From Mark Copeland... "MINISTERING SPIRITS" The Cherubim And Seraphim

                         "MINISTERING SPIRITS"

                       The Cherubim And Seraphim

INTRODUCTION

1. The Old Testament certainly has much to say about angels...
   a. Their service to God and to His people
   b. Carrying out God's will as messengers and in other ways

2. Also serving God are two other classes of spiritual beings...
   a. Cherubim (singular, cherub or cherubim) - a word whose etymology
      is uncertain
   b. Seraphim - a word meaning "fiery ones"

3. What were these spiritual beings...?
   a. They certainly fall into the category of 'ministering spirits'
   b. Are they angels, perhaps of a higher order or class?

[We may not know the answer this side of eternity, but let's see what
the Bible reveals...]

I. THE CHERUBIM

   A. AS GUARDIANS OF PARADISE...
      1. Placed by God after Adam and Eve were expelled from the Garden
         - Gen 3:24
      2. "In their function as guardians of Paradise the cherubim bear
         an analogy to the winged bulls and lions of Babylonia and
         Assyria, colossal figures with human faces standing guard at
         the entrance of temples (and palaces), just as in Egypt the
         approaches to the sanctuaries are guarded by sphinxes." - ISBE
      3. No description is given, but note the mention of "flaming
         sword"

   B. AS BEARERS OF THE THRONE...
      1. As attendants of God, they bear the throne upon which He
         descends from His high abode - Ps 18:9-10a
      2. Through the use of synonymous parallelism they are described as
         "the wings of the wind" - Ps 18:10b; cf. Ps 104:3
      3. Thus God is described as "enthroned above the cherubim" - Psa
         80:1; 99:1; 1Sa 4:4

   C. AS WINGED CREATURES OF FIRE...
      1. "...the function of the cherubim as bearers and movers of the
         Divine throne is brought out most clearly in the vision of
         Ezekiel" - ISBE
         a. In chapter 1 the prophet designates them as 'living
            creatures' - Eze 1:4-5
         b. He later perceives that the living creatures were 'cherubim'
            - Eze 10:15,20
         c. The chariot or throne, from which the glory of God went up,
            is spoken of as a cherub - Eze 9:3
      2. The cherubim as seen by Ezekiel were four living creatures,
         each having...
         a. Four faces: man, lion, ox (replaced in the parallel chapter
            by cherub) and eagle - Eze 1:10; 10:14
         b. The figure and hands of men - Eze 1:5,8
         c. Straight legs, with the soles of their feet like that of
            calves, sparkling like burnished bronze - Eze 1:7
         d. Four wings
            1) Two stretched upward, meeting above and sustaining the
               'firmament', the bottom of the Divine throne- Eze 1:11,
               22; 10:1
            2) Two stretched downward, covering their bodies - Eze 1:11,
               23
            3) Having the noise of many waters, like the voice of the
               Almighty, the tumult of an army - Eze 1:24
      3. The cherubim as seen by Ezekiel in appearance were...
         a. Surrounded by coals of fire - cf. Eze 10:2,6
         b. Like burning torches, the fire flashing up and down among
            the creatures, out of which went lightning - Eze 1:13
      4. The cherubim as seen by Ezekiel...
         a. Run back and forth in appearance like a flash of lightning
            - Eze 1:14
         b. Do not turn as they changed direction, but always go
            straight forward - Eze 1:9,17; 10:11
         c. Each had beside them a wheel - Eze 1:15-21
            1) Like the color of beryl (sea green or gold colored) - Eze
               1:16
            2) Like a wheel within a wheel - Eze 1:16
            3) That did not turn aside as they went in the four
               directions - Eze 1:17
            4) With rims high and awesome, full of eyes - Eze 1:18
            5) Which followed the cherubim wherever they went - Eze 1:19
            6) The spirit of the cherubim provided the direction of the
               wheels - Eze 1:19-21; 10:16,17
      5. Above the cherubim (living creatures) was...
         a. A firmament like the color of an awesome crystal - Eze 1:
            22-23
         b. A voice from above the firmament - Eze 1:25
         c. A throne like a sapphire stone, on which sat one with a
            likeness of a man - Eze 1:26
            1) His waist upward was the color of amber, like fire all
               around - Eze 1:27
            2) His waist downward like fire with brightness all around
               - Eze 1:27
         d. The brightness like the rainbow all around - Eze 1:28
         -- Which Ezekiel described as the likeness of the glory of the
            Lord - Eze 1:28; cf. Re 4:2-6

   D. AS ORNAMENTS IN THE TABERNACLE AND TEMPLE...
      1. In the tabernacle
         a. On the mercy-seat covering the ark were two cherubim of
            solid gold
            1) Facing each other, with wings outstretched above - Exo
               25:18-20; 37:7-9
            2) On which the glory of the Lord appeared, and from which
               He spoke - Exo 25:22; Num 7:89; cf. 1Sa 4:4; 2Sa 6:2;
               He 9:5
         b. On the curtains were woven artistic designs of cherubim
            - Exo 26:1; 36:8
         c. On the veil of the tabernacle also - Exo 26:31; 36:35
      2. In the temple of Solomon
         a. In the inner sanctuary, the Most Holy Place - 1Ki 6:23-29;
            2Ch 3:10-13
            1) Placed over the ark of the covenant - 1Ki 8:6-7; 2 Chr
               5:7-8
            2) Where God's presence was manifested - 2Ki 19:15; Psa
               80:1; 99:1
         b. On the veil - 2Ch 3:14
         c. On the walls and door - 1Ki 6:29-35; 2Ch 3:7
         d. On the ten carts and ten lavers - 1Ki 7:29,36
      3. In the temple of Ezekiel
         a. That is, the temple seen by Ezekiel in a vision - Ezek 41-43
         b. The inner walls of the temple were carved with alternating
            palm trees and cherubim, each with two faces, a lion on one
            side, a man on the other - Eze 41:18-20
         c. The doors of the sanctuary were carved with cherubim - Eze
            41:23-25
      4. In the temple of Herod
         a. "There were no cherubim in the temple of Herod, but the
            walls were painted with figures of them (see Talmud)."
            - ISBE
         b. "In the times of Josephus no one knew what the Scriptural
            cherubim looked like (Ant., VIII, iii, 3)." - ISBE

[Unlike the cherubim, there is only one specific mention of the seraphim
in the Bible...]

II. THE SERAPHIM

   A. AS SEEN IN ISAIAH'S VISION...
      1. The Lord is on a throne in the temple, high and lifted up - Isa
         6:1
      2. The seraphim are above the throne - Isa 6:2a
      3. They had six wings - Isa 6:2
         a. Two covered the face
         b. Two covered the feet
         c. With two they flew
      4. One cried to one another:  "Holy, holy, holy is the LORD of
         hosts, the whole earth is full of His glory!" - Isa 6:3
      5. One flew to Isaiah - Isa 6:6-7
         a. With a live coal in his hand taken with tongs from the altar
         b. Touching Isaiah's mouth with it, saying:  "Behold, this has
            touched your lips; your iniquity is taken away, and your
            sins purged."

   B. AS DESCRIBED IN VARIOUS SOURCES...
      1. "This word means fiery ones, in allusion, as is supposed, to
         their burning love. They are represented as 'standing' above
         the King as he sat upon his throne, ready at once to minister
         unto him. Their form appears to have been human, with the
         addition of wings." - Easton's Dictionary
      2. "Nowhere else applied to God's attendant angels; but to the
         fiery flying (not winged, but rapidly moving) serpents, which
         bit the Israelites (Num 21:6), called so from the poisonous
         inflammation caused by their bites. Seraph is to burn; implying
         the burning zeal, dazzling brightness (2Ki 2:11; 2Ki 6:17;
         Eze 1:13; Mt 28:3) and serpent-like rapidity of the seraphim in
         God's service. Perhaps Satan's form as a serpent (nachash) in
         his appearance to man has some connection with his original
         form as a seraph of light. The head of the serpent was the
         symbol of wisdom in Egypt (compare Num 21:8; 2Ki 18:4). The
         seraphim, with six wings and one face, can hardly be identified
         with the cherubim, which had four wings (in the temple only
         two) and four faces (Eze 1:5-12). (But compare Rev 4:8).  The
         'face' and 'feet' imply a human form; something of a serpentine
         form (perhaps a basilisk's head, as in the temples of Thebes)
         may have been mixed with it: so the cherub was compounded of
         various animal forms. However, seraph may come from a root
         meaning 'princely,' applied in Dan 10:13 to Michael [MAURER];
         just as cherub comes from a root (changing m into b), meaning
         'noble.'" - JFB
      3. "The most that can be said with certainty about the seraphim is
         that they were a separate group of attendants who praised God
         at His throne." - ISBE (revised)

CONCLUSION

1. Whether seraphim or cherubim can rightly be called angels may be
   uncertain...
   a. Perhaps they are a higher class or order of angels - cf. He 1:7
   b. If they are akin to the 'living creatures' in the book of
      Revelation, they seem to be distinguished from angels - cf. Re 4:
      6-8; 5:11

2. In either case, they were certainly 'ministering spirits' whose
   service reminds us...
   a. Of the glory and majesty of Him who sits on the throne
   b. Of the mercy and forgiveness of the God Whom they praise

Do we like the cherubim over the mercy-seat long to behold the mercy God
extends to His people?  Do we like seraphim find the holiness of God
worthy to be praised?  We should...

   "But you [are] a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy
   nation, His own special people, that you may proclaim the praises
   of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light; who
   once [were] not a people but [are] now the people of God, who had
   not obtained mercy but now have obtained mercy." (1Pe 2:9-10)

Have you accepted the gospel call that qualifies you to live a life of
praise and service to such a wonderful God...? - cf. 2Th 2:14; Col 1:
12-13

Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2015

 

Was Job a Real Person? by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=13&article=521

Was Job a Real Person?

by	Eric Lyons, M.Min.

In a single day, the patriarch Job lost all ten of his children, all of his livestock, and many of his servants. In chapter 1 of the book of Job, we learn that as one of Job’s servants was telling him about a group of raiders (the Sabeans) that had stolen all of his oxen and donkeys and killed all the servants tending to the animals (save him), another servant arrived even as the first “was still speaking.” This second servant told Job that a fire fell down from heaven and consumed his sheep and servants. Again, while this servant was talking, a third servant came and related to Job that another group of invaders (the Chaldeans) had stolen all of his camels and had killed all of the servants except him. Finally, while this third servant was talking, a fourth servant came and bore even worse news—Job’s ten children had all perished when a great wind struck the house and caused it to crush them. His seven thousand sheep, three thousand camels, five hundred yoke of oxen, five hundred female donkeys, very large household, and ten children were all gone “in the blink of an eye.” And as if being stripped of his worldly possessions and children were not enough, Job’s body then became diseased from head to toe, his wife urged him to “curse God and die,” and the comforting counsel of his “friends” quickly gave way to judgmental accusations.

Based upon the extent of the physical destruction and mental suffering mentioned above, and upon the limited time frame in which it all occurred, some critics tend to doubt that Job was a real person. Rather, they think he simply was fabricated to teach a lesson about human suffering. Perhaps, they say, he is to be valued like such parabolic figures as the good Samaritan (Luke 10:30-37), the prodigal son (Luke 15:11-32), or the rich fool (Luke 12:16-21), but not like those who actually lived and died upon the Earth.

If Job were not mentioned anywhere else in the Bible apart from for the book that bears his name, those who claim he was not a real person might be able to argue their position more confidently. But the fact is, Job is mentioned in three different verses in Scripture (outside the book of Job), and in all three passages he is considered a real, historical figure.

The first two places his name is found (aside from the book of Job) is in Ezekiel 14, verses 14 and 20. In verse 14, the prophet stated: “Even if these three men, Noah, Daniel, and Job, were in it, they would deliver only themselves by their righteousness, says the Lord God.” Verse 20 is worded nearly the same way: “[E]ven though Noah, Daniel, and Job were in it, as I live, says the Lord God, they would deliver neither son nor daughter; they would deliver only themselves by their righteousness.” Ezekiel’s point in both verses was that the ungodly conditions in the land were such that even if Noah, Daniel, and Job lived in that city, no one else would be saved. Ezekiel spoke of all three of these men as being real, historical people, not legendary characters. If one recognizes Noah and Daniel as being real people of history, then there is no reason to think otherwise about Job.

The last place the suffering patriarch is mentioned in Scripture (and the only time he is mentioned in the New Testament) is found in the latter part of the book of James. In 5:10-11 we read: “My brethren, take the prophets, who spoke in the name of the Lord, as an example of suffering and patience. Indeed we count them blessed who endure. You have heard of the perseverance of Job and seen the end intended by the Lord—that the Lord is very compassionate and merciful.” Obviously, James was not writing through inspiration about an imaginary person. Rather, he considered Job as real as Elijah, Isaiah, and Jeremiah, and as genuine as the Lord Himself.

Finally, that Job was a real person is stated explicitly by God within the book of Job itself. In his second “speech” to Job, God declared that the mighty behemoth was “made along with you” (40:15, emp. added). If Job were just a fairy tale-like character, God certainly would not have spoken as having “made” him.

Although admittedly much about Job remains a mystery (his race, exactly when he lived, who wrote the book that bears his name, where the Land of Uz was located, etc.), we can know that he was a real person who suffered in every way like you and me, and yet remained faithful to his God. Knowing that Job persevered through all his trials and tribulations gives us hope that we can do the same when similar trials come our way (James 1:2-4; 5:10-11).

The Fool by Dave Miller, Ph.D.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=12&article=930

The Fool

by	Dave Miller, Ph.D.

Perhaps many Americans are unaware of the extent to which atheism and agnosticism have blanketed the country. Virtually every department in our state universities has been infiltrated by godless, humanistic presuppositions. Study and research are conducted from an evolutionary, relativistic framework that either jettisons the notion of God altogether, or dilutes it sufficiently to effectively nullify the biblical representation of deity. The psalmist anticipated all such behavior centuries ago when he wrote: “The fool has said in his heart, ‘There is no God’ ” (Psalm 14:1; 53:1).

Because of their inability to discern spiritual things (1 Corinthians 2:14), the Soviet cosmonauts looked out of their spacecraft in the 1960s and, in ridicule, asked, “Where is God?,” echoing again the words of the psalmist: “Why should the nations say, ‘Where now is their God?’ But our God is in heaven; He does whatever He pleases” (Psalm 115:2-3). Pride is a deadly pitfall that blinds one to the truth: “The wicked in his proud countenance does not seek God; all his thoughts are, ‘There is no God’ ” (Psalm 10:4).

But the Universe “declares” the plain work of the Creator (Psalm 19:1). Would we not consider a person a “fool” were he to pick up a watch and proclaim, “There is no watchmaker”? Though he had never empirically encountered the creator and designer of the watch, the mere existence of the watchproves the existence of a watchmaker. It takes very little investigation to see that a watch is a crude, simplistic instrument compared to the glorious, complex chronometers of the Universe. Those who see “the things that are made” and deny the very One Who made it all are “without excuse” (Romans 1:20).

Recognition of the existence of the Creator should lead a person to pursue His will. One may express verbal belief in the existence of God while being a practical atheist. Such a person professes, “There is no God” by his or her actions. By failing to be devoted to God, even while considering oneself to be a Christian, he or she is denying the Lord (1 Timothy 5:8; 2 Timothy 3:5; Titus 1:16). One can deny His great act of love, mercy, and grace (Titus 2:11-12; Hebrews 2:3). One can forget and ignore the great dissolution to come (2 Peter 3:10-12).

Who desires to be a fool? Who really wants to live a foolish existence? The wise, insightful, noble person is the one who examines the evidence and draws the warranted conclusion (Acts 17:11; 1 Thessalonians 5:21). Only a fool would affirm: “There is no God.”

Following the Toucan’s Nose to a Designer by Kyle Butt, M.Div.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=9&article=2053

Following the Toucan’s Nose to a Designer

by	Kyle Butt, M.Div.

The writers and editors of National Geographic are notoriously guilty of saturating their articles with evolution. That is why it is almost humorous to read articles in the periodical that seem to slip by the editors—articles that, if read in a straightforward manner, defy evolution. For instance, in the December, 2006 issue, the editors included a tiny, one-page article titled “Power Beak.” This article discusses the beak of the toucan. John Eliot, the author of the article, interviewed Marc André Meyers, “a materials scientist at the University of California, San Diego.” Meyers believes the unique design of the toucan beak could be used to produce strong, lightweight materials used in vehicles.

Meyers describes the toucan beak as a beautiful structure. He then goes into some engineering detail:

The surface is made of keratin, the same material in fingernails and hair. But the outer layer isn’t a solid structure. It’s actually many layers of tiny hexagonal plates, overlapping like shingles on a roof. The interior is different from the shell, made of bone. It consists of a light yet rigid foam made of little beams and membranes. And some areas of the beak are hollow (Eliot, 2006, p. 30).

On the same page, to the right of Meyers’ comments, the reader can see two pictures from a microscope—one of the hard foam inside the beak and the other of the “shingle” layers of keratin. To the left of the comments there is a toucan head and beak, in which the layers are shown in a cross-section-like diagram. The combined pictures look like they are straight out of an engineer’s portfolio.

What is Eliot’s assessment of the toucan’s beak? In a simple, yet oh-so-telling, sentence, Eliot said: “[T]he toucan’s beak is ingeniously designed to be both strong and light weight.” Look closely at the wording. He says the beak is “ingeniously designed.” The American Heritage Dictionary defines the word “ingenious” as: “Marked by inventive skill and imagination. 2. Having or arising from aninventive or cunning mind; clever” (2000, p. 900, emp. added). Notice that the word “ingenious” implies an inventive or cunning mind. What inventive or cunning mind engineered the beautiful design of the toucan beak? It could not have been the evolutionary process, since evolutionists themselves admit that the process has no ultimate goals and no creative mind powering the system. The only logical answer is the supernatural mind of God. If the editors of National Geographic would only follow the nose of the toucan, they would find the ingenious Designer—and they would stop writing false, evolutionary propaganda.

REFERENCES

American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language (2000), (Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin), fourth edition.

Eliot, John L. (2006), “Power Beak,” National Geographic, 210[6], December 12.

Preposterous Pro-Abortion Positions by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=7&article=4706

Preposterous Pro-Abortion Positions

by	Eric Lyons, M.Min.

Aristotle once wrote: “[T]he same attribute cannot at the same time belong and not belong to the same subject and in the same respect…. [I]t is impossible for the same man at the same time to believe the same thing to be and not to be” (Aristotle, 4:4). It is impossible, for example, for a single door to be completely shut and completely open at the same time. Likewise, it is contradictory for a man to say, “Yesterday I never left my house to go to the store,” if indeed he did leave his house yesterday to go to the store. The fact is, nothing can both be and not be for the same person, place, or thing, at the same time, and in the same sense (cf. Jevons, 1928, p. 117). For a person to say otherwise, he is either a liar or delusional.

Consider the nature of a contradiction in light of the pro-abortion movement and related laws in America. How is it that the same unborn child can be a human being and not a human being at the same time? For example, if a mother and her six-month-old unborn baby boy are brutally murdered while walking into a hospital, the perpetrator may likely be charged with “double murder” (cf. Ertelt, 2009). Why double murder? Because both the mother and her unborn child are human beings. However, if that same mother walks into a medical facility to have someone remove the (alleged) non-human “appendage” from her body, the mother and her accomplice are protected by the law (in many states, even when the unborn child is nine months old). These positions are so blatantly contradictory that even Heather Boonstra, senior public policy associate at the pro-abortion Alan Guttmacher Institute, stated: “The law cannot hold both that a pregnant woman is two persons and at the same time allow her to have an abortion” (as quoted in Simon, 2001).

It is no secret that President Barack Obama strongly supports the pro-abortion platform. He has been a consistent advocate of pro-abortion policies for many years. It is also no secret that Washington, D.C. has some of the least restrictive abortion laws in the United States (“State Policies…,” 2013), allowing for abortion for any reason at any point during the mother’s pregnancy. Astonishingly, as Dave Boyer reported in the Washington Times in 2012, “[t]he pro-choice Obama White House requires pregnant visitors to count their unborn child as a person for tours of the executive mansion” (2012, emp. added). So, in our nation’s capitol, a pregnant woman can visit the President’s home, only if she first fills out paper work in which she counts her unborn child as a human being. Yet, that same mother is free to leave the White House, enter a D.C. abortion clinic, and have her unborn child murdered, under protection of a blatantly contradictory law that our President endorses.

The fact is, at best, the pro-abortion movement in America is absurd—leaving behind reality at every turn. At worst, it is a repugnant, blight on society—so evil that the horrific shedding of innocent blood is actually considered proper. “Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; who put darkness for light, and light for darkness; who put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!” (Isaiah 5:20-21).

REFERENCES

Aristotle, Metaphysics, trans. W.D. Ross, http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/metaphysics.4.iv.html.

Boyer, Dave (2012), “Security at Pro-Choice White House Counts Unborn Children,” Washington Times, May 8, http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/may/8/security-white-house-counts-unborn-children/?page=all.

Ertelt, Steven (2009), “California Man Convicted Killing Both Pregnant Girlfriend and Unborn Child,”http://www.lifenews.com/state4210.html.

Jevons, W. Stanley (1928), Elementary Lessons in Logic (London: Macmillan).

Simon, Stephanie (2001), “Debate Grows on Whether Fetuses Should Have Special Legal Status,”Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 6A, June 17, http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1683&dat=20010617&id=G8AaAAAAIBAJ&sjid=XjAEAAAAIBAJ&pg=6739,6695111.

“State Policies in Brief: An Overview of Abortion Laws” (2013), Guttmacher Institute, June 1,http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/spibs/spib_OAL.pdf.

"Before Any King Reigned in Israel" by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

http://apologeticspress.org/AllegedDiscrepancies.aspx?article=670&b=Genesis

"Before Any King Reigned in Israel"

by Eric Lyons, M.Min.

For most people, the 36^th chapter of Genesis is “unfamiliar territory.” It is known more for being the chapter after Genesis 35 (in which details are given about Jacob’s name being changed to Israel) and before chapter 37 (where one can read about Joseph’s brothers selling him into slavery). Nowhere does Genesis 36 record the names of such patriarchs as Abraham, Isaac, or Joseph (and Jacob is mentioned only once). Nor are there any memorable stories from this portion of Genesis—of the kind that we learned in our youth. Truly, the least-studied chapter in the first book of the Bible seems to be Genesis 36—the genealogy of Esau.

Surprisingly, to some, this often-overlooked chapter contains one of the more controversial phrases in the book. Genesis 36:31 states: “Now these were the kings who reigned in the land of Edom before any king reigned over the children of Israel” (emp. added). According to skeptics and liberal theologians, the notation “before any king reigned over the children of Israel” points to the days of the monarchs. Dennis McKinsey declared in his book, Biblical Errancy: “This passage could only have been written after the first king began to reign…. It had to have been written after Saul became king, while Moses, the alleged author, lived long before Saul” (2000, p. 521). Paul Tobin also indicated that this portion of the Bible “must therefore have been written, at the very earliest, after the first Jewish King, Saul, began to rule over the Israelites which was around three centuries after the death of Moses” (2000). Tobin went on to ask (what he feels certain cannot be answered): “ Now how could Moses have known that there would be kings that reigned over the Israelites?”

There actually are two logical reasons why Moses could mention future Israelite kingship. First, Moses knew about the express promises God had made both to Abraham and Jacob concerning the future kings of Israel. On one occasion, God informed Abraham and Sarah that many kings would be among their posterity. He promised Abraham saying, “I will bless her [Sarah—EL] and also give you a son by her; then I will bless her, and she shall be a mother of nations; kings of peoples shall be from her ” (Genesis 17:16, emp. added). Years later (and just one chapter before the verse in question), when God appeared to Jacob at Bethel and changed his name to Israel, He said: “I am God Almighty. Be fruitful and multiply; a nation and a company of nations shall proceed from you, and kings shall come from your body” (Genesis 35:11, emp. added). The fact that Genesis 36:31 reads, “Now these were the kings who reigned in the land of Edom before any king reigned over the children of Israel” (emp. added), does not mean this account must have been written by someone who lived after the monarchy was introduced in Israel. Rather, this statement was written with the promise in mind that kings would come out of the loins of Abraham and Jacob, and merely conveys the notion that Edom became a kingdom at an earlier time than Israel. Keil and Delitzsch remarked: “Such a thought was by no means inappropriate to the Mosaic age. For the idea, that Israel was destined to grow into a kingdom with monarchs of his own family, was a hope handed down to the age of Moses, which the long residence in Egypt was well adapted to foster” (1996). Furthermore, the placement of this parenthetical clause (“before any king reigned over the children of Israel”) in 36:31

was exceedingly natural on the part of the sacred historian, who, having but a few verses before (Gen 35:11) put on record the divine promise to Jacob that “kings should come out of his loins,” was led to remark the national prosperity and regal establishment of the Edomites long before the organization of a similar order of things in Israel. He could not help indulging such a reflection, when he contrasted the posterity of Esau with those of Jacob from the standpoint of the promise (Gen 25:23) [Jamieson, et al., 1997].

A second reason Moses is justified in having knowledge of Israelite kingship before it was known experientially is because Moses was inspired (John 5:46; Mark 12:26; cf. Exodus 20:1; 2 Timothy 3:16-17; 2 Peter 1:20-21). For someone to say that the author of Genesis could not have been Moses, because the author spoke generally of Israelite kings prior to their existence, totally ignores the fact that Moses received special revelation from Heaven. Nowhere is this seen more clearly than in Deuteronomy 17:14-15. Here Moses prophetically stated:

When you come to the land which the Lord your God is giving you, and possess it and dwell in it, and say, “I will set a king over me like all the nations that are around me,” you shall surely set a king over you whom the Lord your God chooses; one from among your brethren you shall set as king over you; you may not set a foreigner over you, who is not your brother (emp. added).

Under normal circumstances, such foreknowledge would be impossible. One must keep in mind, however, that “with God all things are possible” (Matthew 19:26)—and God was with Moses (cf. Exodus 3:12; 6:2; 25:22).

Were a Christian to claim that Moses wrote Genesis without being inspired or without having knowledge of the earlier promises made to Abraham and Jacob about the future kingship of Israel, the critic might be correct in concluding that Genesis 36:31 is anachronistic. But, the truth is, a Christian’s faith is based on the fact the Bible writers possessed supernatural revelation. Thus, Moses’ superior knowledge is not a problem. Rather, it is to be expected.

REFERENCES

Jamieson, Robert, et al. (1997), Jamieson, Fausset, Brown Bible Commentary (Electronic Database: Biblesoft).

Keil, C.F. and F. Delitzsch (1996), Keil and Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament (Electronic Database: Biblesoft), new updated edition.

McKinsey, C. Dennis (2000), Biblical Errancy (Amherst, NY: Prometheus).

Tobin, Paul N. (2000), “Mythological Element in the Story of Abraham and the Patriarchal Narratives,” The Refection of Pascal’s Wager [On-line], URL: http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/abraham.html.

From Eugene C. Perry... God speaks to man

http://www.oldpaths.com/Archive/Perry/Eugene/Charles/1922/Articles/Godspeaks.html

God speaks to man

When God speaks we should be listening. We should by all means be tuned in, on the right wave length, to receive, assimilate and translate into obedient action whatever instruction or admonition God sends our way.
Although I do not claim to be an authority, I will make some observations on this subject. I cannot but have questions when I hear of the variety of strange messages men are claiming that they receive from God. Pilgrimages, mass suicides, polygamous marriages, “holy” wars, etc. have been proclaimed to be responses to divine messages.
We are forced to the conclusion that men often make plans, decide what they want to or think they should do, and then manage to convince themselves and announce that such was revealed to them as God’s will. The same process has, I fear, even been true regarding doctrines that relate to salvation, worship and Christian living.
There is a difference between being open and receptive to God’s communications and looking for and expecting his support for preconceived plans, ideas and concepts. Whatever the manner of communication, it is important that the message not be “wrested” to fit our agendas. When someone tells you that God spoke to them, that they heard his actual words, do you wonder why you never had such an experience?
Through the history of his dealings with humans, God has communicated in a variety of ways. Certainly, “what has been made” speaks to us of “his eternal power and divine nature” (Rom.1:20). He had a conversational relationship with Adam, Enoch and others. He spoke to and through patriarchs (fathers of families), prophets and chosen people. He communicated in visions, dreams and demonstrations. In considering this the writer of Hebrews began the letter, “In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways,” (Heb.1:1). However, these former processes are contrasted with, “but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son,” (v.2a).
Since Jesus is not physically with us today, it appears that he has made provision for us to hear his message from others whom he chose for the purpose rather than in some mystical way, perhaps “better felt than told”. The inspired writer proceeds to point to the “binding” nature of the messages received “by angels” and uses this to warn us of the grave consequences of ignoring “such a great salvation,” (Heb.2:2,3), the message by his Son.
The message of God regarding our great salvation was spoken by Jesus himself, refreshed in the memories of his apostles by the Holy Spirit (Heb.2:3,4) and confirmed for us (its source established) by means of miracles. The New Testament scriptures have long been recognized as the end result of this process, written by those that heard Jesus and saw his great works and later were enabled to do similar works to establish what they spoke and wrote. This body of teaching, “the faith”, is described as “once for all entrusted to the saints” (Jude 3). Hence, it appears that we should not expect any new or different message from modern day theologians, scholars or “prophets”.
There are those who are seriously asking whether God is speaking to churches today through “theological voices” as he did through Paul and the other New Testament writers. Today’s scholars cannot be God’s messengers in the same way that the apostles were. They have not seen or heard Jesus nor has he promised them a Comforter to put his message in their minds.
On the individual, personal level, communication from God via the scriptures may seem too general and to God by prayer, too one-way. Because of this some claim that God actually responds verbally or, perhaps, in some still small voice. Others, having no direct message, feel that they do not experience God in an intimate way. Current literature on “Experiencing God” appears to be an attempt to respond to these feelings.
Some are urging us to practise “listening prayer”. Certainly, we should, while praying, let God know that we are open to his message and really do seek his response whether it is through scripture, circumstances or our brothers and sisters. It is not uncommon to hear, in a prayer, the request that God “guard, guide and direct us”. Yes, we need protection. Yes, we fumble around and are lost without his guidance and direction. God has taken care of much of this through the scriptures and our relationship with one another in his family.
God’s message is provided to and for the seeker. (John 7:17, Matt.7:7,8). Cornelius’ prayer resulted, not in God telling him what to do to be saved, but in his coming to this knowledge through God’s chosen agent (Acts 10). God’s medium today is the New Testament scriptures and not individual direct messages and not some modern day prophet speaking differently then those scriptures, either more or less.
We must tune in, - study with open minds and receptive hearts. Let us, first of all, be willing to receive and submit to the clear and obvious rather than look for less likely messages delivered in some other way.
God speaks to us today through Jesus and those he appointed. Let us tune in, be receptive and humbly obey.

Eugene C. Perry

From Gary... That little something...

This is one BEAUTIFUL BIRD!!! I especially like the contrasting colors and the overall impression this little creature makes upon the eyes.  Look closely, and you will see a small band on its leg; which means that it is being controlled and has lost a little bit of its freedom. Jesus spoke of freedom and was not understood...

John, Chapter 8 (WEB)

  30  As he spoke these things, many believed in him.  31 Jesus therefore said to those Jews who had believed him, “If you remain in my word, then you are truly my disciples.   32  You will know the truth, and the truth will make you free.”  

  33  They answered him, “We are Abraham’s seed, and have never been in bondage to anyone. How do you say,‘You will be made free’ ?” 

The Jews believed that they were free, but they had hundreds of rules and regulation covering every aspect of their life, yet they thought they were free. In truth, there is only one freedom and that is spiritual liberation. And that freedom is in itself, truth and that is absolutely perfect in what God tells us. Listen to Jesus, know truth, obey truth and you will in fact be free. You may be the lowest of the low in your societal hierarchy, but you are special in the sight of God. Men may even put you in chains and band you like the bird above, but your soul will be free.

John, Chapter 8 (WEB)

36  If therefore the Son makes you free, you will be free indeed.