will are fixed and which are negotiable. The same distinction between determined choices and optional choices is observable in human interpersonal relations. Good parents, for example, will not permit their children to do certain things no matter how much the children may beg, but they do allow their children to influence their decisions in other matters.

For further discussion of this issue, see Thomas L. Constable, Talking to God: What the Bible Teaches about Prayer, pp. 149-52; idem, “What Prayer Will and Will Not Change,” in Essays in Honor of J. Dwight Pentecost, pp. 99-113; John Munro, “Prayer to a Sovereign God,” Interest56:2 (February 1990):20-21; and Robert B. Chisholm Jr., “Does God ‘Change His Mind’?”Bibliotheca Sacra 152:608 (October-December 1995):387-99."  -Constable's Notes

In particular, I'd like to explore this issue further by looking for the articles mentioned at the end.  I'm unclear as to all of the aspects that are  "fixed and which are negotiable."  His larger plans in history are fixed.  of parenting rings true to me.  In that context,  I can grasp how some requests are granted and others not---all for the best of the supplicant.  However from my memory of Old Testament scriptures, the Lord sometimes comes off as erratic in His decision making process.  When Abraham tries to talk the Lord out of destroying Sodom, the haggling seems childish at times.  Why does the Lord indulge Abraham in the discussion as He knows the hearts of all men, the past and the future alike?  There are times when the stories read too much like fables or tall tales, whether they are historically true or not.   I'm not confident in my ability to honor and grasp the genre and nuances of the text in such passages, never mind understand the mind of the Lord through them.      

Drops

Amaziah then said to Amos, “Leave, you visionary! Run away to the land of Judah! Earn your living and prophesy there! Don’t prophesy at Bethel any longer, for a royal temple and palace are here!”
Amos replied to Amaziah, “I was not a prophet by profession. No, I was a herdsman who also took care of sycamore fig trees. Then the Lord took me from tending flocks and gave me this commission, ‘Go! Prophesy to my people Israel!’ So now listen to the Lord’s message! You say, ‘Don’t prophesy against Israel! Don’t preach against the family of Isaac!’ Amos 7:12-16

A Raindrop's Life, Neelesh Jain, Graphite on Paper

Constable's comments on the Hebrew word for preach: 

"Amaziah had told Amos to stop prophesying, namely, to stop preaching (v. 16). “Preaching” is from a verbal root meaning “drip” (Heb.natap), as the heavens drip rain (Judges 5:4; cf. Amos 9:13). The idea is that Amos should stop raining down messages from heaven on his hearers. True prophets were people who spoke fervently for Yahweh."  -Constable's Notes

From Strong's:

נטף
nâṭaph
naw-taf'

A primitive root; to ooze, that is, distil gradually; by implication to fall in drops; figuratively to speak by inspiration: - drop (-ping), prophesy (-et).


In the passages referenced, there is this continued idea of raining down or flowing:

O Lord, when you departed from Seir, when you marched from Edom’s plains, the earth shook, the heavens poured down, the clouds poured down rain. Judges 5:4

“Be sure of this, the time is coming,” says the Lord, “when the plowman will catch up to the reaper and the one who stomps the grapes will overtake the planter. Juice will run down the slopes, it will flow down all the hillsides.Amos 9:13

Stars, Rivers, and Faith

North Fork of the French Broad River near Balsam Grove, photo by Duane McCullough

But there is one who made the constellations Pleiades and Orion;
he can turn the darkness into morning
and daylight into night.
He summons the water of the seas
and pours it out on the earth’s surface.
The Lord is his name!

         -Amos 5:8 

For me, the seamless artistry and beauty of the natural world is one of the strongest evidences of God.

The Lord is ever overseeing the ebb and flow of the seasons and natural cycles. How do rivers begin in obscurity yet tirelessly gather and flow to the seas? It seems effortless. In
contrast, our own efforts at artificial rivers seem forced and require much mechanical engineering and human maintenance.

Studying the French Broad River with the children has given me a greater appreciation for rivers.  Why does the French Broad flow across the Eastern Continental Divide?  How does a river emerge and chart its course?  The slope of the land is the largest determiner of a river's direction and course, but there are many others as well.  Even all of the factors in bulk cannot explain the mystery of my spirit being soothed by water.  Why do we have such an emotional response to a river or to the ocean's confidence and force?  There is rest in the flux and broader constancy. 

The orbit of our earth and the tilt of the planet during different seasons also prompt us to ponder the boundless designs and timing of God.  Our spirits are encouraged as light and life increase each spring.  Later, we welcome our need to herd and gather inward again as the air turns cooler.   The Lord is a Master of context, of wedding what we call "science" with the seemingly opposite world of what we call "art."  The two are actually interwoven, as the new agers would put it--the trunk and the tail of the same elephant.

When my spirit is fickle and my faith is muddy, there is still always the voice of God declaring Himself through the natural world. I may doubt miracles, sickness, and His outer-workings in my life and the lives of those around me, but there is something instinctively and undoubtedly right and true about the natural environment and the wedding of the different liberal and scientific arts behind it all.  I don't have to argue a river---it's a theological masterpiece, incessantly declaring its Creator.