Episode 250 - "Only Noah was left and those with him" - Genesis 7:17-24

Gen. 7:17 The flood continued forty days on the earth. The waters increased and bore up the ark, and it rose high above the earth. 18 The waters prevailed and increased greatly on the earth, and the ark floated on the face of the waters. 19 And the waters prevailed so mightily on the earth that all the high mountains under the whole heaven were covered. 20 The waters prevailed above the mountains, covering them fifteen cubits deep. 21 And all flesh died that moved on the earth, birds, livestock, beasts, all swarming creatures that swarm on the earth, and all mankind. 22 Everything on the dry land in whose nostrils was the breath of life died. 23 He blotted out every living thing that was on the face of the ground, man and animals and creeping things and birds of the heavens. They were blotted out from the earth. Only Noah was left, and those who were with him in the ark. 24 And the waters prevailed on the earth 150 days.

As one who’s had the privilege of studying under very accomplished scholars in the original languages of the Bible and who specialize in researching the ancient people in the Bible, one learns that even the experts disagree on interpretation and meaning at times. We can learn a lot by listening to these scholars. But we also need to discern where there is a splitting of hairs on issues that, quite frankly, are not helpful in understanding the big picture of what is being revealed. One example, in my mind, is the argument for a “local flood” rather than a global flood. This is the idea that the flood of Genesis did not encompass the world but the region where Noah lived. Scholars who hold this view have their reasons for interpreting this story as such. However, the reason why I believe it’s irrelevant is evident in this text.

In order to show this, let’s return to one of my favorite indicators that help us understand the message of this section of the flood story of Genesis. That indicator is “repetition.” Things that are repeated bring emphasis or focus upon what’s important. The first thing that I see repeated is “the waters prevailed.” This is not to say that there was a lot of water. There was a lot of water. But the point here is not the quantity of water, as it is the collective power and destructive effect that the water had upon the earth. In the beginning, God had separated the waters above from the waters below and caused the dry earth to appear (a separation of the water from the dry land). Now, the picture that is painted is one of the waters coming together to overwhelm the dry land and all life on it. The curse upon the earth was brought on by mankind’s disobedience. Now, mankind’s disobedience is being judged, seemingly, by the natural elements negatively impacted by that disobedience. Perhaps this overwhelming and chaotic scene was God’s way of saying, “I’m going to put the earth back under the chaotic, watery condition it was in before I separated the waters, brought forth dry land and filled these spheres with living things.” Humanity was given the authority to rule over creation, but in this divinely willed act, the waters prevailed and ruled over mankind and all living things on the dry land.

Verse 20 tells us that the waters prevailed fifteen cubits deep over the mountain tops. What’s the point in telling us that? It’s like the author is telling us how big this “monster” is that is prevailing. It’s certainly giving us details that nothing was going to be able to escape this judgment, with the exception of those who were on the ark. That which prevailed over all the dry land and all the living things on the dry land also bore up the ark and did not prevail over its inhabitants.

The next few verses (21-23) give us the next repetition. “All flesh died.” The statements in these few verses make it clear that nothing survived that was not on the ark, except for sea creatures. It emphasizes that what God said he was going to do, he did it exactly as he said he would.

This is where we see the pointlessness of arguing over a global versus local flood theory. Either way, the text does not seem to indicate any hyperbole, but rather a clear and precise fulfillment of God’s prophesied judgment upon the earth and the life therein.

If we need any more help, the second half of verse 23, “Only Noah was left, and those who were with him in the ark,” tells us plainly that nothing else survived. Why? The reason that has already been emphasized to the reader is that God deemed Noah righteous. Noah was the one who did “all that God commanded him.”

The message to the reader then is, first, God perfectly and completely judges disobedience. Nothing will escape God’s notice, and he will not let some things slide. Secondly, God alone perfectly judges who is righteous. God will rescue and protect from his prevailing judgment all those he deems righteous. Romans chapter three explains that Jesus Christ alone is perfectly righteous, and those who place their trust in him have his righteousness imputed to them. Because of that, those who have trusted in Jesus can rest knowing that we will be delivered from the ultimate coming judgment and enjoy eternal life in the presence of God. What a great hope!

Episode 233 - "Did God say . . ." - Genesis 3:1-3

Gen. 3:1 Now the serpent was more crafty than any other beast of the field that the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, “Did God actually say, ‘You shall not eat of any tree in the garden’?” 2 And the woman said to the serpent, “We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden, 3 but God said, ‘You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree that is in the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.’”

The first few chapters of Genesis are essential to understanding the Bible as a whole, and the third chapter of Genesis is no exception. What happens in Genesis 3 is the crisis or conflict for the greater story of God creating the world, designing humanity in his image, and giving them dignity and responsibility of being the stewards of God’s creation.

We recall that Adam named the animals. He exercised his God-given authority over the other creatures by naming them. So far, everything has gone according to what God has said. But every story has some type of crisis or conflict from which the plot develops, and a resolution is pursued. The crisis in God’s story through the Bible is revealed in this chapter. I believe that we are still experiencing this crisis today, but the resolution has been revealed, and we are waiting for the culmination of that resolution.

This third chapter opens by saying, “The serpent was more crafty than any other beast of the field” (Gen 3:1). The serpent then speaks in the following verse. For those of us, living in today’s age, this would obviously cause us to suspect the genre to be fantasy and that this is fiction. Who could possibly assess the serpent’s craftiness, and when has anyone run into a talking snake? But if we believe this is God’s story in which we play a part, let’s take this at face value and see if we can identify with what is going on.

The statement that the serpent was more crafty than any other beast suggests that the serpent was going to cause trouble. I believe that is its purpose in the narrative. It should heighten our sense of an imminent problem.

If you recall, God gave the command to Adam in Genesis 2:16-17 to eat freely of every tree except for the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. In the unfolding of the narrative, the woman was not even created when the command was given. Yet, the serpent goes to her directly to ask what God said. Why doesn’t the serpent go to the man who has authority over him to ask what God said? If I’m not mistaken, the implied purpose is to test whether the message had been communicated to her. Based on the information that this creature is more crafty than the others, the serpent’s intent is not to discover God’s message but to confuse and contradict it.

This is evident in the first words it speaks, “Did God actually say, ‘You shall not eat of any tree in the garden’?” (Gen 2:1b) The serpent acts as though it knows what God has said, but is unsure of the details. Personally, I think it knew exactly what God said. Why? Because the first chapter of the Bible vividly describes God as one who expresses and makes known his will. If God is God, he could have thought creation into existence. But instead, he spoke creation into existence. This creator God clearly reveals his will. This fact alone distinguishes the LORD from other gods of the various people groups we read about in the Bible who worship gods represented by inanimate objects. They don’t speak. He also communicated with his people letting the man know that he could freely eat from every tree but the one tree of the knowledge of good and evil. God even communicated what would happen if the man disobeyed God’s one prohibition. I think we are supposed to understand that all the creatures heard God’s word and that in the harmony of all creation, everything understood God’s expressed word.

The craftiness of the serpent becomes more apparent in this question. Instead of repeating specifically what God said, the serpent turned God’s words 180 degrees. In doing so, the serpent indirectly challenges God’s goodness. It is using a question rhetorically to insinuate that God is cruel by putting them in such a wonderful place and not allowing them to enjoy it.

Eve correctly responded with what God said and the consequences with one little addition. She adds, “neither shall you touch it.” (Gen 3:3) Personally, I think this is supposed to get our attention. I think the reader is supposed to cry out at least in their thoughts, “No! God didn’t say that.”

Well, there’s more to this conversation. But I want to pause here to focus on a few things we should learn and even internalize.

First, God is good and desires good for his creatures. In a world in which there is a lot of trouble, we need to be guarded against the temptations to think otherwise.

Second, we should endeavor to know God’s word because it’s through obeying God’s word that we have life. When we get to the New Testament, we discover that Jesus is God’s Word. He is the most clear revelation of who God is. He has promised eternal life to those who believe in him.

Episode 127 - "Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews" - John 19:16-22

So they took Jesus, 17 and he went out, bearing his own cross, to the place called The Place of a Skull, which in Aramaic is called Golgotha. 18 There they crucified him, and with him two others, one on either side, and Jesus between them. 19 Pilate also wrote an inscription and put it on the cross. It read, “Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews.” 20 Many of the Jews read this inscription, for the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city, and it was written in Aramaic, in Latin, and in Greek. 21 So the chief priests of the Jews said to Pilate, “Do not write, ‘The King of the Jews,’ but rather, ‘This man said, I am King of the Jews.’” 22 Pilate answered, “What I have written I have written.”

The account of Jesus’ crucifixion is consistent with other historical information that exists regarding the Roman practice of crucifixion. The detail in verse 17 that Jesus went out, “bearing his own cross” was common for the condemned to carry the crossbeam to the place of crucifixion where they would be hoisted up on the vertical post and nailed to the cross. Other Gospel accounts include details that a bystander was compelled by the soldiers to ultimately carry Jesus’ cross. This was probably due to the effect on his body of the previous flogging and beating he had received. He must have been very weak from it. John does not feel compelled to include that in this account and probably wanted to highlight that Jesus did carry his own cross, being treated like other criminals, since Jesus had taught that those who wanted to be his disciples must “carry his own cross.” (Luke 14:25-35)  Jesus never required his disciples to do things he could not or would not do himself.

While some commentators make suggestions about Golgotha “looking like a skull,” the reality is that no one really knows why it was called “The Place of the Skull” or its actual location today. 

The next point that Pilate wrote an inscription, “Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews” is also consistent historically. It was common for the name of the condemned and the crime for which they were being executed to be written and displayed with the individual to be a testimony to others why they were being executed. It is this inscription to which I will return shortly.

In verse 20, John writes that “Many of the Jews read this inscription.” Why is that? Because it was “near the city” and it’s during the Passover Feast when people are coming from all over to celebrate this feast. 

John then points out the inscription was written in the three common languages of the day “Aramaic, Latin, and Greek.” What we see in these two points is the impeccable timing of God for the Son of Man to be lifted up like the serpent in the wilderness and for the Lamb of God to be sacrificed to take away the sins of the world. Jews and Gentiles alike would see Jesus on the cross with the message accessible to everyone that this is the King of the Jews. 

You can why this bothered the chief priests. They understood the impact this might have on people and they appealed to Pilate to change it. But, Pilate got his final revenge on them by saying, “What I have written I have written.” It has been observed that every other occurrence of the Greek word in John that is translated “written” refers to God’s word. It would seem that John mentions this to suggest that even through Pilate or one of his soldiers, God’s word was proclaiming His revelation and truth regarding Jesus. 

As I write this, we have entered Lent this past week and moving toward the Passion week, I hope you will reflect upon Jesus as “The King of the Jews.” He is the Messiah and he will return and be our eternal king. Praise the Lord!

Episode 122 - God's word is faithful and true - John 18:28-32

John 18:28   Then they led Jesus from the house of Caiaphas to the governor’s headquarters. It was early morning. They themselves did not enter the governor’s headquarters, so that they would not be defiled, but could eat the Passover. 29 So Pilate went outside to them and said, “What accusation do you bring against this man?” 30 They answered him, “If this man were not doing evil, we would not have delivered him over to you.” 31 Pilate said to them, “Take him yourselves and judge him by your own law.” The Jews said to him, “It is not lawful for us to put anyone to death.” 32 This was to fulfill the word that Jesus had spoken to show by what kind of death he was going to die.

No matter how often one reads the Scriptures, new insights on the events and meaning are not uncommon. Even if they are subtle or insignificant concerning the primary message, they are exciting. Such is the case here. As mentioned before, John tells us the crowd first brought Jesus to Annas. Jesus’ time before Annas appears relatively brief before John informs us that “Annas sent him bound to Caiaphas, the high priest.” (John 18:24) I assumed that Caiaphas must have been at a completely different location, perhaps his own home. However, there’s a problem with that. 

Notice that after Annas sent Jesus to Caiaphas, John turns our attention back to the fire and Peter’s last two denials. Then, in verse 28, John records that “they led Jesus from the house of Caiaphas to the governor’s headquarters.” Wait! What happened with Jesus while he was with Caiaphas? The answer is that John doesn’t tell us. Fortunately, we have other gospel accounts of Jesus’ life and ministry, and they often provide different details about the same events. For example, Matthew records the crowd took Jesus to Caiaphas first and makes no mention of him being taken to Annas. (Matt. 26:57 and following) What does this mean? Is Matthew’s account wrong? Is John’s account wrong? The answer is that neither has to be incorrect. It’s simply that Matthew and John chose to include and exclude specific details depending upon what they wanted to share with their audience. 

In comparing the two accounts, it appears that Annas and Caiaphas were at the same facility but perhaps in different areas. It seems reasonable that they would have taken him to Annas first since they considered him to be the true high priest, but then led him to Caiaphas, who ultimately asserts that Jesus has committed blasphemy and deserves to die. (Matthew 26:65-66) It simply wasn’t important for Matthew to record the details of Jesus' short exchange with Annas. But, we can see how the three denials of Peter occurred during Jesus’ trial by the priests and before he was sent to Pilate. 

Moving onto the message of this section, we see more irony, which John so often highlights in how these people have violated the Law by not bringing valid witnesses to convict Jesus. Yet, they take such great caution to “not be defiled” (v. 28) by entering Pilate’s headquarters. They don’t see how they have already defiled themselves.

Pilate appears to see through this group and their attempt to get him to do their bidding. (v. 29-31a) The irony continues when they tell Pilate, “it is not lawful for us to put anyone to death.” (v. 31b) That was true. It wasn’t lawful under the Roman government for the Jews to serve capital punishment. But, that didn’t stop them from trying at earlier times when they picked up stones to stone Jesus, yet he always escaped because it was not his time.

Furthermore, the Mosaic Law called for capital punishment for several violations of the Law. They think they are obeying it by (wrongly) condemning Jesus. (The Jews reveal this to Pilate in John 19:7) So, in making this claim to Pilate that they cannot put anyone to death, they are essentially subverting the authority of  God’s Law under Roman law for their evil purpose. If this is not self-defilement and absurdly ironic, I don’t know what is. Peter incriminated himself, and these Jews are incriminating themselves while Jesus alone stands guiltless.

John explains in verse 32 how their appeal to have Jesus executed by the Romas fulfilled Jesus’ prophecy of how he would die. What is meant by this? Crucifixion was a common form of capital punishment by the Romans because they weren’t just executing people; it was a form of intimidation and control over people. Crucifixion was often near where people would see the condemned hanging and suffering on a cross. It was a message that they better obey the Roman government; or suffer the same fate. Jesus' words recorded back in John 3:14 asserted that the Son of Man must be lifted up like the serpent in the wilderness that Moses lifted up. 

Is there a lesson we can learn through this? If nothing else, it’s that God’s word is true. The words of people are not reliable. Our motivations and pride sometimes lead us to absurd and ironic inconsistencies between what we say we believe and do. Yet, God’s word is faithful and true.

Episode 55 - No one ever spoke like this man! John 7:45-52

John 7:45   The officers then came to the chief priests and Pharisees, who said to them, “Why did you not bring him?” 46 The officers answered, “No one ever spoke like this man!” 47 The Pharisees answered them, “Have you also been deceived? 48 Have any of the authorities or the Pharisees believed in him? 49 But this crowd that does not know the law is accursed.” 50 Nicodemus, who had gone to him before, and who was one of them, said to them, 51 “Does our law judge a man without first giving him a hearing and learning what he does?” 52 They replied, “Are you from Galilee too? Search and see that no prophet arises from Galilee.”

Remember that this is the last day of the Feast of Booths. Officers that had been sent to arrest Jesus returned to the chief priests and the Pharisees empty handed. What is not immediately evident is how long they’ve been gone. Had they only gone out a half an hour earlier or maybe a half day. The answer seems to lie back in verse 14 which tells us that Jesus starting teaching about half way through the feast and Jesus antagonists tried to arrest him. But, they could not. This would seem to indicate that they had been deployed on this mission for about four days. They have failed on the mission they were given. Their only response to the leaders who dispatched them was, “No one ever spoke like this man!”

This may possibly be one of the most important truths we can glean from this whole event. Why is it important? Because one of the first things John wanted his audience to understand is that Jesus is the “Logos.” He is the Word of God. He is God’s message to humanity. 

John is not the only writer of our Scriptures that communicate this truth about Jesus. Notice how the author of the book of Hebrews opens his book/letter, “Heb. 1:1 Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets, 2 but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world. Jesus is God’s conclusive and most comprehensive special revelation to humanity.

In our text today, even some representatives from the antagonists cannot deny the wisdom and power of Jesus’ words. Yet, the priests and Pharisees respond with nothing but attack and lies. After suggesting that the officers had been deceived, they insist that none of them had believed in Jesus. Yet, even Nicodemus had said, “We know that you are a teacher come from God.” At least Nicodemus as well as these officers had been moved by Jesus’ words and signs.

Next, the Pharisees attacked “the crowd” by saying that they don’t know the Law and are accursed. In response to this Nicodemus asked a question that reveals that they themselves are not following the Law. He asks, “Does our law judge a man without first giving him a hearing and learning what he does?” Nicodemus seems to be arguing from a principle found in the Law such as Deuteronomy 17 and 19 which requires reasonable evidence to validate an accusation. Yet, the chief priests and Pharisees don’t seem to be concerned with following that part of the Law. This raises the question If people who don’t know the Law are accursed because they cannot follow a law they don’t know, how much more would people who do know the Law be accursed if they refuse to follow it? These guys are digging a deeper hole for themselves.

When they attack Nicodemus, one of their own, they suggest that no prophet comes from Galilee. In truth, the prophet Jonah was from Galilee. Lies or willful assertions from their own ignorance makes their attacks and justification laughable. 

It is clear that they do not really want to listen to God’s Word. That leaves us with the challenge of do we want to listen to God’s Word or do we want to dismiss Jesus’ teachings?