7/1/15

From Mark Copeland... "FAITH IS THE VICTORY!" In Overcoming Despair

 
                        "FAITH IS THE VICTORY!"

                         In Overcoming Despair

INTRODUCTION

1. In this series I have attempted to show how faith in Jesus gives us
   the victory over such things as:
   a. Sin
   b. Anxiety
   c. Boredom
   d. Depression
   -- For I am persuaded that in overcoming the world and whatever it
      throws our way, "Faith Is The Victory!" - cf. 1Jn 5:4-5

2. Closely related to "depression" is the problem of "despair"...
   a. Those who are depressed are often in a state of despair as well
   b. Despair may be a cause for their depression, or at the least
      making it worse

3. As I hope to illustrate in this study...
   a. Despair (i.e., hopelessness) is a serious problem, not one to be
      taken lightly
   b. It is damaging to our health, our society, and our relationship
      with God
   -- Certainly Christians should seek to dispel despair in their 
      lives, and in the lives of those around them!

[Let me begin, then, by sharing some things I learned in my own study
on the subject of despair...]

I. UNDERSTANDING DESPAIR

   A. DESPAIR DEFINED...
      1. According to the American Heritage Dictionary:  To lose all
         hope; to be overcome by a sense of futility or defeat;
         complete loss of hope
      2. Synonyms for despair include hopelessness, despondency,discouragement
      3. Mark Twain described despair as "...a time when one's spirit
         is subdued and sad, one knows not why; when the past seems a 
         storm-swept desolation, life a vanity and a burden, and the 
         future but a way to death."

   B. THE DANGER OF DESPAIR...
      1. Despair takes its toll on society
         a. According to researchers at the University of Missouri-
            Columbia Health Sciences Center, a lack of hope has been 
            linked to poor behavior in children
         b. As reported by Reuter's Leslie Lang, children with high 
            levels of hopelessness...
            1) Tended to engage in harmful and destructive behavior to 
               themselves and others
            2) Tended to be defiant, refusing to obey rules, take 
               turns, share, and skip school
         c. The researcher quoted indicated that hopelessness may be an
            indicator for children and teens who are prone to act in 
            anti-social or aggressive behavior
      2. Despair takes it toll on your physical health
         a. It can have the same detrimental effect on the heart as 
            smoking a pack of cigarettes, according to a study 
            published in the August, 1997, issue of Arteriosclerosis, 
            Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology,
         b. "a high level of hopelessness exacerbates the 
            atherosclerotic process in middle-aged men" (Dr. Susan A.
            Everson)
         c. I.e.,  it increases the thickness of the arterial walls
      3. Despair is certainly detrimental to one's spiritual health
         a. To be in despair is a slap in the face of God
            1) "He that despairs degrades God." (Owen Felltham,1602-1668)
            2) "When you say a situation or a person is hopeless, you
               are slamming the door in the face of God." (Charles L.Allen, 1913- )
            3) "It is impossible for that man to despair who remembers
               that his Helper is omnipotent." (Jeremy Taylor,1613-1667)
         b. To be in despair renders one ineffective in helping others:
            "He that is fallen cannot help him that is down." (unknown)

[The pervasiveness of despair in our society is reflected in the words
of Thoreau:  "The mass of men lead lives of quiet desperation."  But as
Clare Boothe Luce said, "There are no hopeless situations. There are 
only people who have grown hopeless about them."

Charles Swindoll has said that "Surrendering to despair is man's 
favorite pastime. God offers a better plan, but it takes effort to grab
it and faith to claim it."  With that I agree, and so now wish for us
to consider how...]

II. FAITH IN JESUS HELPS US TO OVERCOME DESPAIR

   A. JESUS PROVIDES HOPE FOR THE HOPELESS...
      1. Through His teachings...
         a. Telling us of God's providential care - Mt 6:30; 7:11;10:29-31
         b. Telling us of God's love for the lost - Lk 15:7; Jn 3:16-17
      2. Through His promises...
         a. Telling us of the abundant life He offers - Jn 4:13-14; 
            6:35; 10:10
         b. His promise of the resurrection He offers - Jn 11:23-27
         c. His promise of His return and the place He is preparing 
            - Jn 14:1-3
      3. Through His actions...
         a. His death on the cross provides the hope of our 
            forgiveness!
         b. His resurrection provides the hope for our own 
            resurrection!
      -- Jesus is truly "our hope"! - cf. 1Ti 1:1

   B. THROUGH FAITH IN JESUS, THE CHRISTIAN...
      1. Has hope in God regarding the resurrection - Ac 24:15; cf.1Pe 1:3
      2. Can rejoice in hope regarding the glory to come - Ro 5:1-2
      3. Use the Scriptures as a constant replenisher of hope - Ro 15:4
      4. Can abound in hope by the power of the Holy Spirit - Ro 15:13;Ga 5:5
      5. Has the hope of salvation as a "helmet" to protect our minds 
         - 1Th 5:8
      6. Can look forward to the "blessed hope and glorious appearing
         of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ" - Tit 2:13-14

CONCLUSION

1. It has been said that "Life with Christ is an endless hope, without
   him a hopeless end."
   a. For those who are in Christ, they have every reason to hope!
   b. For those outside of Christ, one can understand why there is 
      often despair!

2. For those in Christ, we are charged to hold fast to our hope...
   a. "but Christ as a Son over His own house, whose house we are if 
      we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm 
      to the end." - He 3:6
   b. "Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering,
      for He who promised is faithful." - He 10:23
   -- And for good reason, for "This hope we have as an anchor of the
      soul, both sure and steadfast..." - He 6:19

Through faith in Jesus, we can hold fast to our hope, and gain the 
victory!

            God be praised, that to believing souls
               Gives light in darkness, comfort in despair!

                        WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE (1564-1616)

Executable Outlines, Copyright © Mark A. Copeland, 2011

Hebrew Vowels and Bible Integrity by Dave Miller, Ph.D.



https://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=13&article=4167

Hebrew Vowels and Bible Integrity

by  Dave Miller, Ph.D.

Q.

If the Hebrew language originally had no vowels, how do we know we have the Old Testament text as God intended?

A.

It is true that the Hebrew alphabet originally had no vowels. For many centuries, Jews wrote the language without any vowels. But that did not mean that there was any doubt or irresolvable uncertainty about the meaning of the words. When Jews grew up learning their language, just like Americans, they grew up learning how to pronounce words and how to write them. The only reason vowels (which are actually a system of points [dots] and other diacritical markings) were invented was so that Jews who did not speak Hebrew (like the Hellenistic Jewish widows of Acts 6) and non-Jews would be able to pronounce the words. The most widely used pointing system was developed by the Masoretes between A.D. 600-1000 (“The Masoretes and…,” 2002; “Aaron ben…,” 2010). Working primarily in the Palestinian cities of Tiberius and Jerusalem, as well as in Babylonia (modern Iraq), these Jewish scribes/scholars were meticulous in their efforts to preserve the Hebrew text in their transcriptions (known as the Masoretic text). We now know they did an outstanding job, because as the Dead Sea Scrolls (discovered in the 1940s) have gradually been examined, it has become apparent that the condition of the Hebrew text in the second half of the first millennium A.D. was virtually the same as reflected in the Dead Sea Scrolls that date back to the first century B.C. Like the New Testament, the text of the Old Testament has been preserved to the extent that Christians may be assured that they are in possession of the Word of God as He intended.

REFERENCES

“Aaron ben Moses ben Asher” (2010), Jewish Virtual Library, http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/biography/benAsher.html.
“The Masoretes and the Punctuation of Biblical Hebrew” (2002), British & Foreign Bible Society, http://lc.bfbs.org.uk/e107_files/downloads/masoretes.pdf.

Does the Holy Spirit Know When Jesus Will Return? by Eric Lyons, M.Min.




 https://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=12&article=1650

Does the Holy Spirit Know When Jesus Will Return?

by  Eric Lyons, M.Min.

One question that various individuals have submitted to Apologetics Press in recent years involves the Second Coming of Christ and the omniscience of the Holy Spirit. If the Holy Spirit is God (Acts 5:3-4) and thus omniscient (Psalm 139), why did Jesus say about His return, “But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father” (Mark 13:32, emp. added)? Why would the “Father alone” (Matthew 24:36, NASB) be aware of the time of Jesus’ Second Coming? Does this awareness exclude the Holy Spirit?
When Jesus came to Earth in the flesh, He willingly “made Himself of no reputation” (Philippians 2:7; He “emptied Himself”—NASB). He moved from the spiritual realm to put on flesh (John 1:14) and voluntarily became subject to such burdens as hunger, thirst, weariness, and pain. Our omnipotent, omniscient, holy God chose to come into this world as a helpless babe Who, for the first time in His eternal existence, “increased in wisdom” (Luke 2:52). While on Earth in the flesh, Jesus was voluntarily in a subordinate position to the Father (cf. Jackson, 1995).
It has been suggested that, similar to how Jesus chose not to know certain information while on Earth, including the date of His return, perhaps the Holy Spirit also willingly restricted Himself to some degree during the first century (see Holding, 2012). Perhaps the special role of the Holy Spirit in the first century in regards to spiritual and miraculous gifts (Acts 2:38; 1 Corinthians 12:7), special revelation (John 14:26; 16:13), divine inspiration (2 Timothy 3:16), intercession (Romans 8:26), etc., is somewhat similar to the role that Christ played. That is, could it be that both God the Son and God the Spirit voluntarily restricted their knowledge on Earth in the first century? And thus, could that be why Jesus said, “But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father” (Mark 13:32, emp. added)? Considering that a number of Christians and scholars believe that even God the Father may freely choose to limit His own knowledge of certain things (cf. Brents, 1874, pp. 74-87; Camp, n.d.), many would likely explain Mark 13:32 and Matthew 24:36 by contending that the Holy Spirit freely limited His knowledge for a time regarding Christ’s return.
Given especially the indisputable fact that the Son of God voluntarily chose not to know certain things for a time, it may be possible that the Holy Spirit could choose the same. However, the Holy Spirit Himself revealed through the apostle Paul that He, the Spirit, “searches all things, yes, the deep things of God. For what man knows the things of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God” (1 Corinthians 2:10-11). Furthermore, there are no explicit statements in Scripture about the Holy Spirit’s willful unawareness of certain things as there are about Jesus (Mark 13:32; cf. Luke 2:52). All one can cite is Jesus’ statement about “only the Father” knowing the date of the Son’s return and conclude that this declaration implies the Spirit of God was unaware of that day. What’s more, in context, Jesus placed much more emphasis on the words “no one knows” than the qualifying statements “not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son.” Jesus wanted His hearers to understand that just as those in Noah’s day “did not know” the day of the Flood (Matthew 24:39, emp. added) and just as the servants in the parable of the servants “do not know when the master of the house is coming” (Mark 13:35, emp. added; Matthew 24:50), so “you do not know what hour the Lord is coming” (Matthew 24:42, emp. added; Mark 13:33). Thus, Jesus taught the all-important central message in these chapters of “watching” and being “ready” for the unknown time of Christ’s return (Matthew 24:36-25:46; Mark 13:32-37). Even though we may learn something of the Messiah’s voluntary, self-imposed emptying of some of His omniscience (Mark 13:32), Jesus’ “purpose was not to define the limits of his theological knowledge, but to indicate that vigilance, not calculation, is required” (Lane, 1974, p. 482)—a lesson that all “end-of-time” false prophets need to learn.
Rather than quickly dismiss the omniscience of the Holy Spirit during a particular period of time in human history, a better explanation exists: expressions such as “no one,” “only,” “except,” “all,” etc. are oftentimes used in a limited sense. Consider what Paul revealed in Romans 3: “Jews and Greeks…are all under sin. As it is written: ‘There is none righteous, no, not one…. They have all turned aside… there is none who does good, no, not one” (vss. 9,10,12, emp. added). In this passage, Paul was stressing the fact that “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23), but he was using these inclusive and exclusive terms (e.g., “all,” “none”) in a somewhat limited sense. Paul was obviously not including Jesus in this passage, as elsewhere he wrote that Jesus “knew no sin” (2 Corinthians 5:21; cf. Hebrews 4:15; 1 Peter 1:19). Neither was he including infants (see Butt, 2003), the mentally challenged, or angels. Who then has sinned? All humans of an accountable mind and age (see Miller, 2003), with the obvious exception being the sinless Son of God.
In John 17:3, Jesus prayed to the Father, saying, “And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent” (John 17:3, emp. added). Are we to believe, as some do (cf. “Is There Only…?” 2009), that Jesus was implying neither He nor the Holy Spirit is divine? Not at all. Rather, when the Bible reveals that there is only one God, one Savior, one Lord, one Creator (Isaiah 44:24; John 1:3), etc., reason and revelation demand that we understand the inspired writers to be excluding everyone and everything—other than the members of the Godhead (see Lyons, 2008). Throughout the Gospel of John, the writer repeatedly referred to Jesus’ deity (1:1,3,23; 4:25; 9:38; 10:30-33; 20:28)—Jesus most certainly was not denying it in John 17:3. Unless the biblical text specifically mentions what a member of the Godhead does not know or do, we should be careful alleging ignorance, limited power, etc.
In Matthew 11:27, Jesus stated: “All things have been delivered to Me by My Father, and no one knows the Son except the Father. Nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and the one to whom the Son wills to reveal Him” (emp. added). Are we to believe that the Spirit of God does not fully comprehend the Son of God or God the Father? After all, Jesus said, “[N]o one knows the Son except the Father. Nor does anyone know the Father except the Son.” Once again, the terms “no one,” “anyone,” and “except” must be understood in a limited sense. Jesus was in no way suggesting that the Spirit of God, Who “searches all things, yes, the deep things of God” (1 Corinthians 2:10), does not fully understand the Father as Jesus does. The Son of God was revealing that aside from the “one to whom the Son wills to reveal Him” (Matthew 11:27), “no man or angel clearly and fully comprehends the character of the infinite God…. None but God fully knows Him” (Barnes, 1997, emp. in orig.). Once again, Jesus was alluding to His deity. Mere humans cannot truthfully speak in this manner. “The full comprehension and acknowledgment of the Godhead, and the mystery of the Trinity, belong to God alone” (Clarke, 1996). Jesus was and is God. We should no more exclude the Holy Spirit from Jesus’ statement about Himself and God the Father in Matthew 11:27 than we should exclude the Father or the Son from Paul’s statement about the Spirit in 1 Corinthians 2:10-11.

CONCLUSION

It is unnecessary to conclude that the Holy Spirit must at one time have given up some of His omniscience because Jesus stated of His return. “[N]o one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.” In light of the way in which God and the Bible writers oftentimes used exclusive terms in limited senses, especially as those terms relate to the Godhead, it cannot be proven that Jesus was excluding the Spirit of God in this statement. If we should not exclude Jesus and the Holy Spirit from the God that Jesus praised in John 17:3, and we should not exclude the Holy Spirit from the Divine that Jesus spoke of in Matthew 11:27, it seems entirely unnecessary to infer that in Mark 13:32 and Matthew 24:36 Christ was implying that the Holy Spirit was unaware of the day of His return.

REFERENCES

Barnes, Albert (1997), Barnes’ Notes (Electronic Database: Biblesoft).
Brents, T.W. (1874), The Gospel Plan of Salvation (Bowling Green, KY: Guardian of Truth Foundation, 1987 reprint).
Butt, Kyle (2003), “Do Babies Go to Hell When They Die?” Apologetics Press, http://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=13&article=1201.
Camp, Franklin (no date) “1 Peter 1:1-2,” Redemption Through the Bible (Adamsville, AL: Brother’s).
Clarke, Adam (1996), Adam Clarke’s Commentary (Electronic Database: Biblesoft).
Holding, James (2012), “Mark 13:32 and the Holy Spirit,” Tekton, http://www.tektonics.org/lp/mk1332.html.
“Is There Only One True God?” (2009), Jehovah’s Witnesses Official Web Site, http://www.watchtower.org/e/200602b/article_01.htm.
Jackson, Wayne (1995), “Did Jesus Exist in the Form of God While on Earth?” Reason & Revelation, 15[3]:21-22, March, http://www.apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=10&article=354.
Lane, William (1974), The Gospel of Mark (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans).
Lyons, Eric (2008), “The Only True God,” Apologetics Press, http://www.apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=10&article=983#.
Miller, Dave (2003), “The Age of Accountability,” Apologetics Press, http://www.apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=11&article=1202.

Atheists Are—“Bright”? by Dave Miller, Ph.D.


https://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=9&article=779

Atheists Are—“Bright”?

by  Dave Miller, Ph.D.

A recent atheist conference in Crystal City, Virginia included the usual insistence by atheists that “God is a myth” and “children must not be taught religion” (Castillo, 2007). Oxford professor Richard Dawkins unleashed his typical militant, intolerant tirade against Christians. He insisted: “Religion is not the root of all evil, but it gets in the way of [determining] how we got here and where we find ourselves...and that is an evil in itself” (Castillo, emp. added). Ironic, is it not, that if atheism is true and there is no God, no absolute, objective evil even exists. That means that Dawkins must use the term “evil” to refer simply to his own subjective opinion.
When asked to state the main difference between believers and atheists, Dawkins unhesitatingly quipped: “Well, we’re bright” (Castillo). Apart from the arrogance, let us make certain that we have grasped correctly his sentiment. In order to be an atheist, one must know that God does not exist. That means that one must possess evidence that proves that God does not exist. In fact, the atheist must know (and thus be able to prove) the following (see Warren and Flew, 1977, pp. 7-8,55-58):
1. Matter is eternal, having existed non-contingently, without a beginning.
2. Matter is all that exists.
3. Matter has always existed.
4. No one piece of matter is worth any more than any other piece of matter.
5. By sheer chance, dead matter became living matter.
6. By sheer chance, dead matter became conscious matter.
7. By sheer chance, dead matter became a human being.
8. By sheer chance, dead matter developed conscience.
But the atheist cannot know or prove any of these eight items! Even modern science acknowledges that the Universe is not eternal (see Miller, 2007, 27[4]:30-31). These eight are but a fraction of the insurmountable barriers to proving atheism. So the atheist cannot prove the very things that must be proven in order to assert that God does not exist. Yet, we are assured by one of the world’s leading atheists that they, in contrast to theists, are “bright.” “Professing to be wise, they became fools.... [and] exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator” (Romans 1:22,25).

REFERENCES

Castillo, Brent (2007), “Is U.S. Ready for an Atheist Revolution?,” The Wichita Eagle, October 11, [On-line], URL: http://www.kansas.com/opinion/castillo/v-print/story/197554.html.
Miller, Jeff (2007), “God and the Laws of Thermodynamics: A Mechanical Engineer’s Perspective,” Reason & Revelation, 27[4]:25-31, April, [On-line], URL: http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/3293.
Warren, Thomas B. and Antony G.N. Flew (1977), The Warren-Flew Debate on the Existence of God (Ramer, TN: National Christian Press).

Children and the Rod of Correction by Dave Miller, Ph.D.






https://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=7&article=1255

Children and the Rod of Correction

by  Dave Miller, Ph.D.

American civilization has undergone tremendous social shifting in the last fifty years in virtually every facet of its culture. This transformation is evident, for example, in the area of the family and parental discipline. From the beginning of this nation, most Americans have believed in the value of corporal punishment. This discipline has included spanking the child using a variety of instruments, including a “switch,” paddle, razor strap, yardstick, belt, or hand. The last generation to have experienced this approach to parenting on a wide scale was the World War II generation. Due to the adverse influence of social liberals and alleged “specialists” in human behavior and child psychology, the thinking of many Americans has now been transformed to the extent that corporal punishment has come to be viewed as “child abuse”—even by the judiciary.
Make no mistake: genuine child abuse is taking place every day in America. Some parents are burning, torturing, and even killing their children. However, the abuse of a good thing is no argument against its legitimate and judicious use. Extreme behavior often elicits an extreme reaction. We must not “throw out the baby with the bathwater.” Regardless of the superficial appeal of the arguments that are marshaled against spanking, those who recognize that the Bible is the inspired Word of God are more concerned with biblical insight regarding the matter. Does the Bible advocate or sanction the spanking of children?

THE BIBLE’S VIEWPOINT

Several verses refer explicitly to the use of corporal punishment in the rearing of children. The longstanding quip, “Spare the rod and spoil the child,” is undoubtedly a paraphrase of Solomon’s words: “He who spares his rod hates his son, but he who loves him disciplines him promptly” (Proverbs 13:24). This motif is repeated throughout Proverbs. For example, Solomon asserted “foolishness is bound up in the heart of a child, but the rod of correction will drive it far from him” (22:15). This one statement is packed with meaning that merits deep and prolonged meditation and analysis. Most modern adolescent psychologists have not even begun to plumb its depths, let alone agree with it.
Lest someone get the idea that Solomon used the term “rod” figuratively, without intending to leave the impression that parents should actually strike their children with a rod, he clarified the target: “Do not withhold correction from a child, for if you beat him with a rod, he will not die. You shall beat him with a rod, and deliver his soul from hell” (23:13-14). A proper balance is obviously needed between verbal reproof/encouragement on the one hand, and the application of corporal punishment on the other, as seen in the following words: “The rod and reproof give wisdom, but a child left to himself brings shame to his mother. Correct your son, and he will give you rest; yes, he will give delight to your soul” (29:15,17, emp. added). The immense importance of the interplay between positive instruction, encouragement, and nurturing, in conjunction with appropriate physical punishment, cannot be overestimated nor successfully discounted.

MEANING OF “ROD”

But what did Solomon mean by “rod”? The Old Testament uses primarily three Hebrew words to refer to a wooden stick:
Maqqel refers to a tree branch that has been transformed into a riding crop (Numbers 22:27), a shepherd’s staff (1 Samuel 17:40—which Goliath called a “stave” or “stick”—vs. 43), or a weapon of war (Ezekiel 39:9—“javelin” in the NKJV). It is also used as a symbol of dominion (e.g., Jeremiah 48:17—where it occurs in synonymous parallelism with matteh), and in its natural state as a branch of a poplar, chestnut, or almond tree (Genesis 30:37; Jeremiah 1:11) [see Harris, et al., 1980, 1:524; Botterweck, et al., 1997, 8:548-550].
Matteh occurs 252 times and is used to refer to a branch, stick, stem, rod, shaft, staff, and most often a tribe (some 180 times). It can refer to a stick used to beat out cumin/grain (Isaiah 28:27), a soldier’s spear (1 Samuel 14:27), as well as the shaft of an arrow (Habakkuk 3:9,14) [Botterweck, et al., 8:241; Gesenius, 1847, pp. 466-467].
Shevet, the word used in Proverbs, refers to a staff, stick, rod, scepter, and tribe. Gesenius defined it as “a staff, stick, rod” and then showed how it is translated differently in accordance with the use to which it was put, whether for beating, striking, chastening (Isaiah 10:5,15), a shepherd’s crook (Leviticus 27:32; Psalm 34:4), a king’s scepter (Genesis 49:10; Amos 1:5,8), a tribe (Judges 20:2), a measuring rod, or a spear (2 Samuel 18:14) [p. 801; cf. Harris, et al., 2:897].
Matteh and shevet are used together in Ezekiel 19:10-14 to refer to fresh tree branches. They are used in synonymous parallelism in Isaiah 28:27 as a stick used to beat out cumin/grain: “But the black cumin is beaten out with a stick (matteh), and the cumin with a rod (shevet).” They are unquestionably synonyms. If any distinction can be made between them, it is that matteh is not used to refer to a scepter (see Harris, et al., 2:897; although Gesenius, pp. 466-467). However, both are used to refer to a stick or rod. In fact, shevet is specifically referred to as a rod used for beating a human being: “And if a man beats his servant or his maidservant with a rod…” (Exodus 21:20). As Isaacs noted: “The Heb[rew] shebhet is the ordinary word for rod or club” (1959, 4:2702; cf. McClintock and Strong, 1880, 9:57-58,401).
In addition to the verses in Proverbs that refer specifically to spanking a child, several additional verses verify that literal striking of the body with a wooden stick is envisioned. For example, “Wisdom is found on the lips of him who has understanding, but a rod is for the back of him who is devoid of understanding” (Proverbs 10:13). “A whip for the horse, a bridle for the donkey, and a rod for the fool’s back” (Proverbs 26:3). Obviously, the “rod” is as literal as the “whip” and “bridle.” The Psalmist declared: “Then I will visit their transgression with the rod, and their iniquity with stripes” (Psalm 89:32). Though speaking figuratively, the Psalmist aligned “rod” with “stripes.” In passages where the term “rod” is used figuratively, the figurative use presupposes the literal meaning (e.g., Job 9:34; 21:9; Isaiah 10:24; 11:4; 14:29; 30:31; Lamentations 3:1; Micah 5:1).

CONCLUSIONS

In light of the linguistic data, the following conclusions are warranted:
First, the three terms are essentially synonyms with no real distinction to be discerned between them. They are as generic, ambiguous, and flexible as their English counterparts. As Orr stated: “Little distinction can be drawn between the Heb[rew] words used for ‘rod’ and ‘staff ’ ” (1959, 4:2596; also Funderburk, 1976, 5:132). The commonality that exists between them is the fact that they all refer to a stick/limb, i.e., a branch from a tree. In antiquity, scepters, spears, arrows, rods, staffs/staves were all made out of wood, i.e., tree branches (cf. Ezekiel 19:11). Hence, the distinction between them was one of purpose/function—not source. It follows that size, i.e., thickness and length, would likewise have varied. The Hebrew words themselves possess no inherent indication regarding size.
Second, the principle of spanking is clearly taught in Proverbs. This is beyond dispute. Since God would not approve of child abuse (cf. Colossians 3:21), it follows that whatever instrument is used for spanking, whether switch, yardstick, paddle, belt, razor strap, etc., should get the job done without inflicting inappropriate or unnecessary damage to the child’s body. The “switch” has much to commend it, and certainly coincides with the biblical texts on the subject. But good sense and personal judgment must be exercised in determining its size.
In his comments on the Hebrew word for “rod,” Hebrew scholar and Professor of Old Testament at Regents College, Bruce Waltke noted: “The rod was also used as an instrument for either remedial or penal punishment. …In Prov[erbs] it is the symbol of discipline, and failure to use the preventive discipline of verbal rebuke and the corrective discipline of physical punishment will end in the child’s death” (Harris, et al., 1980, 2:897, emp. added). The author of the apocryphal book, Ecclesiasticus, observed: “He who loves his son will whip him often, in order that he may rejoice at the way he turns out” (May and Metzger, 1965, p. 166).
Writing over one hundred years ago, professor W.F. Adeney offered a surprisingly current observation that has much to commend it:
The primitive rigour of the Book of Proverbs is repudiated by modern manners. Not only in domestic training, but even in criminal law, people reject the old harsh methods, and endeavor to substitute milder means of correction. No doubt there was much that was more than rough, even brutal, in the discipline of our forefathers. The relation between father and child was too often lacking in sympathy through the undue exercise of parental authority, and society generally was hardened rather than purged by pitiless forms of punishment. But now the question is whether we are not erring towards the opposite extreme in showing more tenderness to the criminal than to his victim, and failing to let our children feel the need of some painful discipline. We idolize comfort, and we are in danger of thinking pain to be worse than sin. It may be well, therefore, to consider some of the disadvantages of neglecting the old-fashioned methods of chastisement (1950, 9:258-259).

REFERENCES

Adeney, W.F. (1950 reprint), The Pulpit Commentary—Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon, ed. Spence, H.D.M. and J.S. Exell (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans).
Botterweck, G. Johannes, Helmer Ringgren, and Heinz-Josef Fabry, eds. (1997), Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans).
Funderburk, G.B. (1976), “Rod,” The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible, ed. Merrill Tenney (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan), 5:132-133.
Gesenius, William (1847), Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker), 1979 reprint.
Harris, R. Laird, Gleason Archer, Jr. and Bruce Waltke, eds. (1980), Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (Chicago, IL: Moody).
Isaacs, Nathan (1956), “Sceptre,” International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, ed. James Orr (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans), 4:2701-2702.
May, Herbert and Bruce Metzger (1965), The Oxford Annotated Bible With the Apocrypha (New York, NY: Oxford University Press).
McClintock, John and James Strong (1880), Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1970 reprint).
Orr, James (1959), “Rod,” International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, ed. James Orr (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans), 4:2596.

From Gary... Situation, conjunction and control


Recently, the topics that have been the focus of my posts have been the cause of much distress and downright anger for me.  I feel frustrated over the apparent destruction of my country and feel helpless to do anything significant to change its headlong descent into an ungodly atheistic abyss.

When I took my two dogs out for their last potty break before bed, I looked up and saw the conjunction of Venus and Jupiter. Then, I remembered that someone had said this was the same conjunction that is commonly called "The Star of Bethlehem. Not really sure about that, but I am very sure that I need to look up more!!!

Then, today, I saw this picture and was once again reminded of the beauty in the world; of the wonders of creation and the GOD who controls everything!!!  Today, I will make a point to open my eyes to the beauty all around me and find comfort in the fact that no matter who is president and what stupid things our government may do- GOD IS IN CONTROL!!!

Somehow, I just can't stop thinking about what Job said...

Job, Chapter 42 (WEB)
  1 Then Job answered Yahweh, 
  2 “I know that you can do all things,
and that no purpose of yours can be restrained.
  3 You asked, ‘Who is this who hides counsel without knowledge?’
therefore I have uttered that which I did not understand,
things too wonderful for me, which I didn’t know.
  4 You said, ‘Listen, now, and I will speak;
I will question you, and you will answer me.’
  5 I had heard of you by the hearing of the ear,
but now my eye sees you.
  6 Therefore I abhor myself,
and repent in dust and ashes.

Today, I will trust more, pray more and be encouraged by the truth of verse two and the personal message of verse six!!!

PS.. I am told that Venus and Jupiter will be at their closest point this evening; so about 30-40 minutes after sunset, look to the western sky and wonder!!!