Matthew 1:1-1:17, Luke 3:23-3:38

New Thoughts (7/8/04-8/7/04)

General Matters (7/8/04-7/10/04)

Well, this has certainly proven a much larger undertaking than I ever expected! In short, this last month has been somewhat of an introductory overview into the entire sweep of Old Testament history. There is no way I could do the subject of Jesus' lineage justice by simply commenting on the overall sweep of these two lists. Instead, I will pursue some general observations and questions first, and then pursue some specifics of the genealogy during each major period of God's history.

I'll begin by simply saying that looking into these genealogies has probably raised more questions than it can hope to answer. I don't have any illusions of finally discovering the correlation between the apparent discrepancies that exist comparing Matthew to Luke, or comparing them both to Chronicles, in some instances. Two thousand years of thought haven't unraveled that knot satisfactorily. I don't expect my added month will suddenly break it loose. That said, there are some possibilities that come to mind, but they can be no more than that - possibilities. These will perhaps be explored in their proper place.

One question that is bound to come to mind, looking at these two family trees is why they are so different. This can perhaps be broken into two different questions, one of which I think can be answered with relative certainty. Upon the other there can be only speculation. This latter question is concerned with the actual names on the list. How can they be so different? How is it possible that so many from Luke's list in particular seem to be unknown to the rest of Scripture? As I said, this is a matter which one can only speculate about. Two thousand years on, there has been no clear and decisive answer to this matter. The other question, though, is concerned with form. Matthew and Luke have each chosen a starting point and a progression for their genealogical listings, but they have chosen to progress through the list in opposing directions, and to differing extents. Why?

The answer to this one is actually fairly plain to see in the text itself, moreso if we keep in mind the authors' respective target audiences. Begin with Matthew. He makes his key point in the first sentence. What was important for him to establish with his readers was that Jesus was descended both from David and from Abraham. These are the key matters to a Jewish readership. One could hardly be a Jew in Israel and not be aware of the covenant God had made with Abraham. On this covenant hinged everything: one's property rights, the very existence of Israel as a nation - this was all a result of God's covenant promise. Furthermore, full participation in Jewish society absolutely required certifiable proof of descent from Abraham. Without that, one could not even fully participate in the worship of God as the Temple authorities defined it. You could come no closer than the court of the Gentiles, the marketplace zone that Jesus cleared out in the course of His ministry. One could hardly be expected to accept a Messiah who could not declare Himself a son of Abraham! The covenant promises were made, after all, to a particular seed of Abraham. Messiah, in Whom all the promises of the covenant combined and rested must therefore be from Abrahamic lineage. The son of Abraham, the seed of Abraham, received the promise that all the nations would be blessed by him. The son of Abraham received the promise of possessing the land of Israel in perpetuity.

Next comes David. In David's line resided the promise of rule. Again, that promise was to be delivered to one particular seed of David. When Israel died, his blessings were given to his sons, and those blessings were given by the informing of the Holy Spirit. Twelve sons were arrayed before him, but the prophetic announcement of rule was given over Judah, not to the firstborn. When David had long sat upon the throne, God spoke again in this matter of who should rule over Israel. No longer would any member of the tribe of Judah suffice, it must be shown that the king was a descendant of David. Further messages from the prophets had made it clear to the Jewish mind that Messiah, the promised seed of David and of Abraham, would be born in Bethlehem.

Matthew was writing to his fellow Jews about this Messiah who had defied all their preconceptions, yet was truly Messiah. To counter the weight of their preconceptions, Matthew leans hard on showing the prophetic fulfillments that surrounded this Jesus. The very first thing to establish with his readers is that Jesus is, at the very least, a candidate for the position. Sharing his nation's preoccupation with genealogies, he lays out the proof. Yes, this man is descended from David and from Abraham. He fits the ticket.

There are other questions one might ask about Matthew's approach. For instance, few of the wives of the ancestors are mentioned. To what end were those who are mentioned included? Out of this whole line, only Judah's wife, Boaz's wife, Obed's wife, and David's wife are noted. They were hardly the only ones with multiple choice wives. Nor were these by any means the only women of note along the way. Curiously, the ones mentioned are all 'beyond the pale' in some fashion or another.

Tamar had come into Judah's family as a bride to his firstborn. He, in turn, had been fathered upon a Canaanite woman, hardly kosher for a son of Abraham. Indeed, so unblessed were the children of that union that two were killed by the Lord because of their evil ways. Meanwhile, following Jewish tradition, Tamar was promised to the third, but Judah put her off thinking the blame for his sons' deaths lay with her. Ah! The blindness of parents! Eventually, she posed as a prostitute and conned Judah into fathering a child upon her, only revealing herself when very evidently pregnant. Judah was forced, rather by embarrassment than anything else, to take her as his own wife, although she was already promised to his own son. Not exactly, the obvious choice for the family tree, then.

Rahab, while she had shown favor to Israel as they came to take Canaan, was not a Jewess at all. She was a Canaanite prostitute! Yet, once more Matthew makes a point of reminding his readers that she had a part in this thing. This is followed by Ruth, another outsider to the ways of Israel, from the daughters of Moab, in fact! One can read in the Scriptures the exclusions placed upon these people. They were not to be accepted amongst the tribes of Israel, yet here she is! And she is only removed from the illustrious king David by one intervening generation! Shocking! Last in this list of shockers is Bathsheba. So inappropriate is her presence in the line that Matthew will not even suffer himself to write the name, preferring instead to mention only that she had been the wife of another.

So, what was Matthew's purpose in pointing out these notorious women in the line of Christ? Why not focus instead on the exemplary wives who could be found in that tree as well? Consider the story of our Savior's birth: Mary was betrothed to Joseph, a married woman in all but one matter. She was discovered to be pregnant, and the marriage had not yet been consummated. Recall that she had spent the first three months of this out of wedlock condition visiting with Elizabeth. When she returned to Nazareth, her condition would have been already beyond hiding, and many a neighbor would doubtless think that was exactly what she had been doing. Joseph, her betrothed, was trying to think of some means of breaking things off without totally destroying this young girl before the Lord sent word to him that he should go ahead with the marriage. The point: Mary's pregnancy was no secret to the neighborhood. The fruit of that pregnancy was also no secret. The whole town knew of Jesus' illegitimacy, and if they knew, one can bet the rest of Israel had been informed as well.

It occurs to me, given all this, that along with establishing Jesus' credentials as a true son of the two key figures of Jewish history, the events of His birth were hardly a disqualifying factor either. Look at the precedents, he says. (Interesting, isn't it, that all of his examples are taken en route to David!) We know that the promise was made to David, that the line from Abraham to Messiah must necessarily pass through the great king, but look at the couples through which that line descended! Before he sets out to explain the circumstances of this all important birth, he makes a point that even if no explanation were forthcoming, it would hardly matter. Worse things than that could be found in the necessary ancestry of Messiah, whoever He might be.

Turning to Luke, this same concern is addressed immediately. The modern translations don't really do his first sentence justice. It is given to us that Jesus was 'supposedly the son of Joseph.' This doesn't really capture the intended message very well. What is being said is that He was legally Joseph's son. Any question of legitimacy had long since been resolved by the time He began to minister. There is also in that word the sense that this was generally acknowledged, an accepted fact amongst the people. As much as there were those who could not stop whispering about the scandalous circumstances of His birth, the matter was legally settled, and generally acknowledged as such. Luke has already explained the story of Jesus' birth by the time he introduces us to Jesus' family tree. His reason for addressing the role of Joseph in the matter is, I think, to make it clear that we are looking at the fleshly line of descent, not the more important heavenly line of descent. Indeed, by the end of his list, Luke makes clear that either way - spirit or flesh - Jesus remains Son of God.

As a byproduct of this, he also lays out a basis for the Christian claim to be children of God, although he makes it a claim that any man could sign up to. This is a particularly important point for the Gentiles to whom he writes, and for the Jews among them as well. All who walk the earth, and all who ever have, can trace their lineage back to Adam, and therefore to God. The exclusive nature of Jewish faith up that point, their near refusal to share that faith with those outside Israel, could not be sustained on the idea that they alone had the critical line of descent. Sure they were sons of Abraham, but it was not every child of Abraham that would receive the promise, only one. Sure, they were chosen of God, but not because of anything in them. For the Gentiles, there is a hint of the universal nature of salvation in that all can claim a degree of relationship to Jesus on this same basis. All can claim relationship to each other on this basis as well.

We are all, believer and unbeliever alike, children of God. That may shock us a bit, but it is as plain as the fact that Jesus was descended from Adam, and Adam had no progenitor other than God. We are all God's children, the question is, how many are sons? Even amongst professed believers, there are many to be found who will claim to be sons when the most they can legitimately lay claim to is being children. Jesus made this point with the Pharisees. "We are sons of Abraham!" they cried. They could doubtless produce their genealogies to provide proof of this matter. But God is not terribly concerned with lines of fleshly descent. He could, if He felt it necessary, destroy the whole mess, and raise up new sons to Abraham from among the rocks of the field. Genealogies don't establish the status of son. They can only establish the status of child. A son, as Jesus pointed out to the Pharisees, will behave in the fashion he has learned from his father. It is only as the character is conformed to the example of this cherished elder that one truly achieves the status of son. In matters spiritual, our character becomes the unerring indicator of who our true father is.

Love and desire, faith and obedience, honor and reverence: These things all dwell as one, in one accord, in the legitimate son. The real son cannot but obey his father's commands, cannot but desire what his father wishes. We cannot claim to honor one we do not obey. We cannot revere one whose word we feel free to ignore. Where is love that does not desire its loved one's desires? Where is faith that does not believe the necessity of what it hears from the object of faith? Reverence without love, without desire, is fear - abject fear. We can hold in awe anything that has power over us to destroy us, but we cannot love it. We cannot desire it. It is an awe of fearfulness. But perfect love casts out all fear! The reverence remains, but it is the reverence one cannot help but have towards Him who has saved us so many times. He has shown Himself a most worthy Father to all His children, He has established sufficient reason for us to pursue the example He provides.

Now, I cannot speak for any other, but I know that in myself I can hardly lay claim to having these characteristics in me at all times. While I love Him dearly, I cannot say I love Him perfectly. While I desire Him most assuredly I cannot say that I always desire what He desires. Truth be told, there are times when I'd just as soon He left me alone for awhile. Life was easier when I didn't see His example constantly before me. But those moments pass, thanks be to God! No, I certainly cannot claim unwavering faith and obedience - especially the obedience part. There are more than enough examples I could pull up without trying too hard that would show that I do not always do as He would do. No, if I were left with nothing but this description of the legitimate son, I should be forced to walk away, head hung in shame, never to seek entrance into His house again.

But this is not all I am left with! I am no more without hope than those who sought so imperfectly to pursue the Law. Hope is not to be found in perfect conformance. It cannot be, because such perfect conformance is not to be found in imperfect flesh! We are, in ourselves, wholly and utterly incapable of upholding the whole of the Law for so much as a single day! The day we think to have done so is the day we have allowed ourselves to be fooled. In the same fashion, we are, in ourselves, just as wholly and utterly incapable of living the lifestyle of a true son. Think about it! The true son does as he sees his father doing. Our Father laid out the pattern for obedience in that very Law we are incapable of following. The capability is not in us! But, shall we despair? Should we all give up now, and return to our old ways? Not at all, for God has provided! He has sent Himself, in His Son, to furnish what is needed! This is a large part of what it meant to be the Christ, the Messiah. Yes, He was and is King of kings. Yes, He was, is, and ever shall be the Savior of the world, and all who are in it. He is also our propitiation - the Sacrifice, the Altar, and the High Priest all in One. He is the mercy seat. He is, at this hour, in every hour of need (which is to say, every hour), our Advocate, our Defense Counsel, standing before our Father the Judge, and laying out our defense when the enemy of our soul would bring accusations.

For every failure of our obedience, for every slip of our tongue, God has furnished what is needed in Christ. Assuredly, we will hear a list of our sins when we come before Him in that final day - but only such sins as we have refused to confess. If we confess our sins to Him, He has told us, He is faithful to forgive us. He is faithful to furnish what is needed. Furthermore, we are given to understand that what He has forgiven is wiped from the record. It has been placed beyond mentioning, and shall be remembered no more. Truly, He has provided all that is needful for us. He has provided the Perfect Sacrifice - Him whose fleshly lineage we consider here. He has provided most wonderfully, for He is the Father of Lights, the Giver of every good and perfect gift.

Before I move on to the genealogy itself, there is one other general question that comes to mind in considering the overall lay of the lists. Why is Matthew so concerned to show fourteen generations in each of the periods he covers? Indeed, the lists are a few names shy of accurate, apparently in the interest of maintaining this odd symmetry. In the case of Jehoiakim, at least, it would seem most improbable that the omission was simply poor research or forgetfulness. Here was the king who was personally responsible for Judah's exile becoming an irrevocable certainty, and a Jew could forget this? No, it would seem Matthew went to some lengths to have his three by fourteen genealogy. Why? Can it be that he simply wanted to emphasize the aptness of the timing? It could be that simple, I suppose - as if to make the point that some major event in the calendar of God's blessings upon Israel had occurred in these consistent intervals. The time was due for the next event, and here it was: Messiah! I wonder how many generations have passed since.

Given the penchant for finding deep significance in numbers, it may also be that the number fourteen had some mystic significance to the Jewish mind. However, I can find no reference to such, other than that there is a pair of sevens, and seven is certainly a number of significance in Scripture, as would be the three to be found in Matthew's three divisions. However, this all seems just a bit far fetched to me. I would tend to suspect that the other theory is more probable, that Matthew simply wanted to show that the time was right.

Just the Names (7/12/04-7/13/04)

I had thought there might be something of interest to be found in the names of Jesus' ancestors, but if there is, I fail to see it. However, it is somewhat convenient to see them laid out in order. Through to Abraham, there is only Luke's list to consider of course, which list is to the right. From Abraham to David, both authors are in agreement, but from David to Zerubbabel, there is not one name to be found in common. Matthew proceeds right on through the list of Judah's kings (omitting one or two), whereas Luke pursues a different son of David's. The two lines converge once more at Zerubbabel, then diverge once more. Curiously, between the two kings, the number of generations in both lists is about equal, whereas the final line through the silent years shows many more generations in Luke's list than in Matthew's. What can be made of this? Very little.

In the final entries of this listing, I side with the traditional view that Luke has followed Mary's line rather than David's. This cannot be declared unequivocally based on the text, but still seems a reasonable answer to some part of the question regarding the drastic differences in the two genealogies. Luke clearly had conversations with her in preparing his gospel. Joseph, on the other hand, is all but unknown to us apart from the few sketches we are given of his involvement in Jesus' upbringing. Matthew, as a Jew writing to Jews, would be more inclined to follow the paternal line. As a tax-collector, he might have had some degree of access to the records of that lineage, as well. This, I do not know.

Before the Flood (7/12/04-7/15/04)

Adam: 0-930, Seth: 130-1042, Enosh: 235-1140, Cainan: 325-1235, Mahalaleel: 395-1290, Jared: 460-1422, Enoch: 622-987, Methuselah: 687-1656, Lamech: 874-1651, Noah: 1056-2006

By the time of Noah's death, we have covered 2006 years, about as many years than have passed since the birth of Christ Jesus, whom we consider here. I know many attempts have been made in the past to make something of this, to show an equivalency to periods of time so as to predict the return of our King. I will not do so. First and foremost, it is the admonition of our King that the timing is not ours to know. No matter how men may try to sidestep that, it would be better by far that we simply accept our Lord's word for it, and live each day in joyful and earnest expectation of His return. Secondly, before one gets much past Abraham, it becomes next to impossible to determine the dates of birth and death with any degree of clarity. Those who make claims to having this well-defined timeline must find their data somewhere other than the pages of Scripture, for God in His wisdom countered the curiosity of His children by leaving the trail blurred in the sands of time.

One might ask, then, why He left things so clearly marked out for these first generations. One might ask, but I cannot say as I could answer. That said, there are some interesting things to note in the timeline of these first several generations. What I find most stunning is the thought that Noah was the first generation to be born who had not known Adam personally. Imagine! Nine generations of the family all present at the same time. All nine generations had been present to witness Enoch's being no more. All nine had known Adam, the son of God. All had grown up aware of their relatives on the other side of the tracks, the family of Cain. Noah was the first who must trust to word of mouth when it came to Adam, Seth, and Enoch. These three might have been considered the pillars of the family. Adam, as the progenitor of all, must have a place of honor in the minds of all in spite of his failure in Eden. He is the patriarch of patriarchs. Seth, the substitute, third son of man, through whom the line Cain had sought to destroy was reestablished. Enoch, who walked with God and was no more. Of these early generations, these are the names that shine even to our day. There is Methuselah, as well, of course, but his fame is more to do with having lived to a fine old age. We like to think this is somehow connected with right living or some goodness in man, but it is God who determines our days, and we do well to remember that all our modern medical wonders, all our careful diets and exercise programs, all our great paranoid clinging to life will not do one bit towards lengthening our stay on earth by even a minute.

Now, I want to turn back to Seth for a moment, because there is that about him which deserves a bit of exploration. He was the third son of Adam, the third son of man. His father had failed to obey the command of God as God's enemy sought to destroy the work of creation. He had two older brothers, and yet he had none. The firstborn, who should have carried forth the family name had been murdered in a fit of jealousy, and jealousy over what? Over God's opinion of him! Both he and his brother had grown up with the same parents, the same upbringing. Both were equally aware of who God was and what He required. Both knew that an offering to Him required blood, for life is in the blood. Yet, only Abel had brought such an offering. Only Abel was willing to confess his sins to God and accept God's forgiveness. Cain came with a lesser offering, an offering of works. In this was a tacit refusal to confess his own sins, and so, he was left to them. Left to his sins, his sins quickly overcame him, and he finally made a blood sacrifice. He sacrificed his own brother, but it was not a sacrifice made to God. It could not have been acceptable in His sight even if it were. No, it was a sacrifice to that which Cain truly worshiped: vile pride and greed, and with this sacrifice he established his own family line.

What of Adam and Eve? With this one act, their own son had deprived them of both their firstborn and their second. Where, then, was the heel that would crush the serpent's head? See how that wily serpent had done his best to ensure that the heel would never fall! But his most crafty moves cannot take our God and Father by surprise. The plans He lays are beyond the enemy's capacity to disturb. There came a third son, and in him was found righteousness, in him was found one who would follow in the faith of his father. Through him, through the substitute, the family of man was restored.

See Jesus in this! Here is a type of Him who was to come. He, too, was the substitute, our propitiation, the necessary blood sacrifice to which every true sacrifice of worship had pointed. In Him, our substitute, the family of man is truly restored. Through every generation from Adam on down, there had been those who sought that restoration, who understood what had been lost and longed to see it found once more. All the longing of the pure in heart is for this restoration of things to what they were intended to be. This is the wish of shalom - everything restored. This is what our Substitute brings to us. In Him and in Him alone the family of man is restored to what it was intended to be. In His life, we were given to see life lived as God intended, man acting as God intended. In His life, we were given to see what it meant to obey God's law - love to Him, and love to man. In His sacrifice, we received the forgiveness we had so longed for, we are put firmly on the path back to Eden, back to life as it was intended to be. In Him, we are made fit for the eternity that Adam had at the start.

Enoch presents another case of substitution. There had been an earlier Enoch in the history of man, a descendant of Cain's. Like Enoch who walked with God, he had a son whose name, while not Methuselah, was similar in both form and meaning, and like Enoch who walked with God, he had a grandson named Lamech. Three generations, then, of parallel development in Cain's line, but to what result? By the time Lamech had matured, the fruit of Cain's rebellion was in full ripeness. Lamech of Cain's line became father of Jabal, Jubal, and Tubal-cain. These children, in turn, were the progenitors of every rebellious people that ever walked the earth. Enoch, then, was a true son of Cain, fully initiated into the city of man, the city of rebellion. His grandson boasted of being 'more odious than Cain.' He was proud of his evil. Cain, having murdered, had sought to hide himself away. Lamech, having murdered, found in it a cause for boasting. And he trained his children well. To a man, they showed themselves to be true sons of their father, men of similar character.

Return now to the line of promise. Seth had begotten a son, Enosh. Only two generations removed from Adam, and already the frailty of life had become evident, evident enough that Seth named his child 'mortal.' Any thought of immortality had been taken from mankind. It must be said that this was God's grace in action, for immortality without purity would be eternal torment. Enosh, mortal, was a confession on Seth's part of the frailty of the human condition. This might seem odd coming as it does from one who lived so many hundreds of years. Indeed, looking at the line from Adam to Noah, it's hard to associate frailty with these men of such great longevity. However, as much as all these generations had grown up with the example and understanding of Adam to shape them, as well as that of all their other predecessors, they had also grown up with the example of Cain hand his brood near at hand. As Moses stood before all Israel and said, 'behold the blessing and the curse, now choose,' so spoke the lives of men to Seth and those who followed. They could see the righteousness, imperfect though it was, of their own family, and they could see the developments occurring in the family of Cain.

By the time of Enosh, the distinction had already become plain to see. That can be seen not only in his name, but in the fact that he was born almost as the hallmark of a time when men began to truly feel their need for God. Cain had walked away from Him. The impact of that choice was becoming more and more clear with each succeeding generation. Adam had made his mistake, but he had not walked away from the Lord, remained faithful to him, and his faith was contagious. Seth walked in the faith of his father, recognized, seeing his cousins' downward spiral, that man without God was certain to become just as vile as had they.

Enoch, several generations later, still had the examples of Adam, of Seth, and of the intervening generations to guide his faith. He still had the nations of Cain to give him cause to pursue the faith of his fathers, and pursue it he did. Walking in righteousness before God, he became the second of his entire family to reach the gates of heaven, having been preceded only by Abel. Abel, however, had been cut short by murder. Enoch was brought early by God. He walked with God, and God took him up into heaven. He did not die of some odd disease that cut short his life. He was not taken out by wild animals, nor by wild relatives. He was simply taken away.

These three were the pillars that stood amongst Noah's lineage, yet these three pillars were all gone from the earth before Noah's birth. Isn't that interesting? All the men of renown in the line of God's choosing had been taken from the scene before Noah arrived. He was left with the second team, as it were. Those seemingly most fit to see to his spiritual upbringing were gone. The eye-witnesses to God's goodness, as it were, were gone, and he was left with those who could speak only of the God of their father, or their father's father. The story of Noah's life makes it plain that, though the knowledge of God persisted in these other generations, it was not of a kind with what had been. Further, things previously unknown to the line of promise had come.

There had been deaths in the family, deaths by natural causes. Abel's murder had come before any of those in this family were born. It was a story they heard from Adam, but no more real than that to them. Enoch had not died. He had simply been taken into heaven. This could hardly be seen as a tragedy. They could still look upon the sons of Cain and think, perhaps, that the curse had followed his line and left them alone. But there had been Adam's death. He was not taken into heaven as Enoch would be. He simply died. Seth, too, passed away. These three, who had lived hundreds of years, were all gone within a century. This seems to have had an impact on the faith of those left behind. If those who trusted in God died just the same, well, what was the point?

It's a question that one can hear echoed throughout the record of Scripture. It's perhaps the question about God that most plagues man's thinking. If obedience results in nothing different than rebellion, if indeed rebellion appears to prosper, what reason is there to justify obedience? God's answer, when it comes, is equally constant. Look beyond. Look beyond the short term of mortal life to the eternal. In the scales of eternity, justice will be served. They may have their moment of prosperity here, but it will lead to an eternal poverty in all that truly matters. Though the obedient may suffer in this life, though it may seem that there is no benefit to righteousness, yet if we persist, the eternity of head will show itself rich in blessings upon us.

The point I am reaching for here is that by Noah's time the sad proclamation of Hosea could already be applied to the whole of mankind, even the line of promise. Even that early on it could be said that not one among men had managed to do better than Adam, not even Enoch who walked with God. Every last one of them had broken covenant with God, had rebelled against Him in one matter or another (Hos 6:6-7). This was the world Noah came into. The exemplary lives were gone. The remaining generations were sliding slowly into the ways of their cousins. They had not sunk as far, but the sinking had begun. God was determined to move before the damage got any worse, and Noah was His man. In spite of the lack of solid characters to model himself upon, he managed to follow the footsteps of his forefathers. He, too, in the end would fall under the judgment declared by Hosea, but he followed the right footsteps overall.

So, if all have rebelled, if the line of promise is as guilty of breaking covenant with God as is the city of man, what is it that makes the difference? We could find an answer in the reaction of these two families to their own rebellion. We could point to vile Lamech who, rather than repenting of the murder he had committed, rather than showing remorse and falling on the mercy of the Judge, boasted of his accomplishment, relished it as a sign of his own power, and permanently turned his back on God. We could point to Cain, who ran from God after his own sin had come to the surface. Yet, Adam had also hidden himself away from God when he recognized his criminal status. We could point to God's having come to restore Adam, to Him having done what was necessary to preserve him. Yet, He did as much for Cain, indeed marked him in a fashion which prevented his own murder in turn. He had shown mercy to both. What made the difference, then?

So long as we look to the men involved for an answer to that, we will not find it. So long as we look to the actions of God, as they are recorded here, we still will not find it. It is the less visible actions of God, the working of the Holy Spirit upon the souls of men, that really determined events. Praise God that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are forever in accord in the one purpose of their one essence! Even before Adam had been created, it had been determined that a substitute would be needed. See it happening in the family tree! Seth, born to Adam and Eve as a substitute not only for Abel who had been lost to life, but for Cain as well, who had been lost to righteousness. Fleshly descent was not the determining factor, it was God's planning and purpose that was the determining factor.

Enoch through Lamech, we have seen, were substituted for the ever worsening lines of descent in Cain's family. Here was a chance for redemption of man. The same names would be involved: Enoch the initiated, Lamech the powerful. Both Enochs were initiated into their distinct ways of life, and both Lamechs had become powerful in those ways, the one powerfully evil, the other powerfully chosen. Only one thing made the difference in these two families: The power of the Holy Spirit. Again, I have to think that Noah's father was not one who could be described as powerfully righteous. If this were something that could be said of him, we would probably hear more about him in Scripture. Yet, God was faithful to hold off the destruction of the flood until the last of Noah's ancestors had passed from the scene. Indeed, the flood came in the same year as Methuselah's death, ending the generations before the flood. This is the same mercy of God that we see displayed in the period of the kings. The righteousness of one man could never be enough to turn the tide of God's judgment, but it could forestall the inevitable.

It cannot suffice, because the righteousness of man, be it ever so good, is never complete. Perfect obedience is not in us. We can, however, be righteous enough to have an impact not only on ourselves, but on those around us. Because of the limited righteousness of that line from Adam to Noah, none of them were suffered to see the flood, to feel that devastation. These were not perfect men. They were as deserving of the flood as any other. There can be nothing but God's mercy behind their protection. He's like that. For the sake of one somewhat righteous man He held off the destruction of Sodom, but only until that one man could be removed from the area. The judgment was not changed, only deferred for a time. The righteous acts of one or two kings could not change the judgment against Israel for all its sinful idolatries and vile human sacrifices, it could only delay the judgment for the lifespan of that one king. Eventually comes the time when God declares that even if the most righteous of men through all the history of man were to plead with Him, judgment will not be delayed by so much as a moment.

Neither is the unrighteousness of many sufficient to thwart God's purpose in creation, and in this we can find cause for hope. One line of the many descended from Adam was chosen as the line of promise. That line was chosen not for any particular merit on the part of its constituent members, but purely because it suited God's purpose to choose that line. As we succeed down the generations from Adam, we see that each generation had other sons and daughters, but there was only the one whose history was to be pursued. What of all these others? Most, I suspect, had pursued the path of Cain, joining the vast city of man, and falling to its enticements. In short, unrighteousness was then, as it ever is, a growing concern. The children of God, the representatives and ambassadors of the heavenly kingdom remained a minority. By Noah's day, it was down to eight - Noah, his sons, and their spouses. That was it out of the whole sea of humanity, yet there was that remnant, and God's plan had in no way been disturbed. The chosen line would succeed in spite of all that had sought to interfere.

The history of the line of promise is as much a history of the enemy's attempts to thwart God's work as it is a history of God's faithfulness in pursuit of His perfect plan. The enemy, I'm sure, thought he had won the war in that first attack, knocking Adam and Eve from their righteous innocence, and making of them a corrupted, lesser nature. He had succeeded in reducing candidates for immortality to a state of mortality, but in this he had really only succeeded in establishing the grounds for the purpose God had already purposed. He provided the occasion to put the plan of redemption into action. Seeing this defeat, he worked harder to cross God's purpose. He struck down the first of the first-born, aware already, as Adam could not be, of the import that would attach to the first-born throughout the history of mankind. But God provided the substitute - not truly a substitute, he, but the true choice of God's true purpose. The enemy had struck, he had caused trouble to the hearts of man, but he had struck the wrong one.

Now, he was less willing to take chances. He would attack the whole of the race. He found others in the heavens as corrupt as himself and sent them among men to entice the women, to breed from the degraded human stock an even more degraded, an even more corrupt race. That race, imbued as it was with the genes of a higher creation must show itself stronger, superior to the race that God had made. Surely, he would have the victory this time! This was the world Noah was born into, a world which had suffered more than a thousand years of the enemy's worst efforts to destroy it. Yet, it would be the Creator Himself who truly wrought destruction upon His own creation. That destruction would be a cleansing, an elimination of the majority of the corruptions that the enemy had introduced. It could not be a complete cleansing, because such a complete cleansing could have left nothing, not even Noah, not even the least of animals. All was touched by the corruption of Adam's fall.

This still was not a thwarting of God's purpose. All was still running according to plan. The line of promise, the pathway to redemption remained intact in spite of it all. As shall be seen in succeeding generations, this was hardly the end of the battle, though. The enemy was still present, and he would strike again. He would strike swiftly.

Now then, Jude, in his letter, finds it worth pointing out that Enoch was the seventh generation from Adam. This points out two things to me. First, it would suggest to me (as does the name itself) that Jude was an Israelite. He displays their interest in numbers. It is important to him, and one presumes to his readers, that Enoch, who came closer perhaps than any mortal to perfection, was of the perfect generation, for seven is the number of completeness. This might shed some light on Matthew's concern with having fourteen generations in each of his intervals, leaving Jesus in a 'seventh' position. Enoch was, indeed, the seventh generation from Adam, and he certainly did approach righteousness more closely than most. It is rare, indeed, to have avoided death en route to heaven. Yet, there were certainly many more seventh generation children who could not make this claim. One wonders if, for instance, the first-born of the seventh generation in Cain's line epitomized the vileness of his clan.

This much is clear: the plan and the purpose of God was sufficient from the very first to withstand, indeed to usurp and incorporate to its own ends all that would come against it. Nothing about the world before the flood had taken Him by surprise. The serpent in the garden was no surprise. Adam's fall was no surprise. All had been prepared for this inevitability before ever it occurred. All. Everything from the first word of Creation to the advent of the Word in that creation. It was laid out step by step, moment by moment, every eventuality, every twist that the enemy would introduce, already accounted for, already countered long before the strike ever came.

What an awesome God You are! Who, indeed, could hope to compare to You? So many have tried, Lord, so many have promoted themselves above You, yet You continue to reign in majesty. You reign undisturbed by all these pretenders. You reign even in the face of my own pretensions, and You reign with mercy. Though I have earned destruction many times over, You have responded with mercy. You have made this enemy Your own loyal subject. Even more You have done! You have taken this enemy as Your own son. How could I even begin to imagine such a thing! What reason had I in my younger days to expect such love from You? Not a one! Yet, You have loved me as no other ever will. You have blessed me in ways that I am still discovering with each passing day. You have changed this corrupt young man. You have put in me a heart of honor. Oh, I know I still have my moments, days even. Yet things have changed beyond denying. You prove it to me over and over again, and I can only thank You for that which You have wrought in me. I know it's none of myself. If there is any good in me, it is Your presence that has made it so, it is You dwelling in me that has brought the good. All praise to You, Lord! All praise to You!

Holy God, You know the state of heart I have been in of late, the hurts, the disappointments, the frustrations. Help me in this time, Lord, to recall Your faithfulness, to trust my weaknesses to Your strength, and to lean upon You all the more. Bring the change, Father, where it is needed. If it be in me, do what You must. You've done wonderfully thus far, and though it hurt, I trust Your hand to continue its work of renewal. If it be beyond me, there too I will do my utmost to leave things to Your own purpose, Your own resolution. You always do so much better than I at resolving these things. Thank You. It's been good to talk to You again. It's been too long. I love You, Lord.

Generations of Noah (7/16/04-7/19/04)

Noah: 1056-2006 Shem: 1556-2156 Arphaxad: 1656-2094 Shelah: 1691-2124 Heber: 1725-2189 Peleg: 1759-1998 Reu: 1789-2028 Serug: 1821-2051 Nahor: 1851-1999 Terah: 1880-2085 Abraham: 1950-2125

Here, we come to a point that has to be a little disturbing. Luke, the careful historian, the one thought to have best researched the things of which he wrote, places a name into the genealogy he provides which is not recognized in the older genealogies of the Old Testament. There was, indeed a Cainan in the family tree, but he was already covered. That there was no Cainan to be found here between Noah and Abraham seems clear. Even if we were to declare Luke right, that would only succeed in declaring the Old Testament record wrong. The most which the commentaries seem to offer on this point is that it's ok to skip over this bit. How does that help? Indeed, as much as I subscribe to the inerrancy of Scripture, this whole genealogy - both Matthew's and Luke's - seems to be at the very least problematic for that position. Luke apparently inserts a name here and there. Matthew clearly omits one every now and then. How, then, can either be viewed as inerrant? Matthew would come off clean if he hadn't closed with that business about the 14 generations between each critical point in history, for all those he names (at least insofar as they can be confirmed from Scripture) are present and accounted for. There are simply others that he neglects to mention. But Luke, the careful one: how is it that he has, both in this portion and elsewhere, stuck in names that nobody else seems to know about?

Surely he had access to the Scriptures? Surely, he could read the genealogies for himself, as they were so carefully preserved. Indeed, it seem most improbable that he did not do so. It is equally clear that he had occasion to converse with many in Israel who had witnessed the life and ministry of the Christ. It is particularly evident in his treatment of this period leading up to Jesus' birth. If we follow the thinking that Luke presents us with Mary's lineage rather than Joseph's, we could almost imagine him sitting down with Mary and writing furiously as she recounts the family tree. One can imagine that if this were the case Mary's recounting of the names might not necessarily follow the order as precisely as one might like. Names might be remembered out of sequence, or be repeated because she forgot that they had already been covered. Now, Luke being a good historian would doubtless have taken this into account. He would have found means to confirm the names and the order they ought be in before he finalized his list. It would seem as though he must have noticed the fact that this Cainan didn't fit the records. It seems quite possible that at that point he might speak to Mary again, ask her to confirm with certainty that this name really belonged in that spot. One can imagine other places where this needed to be done as well.

That said, from this vantage point the best we can really do is imagine how the list took shape. I can offer no earth-shaking indisputable answer to the question raised by this name in the lists. It remains a question for me how this can be. How can this be acceptable in an inerrant document? No, the matter under discussion in the text is hardly of any great consequence. It will not alter the plan of salvation one bit to include Cainan or to exclude him. The issue is not the genealogy itself. The issue is the truth of the whole of the Bible. If, indeed, it is inaccurate here, what prevents it from being inaccurate on matters that do impact on salvation? If parts of it are wrong, how do we determine which parts? This is the dangerous trap that is opened by the concerns presented here.

I wonder if this isn't at least a part of what Paul was dealing with in his letters to Timothy and Titus. Timothy, he wrote, teach your people to ignore the myths that are offered as counter claims. Teach them to ignore all this endless talk of genealogies. These things can only produce speculation, not answers. They can do nothing towards promoting God's purposes, they can do nothing for faith. That's the goal of instruction: Love from a pure heart, a good conscience, and a true faith. Some have set aside these goals in favor of useless discussions. They want to be teachers of the Law but they haven't the least idea what they are talking about, in spite of their confident presentation (1Ti 1:4-7). Shun these foolish controversies! Don't even acknowledge these issues of genealogies, refuse to debate about the Law. Such arguments are worthless, there can be no profit in them (Ti 3:9). I had always looked at these warnings as shouts against the Judaizers that sought to turn Christians back to Temple worship, and indeed that is doubtless what prompted the warnings. But it occurs to me, given my own lack of answers on the matter, that things like Cainan's name showing up where it oughtn't may have been used by these early attackers as evidence against the new faith of Christianity. It was more than their trying to discredit a preacher for not being from the line of Aaron, to declare that those who served in these churches were no Levites. No, it was an attempt to completely and utterly discredit the whole of Christian doctrine by declaring the foundational texts untrustworthy.

For the present, then, I must accept Paul's admonition, even though the debate were only with myself. It cannot deliver anything of worth. It cannot profit me in any way. Indeed, it would seem that it can only trouble the soul which ought to know better.

Lord, I cannot deny that this whole study has been raising some questions in me. This issue of inerrancy is high on that list, because it is important to know Your word is true. Indeed, Father, I do know Your word is true, and I am most assured that the text we have in the Bible is indeed an accurate reflection of Your truth, Your word. Yet, my God, this leaves me with a dilemma, for if truth is to be true, if Your word is truth, and it is Your word we have in Scripture, then Scripture must be true, and if Scripture is true, it must at the very least agree with itself. I have no doubt, Holy One, that there is an answer to this, but oh! How assuring it would be to know that answer! Yet, I shall walk by faith, Lord, though it offend me to have faith defied by reason, yet I will walk by faith, for my trust is ever in You. Your ways are yet beyond mine own. Reveal to me what You will and allow me, like better men before me, to allow You Your mystery where Your will is to keep it so.

Here is another oddity which arises out of the record of Noah's family. After the flood receded, Noah took to a bit of farming, planting himself a vineyard and enjoying the produce thereof. On one occasion, he enjoyed his produce a bit much and passed out naked in his tent, where his youngest son Ham happened upon him. We might wonder what Ham was doing in his father's tent to begin with. Whether or not there were separate tents for each of the four nascent families that came out of the flood, there were doubtless private spaces, and it is to be presumed that it was in such a private space that Noah had reclined. His son, in seeing him thus disposed, was trespassing in places he ought not have been. He increases his guilt by going out and telling his brothers what he had seen. They in turn cover their father, taking care not to look upon his weakness. Love covers a multitude of sins (1Pe 4:8). It is something else entirely that points them out to one and all. There's a good lesson for us in the family of God, here, but what has this to do with anything odd?

Well, here's the part that rather surprises me. When Noah learns of what has happened, which he inevitably does, it is not Ham he strikes out at, but Ham's son Canaan. Now, Canaan was not Ham's only son, quite probably not even his firstborn. Near as one can tell from the record, it would appear he was more likely the fourth son born to Ham, the youngest son of a youngest son. What was it about him that singled him out for Noah's anger? It's almost as if he's saying 'as my youngest son as become a curse to me, so my your youngest son be cursed.' I can see no other earthly reason for Noah to have chosen this particular reaction.

Many people, looking on the story of the Exodus, think they have found cause to call God unfair. I've seen this even amongst the modern Jew. They are happy, to be sure, that God chose to give them the land of Canaan, but it was after all Canaan's land first. How can it be fair that God arbitrarily took that land from them and gave it to Israel? Ah, but it was hardly arbitrary. The people who populated that land had become more vile than most of fallen man. They had gone beyond the crass idolatry that was common to the nations, and had proceeded downward to human sacrifice. Even this was not sufficiently evil for them. They would offer their own children upon altars of hot metal. There was no abuse of the image of God which is humanity that was beyond them. Indeed, the history of Israel would show that the corrosiveness of their evil ways would corrupt even the chosen people of God.

God warned them of this before ever they entered the land, but they failed to heed His warning. Drive them utterly from the land, lest they cause you to neglect the Lord your God. Remove their influence completely from the land lest they cause you to stumble. This was the heritage of the one whom Noah had cursed. They could deserve only destruction. Yet the curse did not call down destruction but enslavement, and so it turned out. Israel did not destroy the nations from their land, but allowed remnants to remain. Sometimes these remnants were indeed enslaved to Israel, other times Israel was enslaved to them. In the long run, though, the corrupting influence that was left in the promised land indeed corrupted. Israel's leaders, and thus the whole of Israel were caught up in the ways of these interlopers, the very kings who were put over God's people sacrificing their children along with those upon whom God's wrath had long since been determined. So great was the influence of corruption that Judah, too, fell under punishment, a punishment made irrevocable, though not irreversible. Where Canaan must in the end be destroyed, Israel would be punished with an eye to correction. They were not beyond redemption.

Today, we are pretty free about our imprecations upon those who offend us, however slightly and however unfounded our offense may be. We have lost respect for the power of our word, a power that is given by our service to the Word. Is it any wonder that Scripture warns us of the danger of our tongue? Is it any wonder that we are told that the Judgment will take into consideration every idle word we have spoken? Why? Because we have forgotten the importance of the words we speak. So, am I suggesting we all join the party of positive-speak? That we should all welcome the hypocritical confession that things are not as they seem? No. Yet, in this brief story we are given three examples to choose from.

We have Ham, whose reaction was to tell one and all of the sins of his fellow man, though those sins had harmed none but the sinner himself. Indeed, it seems quite possible that Ham's exposure of his father was cover for something of his own doing. His example is that of the ones who will seek to show themselves more righteous by pointing to the omissions of their compatriots.

We have Noah, indignant at the way he had been treated, and calling down the power of God to avenge him. He did not leave vengeance to the Lord, as would have been more wise, but took matters into his own hands. Is it not possible that in cursing Canaan, he had a hand in determining the course of a nation? Were his words, accurate though they proved to be, ill-considered? When we speak against our children, do we really consider the potential consequence of our words, or do we allow anger to rule our tongue?

Finally, we have the joint example of Shem and Japheth. They heard the voice that would charge offense. They knew that the charge was not without foundation. Yet, they chose to correct the offense rather than punish the offender. They knew the gospel path although the Gospel was many long centuries away from being revealed. They understood, as Noah perhaps did not, the mercy of God. Noah had experienced, perhaps, too much and too personally the wrath of God. He had been an instrument of that wrath for decades. In that labor, it seems he mislaid somewhat his understanding of the mercy which balances God's wrath, and makes both His wrath and His mercy perfect. Fortunately for him, his sons had not lost sight of mercy.

Lord, this is a reminder for me, isn't it? David understood it. "In Your wrath, remember mercy." That was his cry to You, and often enough it is mine, too. In my wiser moments, I recall what I deserve, and I am reassured that because of Your mercy what I deserve is not what I receive from You. Your love for me has proven to be unconditioned by my own vicissitudes. Yet, how am I? How do I react, Lord, aware as I am of Your mercy towards me? Am I merciful? Am I forgiving? Given time, perhaps, but in the moment I am far to capable of allowing wrath to overrule all else. What have I done, Lord? What have I done to this child You entrust to me by the carelessness of my words? Lord, help me to get this tongue in check. Show me, Father, how to bless when anger says to curse. Help me to rejoice in the accomplishments of this one You would have me raise, rather than to point out her weaknesses. Teach me, Holy One, to be like Shem, rather than Ham.

In spite of his momentary lapses, in spite of his sins, Noah was deemed righteous in the sight of God. We've seen that before in this study, in the example of Zacharias. We'll see it again with David. Indeed, if we look to any of those whom God has declared righteous, we will not find perfection on their part. The sentence against the sons of Adam stands - "There is none righteous, no not one." Yet, there are those like Noah whom God calls righteous. It is the same God who made both these statements. None are righteous, yet some are righteous in God's sight. I think it may be key to remember that phrase: "in God's sight." None are righteous in themselves. None could be found who would walk in perfect obedience to the ways of their Creator. Yet, there were those whose hearts desired nothing more and nothing less than to know that obedience. Enoch, Noah, Abraham, David - each of these had their failings, yet each of them showed a willingness to obey, showed it by what were extreme acts of obedience. It was the heart that mattered, not the perfection. It was the character of a lifetime, not the failure of a moment.

That said, it becomes clear that none of these men entered into God's favor on the grounds of their own actions. Each and every one of them stood under the curse, and would remain there if not for something or someone beyond themselves - the Substitute. Seth pointed to Him, given to Adam and Eve to replace what had been lost to sin. There is a verse buried in the account of the ark which makes plain what made the difference. Those that entered, entered as God had commanded him (Ge 7:14). Now, the 'him' who was commanded was clearly Noah, who stood as God's only spokesman in that time. Yet, the 'Him' who commanded was God. What entered in, entered in by His command. None entered who were not called by Him, and none whom He called failed to enter. This whole account was written as a parable for us. The same truth remains true for the ark which is the church of God. It is He who not only permits entrance into the Holy kingdom, but commands it. Where He commands entrance, it is irresistible, even as the animals could not resist His call to enter most unnaturally into the ark of their salvation.

What wonderful news that is! It is only for this reason that I have a place on that ark, because He commanded it. I didn't ask for permission. I wasn't looking to come on board. But just like the animals that were commanded to board the ark, board I did. I cannot sufficiently express how thankful I am for having been the recipient of that command! Today, being Sunday, I was in the earthly representation of that ark once more. We are blessed, our church, to have been brought to a building which has such a distinct resemblance to that vessel of salvation. The service today was a call to participate in outreach to the lost and hurting in the local communities, in the cities that so many in this state have abandoned to their own fate. I was reminded in that call of the lessons we have in the tale of Noah and his family.

Not only were he and his sons commanded to board, but so also were the animals. These animals were not created in the image of God as Noah's family were. They were not created with the intelligence of man by which to respond to God as man does. Yet, they heard the command and they obeyed. Let me put it in perspective for us today. We in the church are blessed to recognize that we are indeed created in His image, and for the purpose of glorifying His name. Yet, there are others out there in the cities and towns we dwell in who are also commanded to salvation. The flood, God has promised, will not come again, but there will be an end to this present world and its present order. God was patient in Noah's day. He waited until the ark was completed. He waited until the ark was sufficiently stocked for all that would be aboard. He waited until all who had been commanded to board had boarded, and then He Himself sealed the door.

What of Noah's family, those who knew God, who had relationship with Him? What was their role in all this. After all, if the animals were commanded, and the command was irresistible, were they simply to sit and wait? No. God put them to work, sent them out to gather those to whom the command had been given. We have a similar purpose in this day and age. The ark of the church has been built. Many have heard the command to come on board and responded. Others have been commanded, but don't yet understand the command. The animals were not trained to board a ship. They had nothing in them that would lead them to do such a thing. It needed one with understanding to come and guide them. Then, the command and the ability to comply were meshed in them. They did not resist when the guides came. They did not attack the others they found heeding that same command, but boarded at peace with themselves and with their cohabitants for the next year or so.

This is our call: to go out and guide those who have also been commanded to board the ark of salvation. They have the command, but they don't have sufficient understanding to comply. What is missing? Only the ones who will heed the whole of God's command, and go forth to lead them in. That's what the church is for, to train us up as guides to those others who are supposed to come in. God is patient. He's waiting for us to do the job He has assigned us. He's waiting for us to bring in all those He has commanded to board, and until we have done our job, until all who are to be saved have boarded, He will not seal the door.

The floodwaters in their modern form are rising, and will we feel the sense of urgency? Will we go out and find those whom He has called? Will we guide them to the safety of His ark?

Do I want to hear this message, God? Truth be told, no. I've grown fond of my comfortable worship, haven't I? Where is the passion, Lord? Where is it? What is this dullness that has come upon me? How can I not care? Holy Spirit, this needs to change!

Oh, I'm willing enough to pray for the unsaved, I suppose, but the prayers won't suffice. Am I really willing that those whom He has commanded to salvation should be lost because I wasn't willing to guide them to safety? Prayers are not enough! Look at God's word to His wayward people. In the unfaithful country, even those with the stature of Noah, of Daniel, of Job, even those He has declared righteous in His sight could save no more than themselves! Not even their own children could benefit from their standing with God (Eze 14:14, Eze 14:20)! However we might stand with Him, however Christ's righteousness may clothe us, the clothing He has blessed us with cannot clothe another. We can, however, seek out those He is still waiting to clothe. We can bring them home to Him, so that they can have their own share of the righteousness which is in Christ alone. We can bring them to safety, and then they, too, can join the labor of bringing others to that same place.

There are two in this period between Noah and Abraham whose names are particularly interesting to me. The first comes about midway in the generations, and we are told he was named as he was 'because the earth was divided in his day.' What are we to make of this? Nothing more is said of the situation than this one notice. Now, there is another definition given to that word 'Peleg' which indicates an earthquake. Is this what the reference is to? Certainly such an event would be enough to get peoples' notice! If the descendants of Noah had by this time already come to Ur, down between the Tigris and the Euphrates, such an event might also have been accompanied by some serious flooding along one or both of the rivers. This, too, might give rise to the description we are given of the world at that time. Or were there deeper issues reflected in Peleg's naming? Was it a matter of conflict between peoples? Was it a spiritual matter? Perhaps, but there is certainly nothing here to support some deeper significance to his name. Neither is the record of the naming of children conducive to such a deep interpretation. Even when the names proved most prophetic it was still a spur of the moment matter that led to the name given. Jacob was named simply because of the events surrounding his birth. Then look at Nahor! How embarrassing for him! Every day to be reminded that one had been a snorer from birth. No, I think the probable cause must be sought in 'natural' occurrences.

The other whose name seems more meaningful in the plot of God's purposes is Terah, father of Abraham. His name is indicative of a way-station, a stopover not unlike a caravanserai. He had dwelt with his sons in Ur, later to become Babylon, and later still Iraq. He had been born there, as had his sons. It was after Haran, his youngest, died in his own sight that he determined to depart, and he took with him Haran's son Lot. It is not explained to us why Nahor, his middle son was not with them on this journey, but it was only Abram and Lot who went with him. Yet, in the end, though he had thought to go to Canaan, he could not leave the place named after his lost son. He settled the family in Haran and would go no further. Even when Abram, at God's command, took up the journey his father had started, and took Lot with him, Terah clung to this memory of his son and would not go. He remained a station along the way, a stopover on the road between his two sons.

Given the interactions that would occur between the families of these two men, was it a weakness on Terah's part, or a fulfilling of his part in the purposes of God? It was a long road to travel between Canaan and Ur, and not always an easy one. It would be a blessing indeed to find family along the way, an oasis of familiarity amidst tribes who might prove hostile to those passing through. It may, perhaps, have been both weakness and purpose that held Terah in that place. God knows His creatures, and He fashions them for His purpose. If there was a weakness in Terah that caused him to hold to this reminder of his son, was it not God who made him this way? God does not operate in frivolity. He creates for a reason. He makes each one of us uniquely, and assigns to each one of us unique roles to play in the unfolding of His plans. Terah was no different. Although we are told that he did not worship the true God, yet the true God remained his creator. Although he was never declared "righteous in the Lord's sight," yet the Lord had a purpose for him, and he served that perfect purpose perfectly.

Two lessons are to be taken from this, a positive and a negative. First, we ought to take to heart that the deeds do not define the man. One can be 'used of God' and yet want nothing to do with him. One can be the worst of idolaters and yet be part and parcel of what God is doing. This is a repeated lesson of Scripture, yet it is one we are forever failing to take to heart. We judge by what we can see, and we are greatly impressed when we see God doing something through somebody. Yet, we foolishly allow ourselves to become impressed not with God, but with that somebody through whom He happens to be working! Wrong! The kings of Babylon, Assyria, and Persia could hardly be construed as righteous men, yet each one of them was anointed and appointed by God to serve a purpose in the life of Israel, of His chosen ones.

Here's another 'beware' for us charismatics! In the collapse of Judah, the cry was "the Temple! The Temple!" The people were so sure that God would not abandon His house that they felt free to do whatever vile things they pleased, because the Temple would keep Jerusalem safe. A lot of history had to be ignored to reach this viewpoint, but reach it they did. Today, we know better. We do not worship the buildings in which we gather because we know that it is the body itself which is the Temple of God. But a new cry arises among us: "the Anointing! The Anointing!" We see acts of power and we are convinced that all is safe. The one who has been the conduit of that power must be one we can trust because God has used him so! After all, Scripture tells us that His messengers will be accompanied by signs and wonders. Surely, then, this is a teacher to whom we must listen! Yet, Scripture also tells us that the messengers of antichrist will come with signs and wonders of their own. There will be many counterfeits seeking to fool, if possible, even the elect. But, like Judah of old, we ignore the record that has been left for our instruction, and blindly follow after the signs. The signs are not a guarantee! Being 'used mightily of God' is no guarantee that we should follow after the one used! Nebuchadnezzar was 'used mightily of God,' yet he was hardly one after whom God's chosen were to follow as their leader. Satan at his worst is still 'used mightily of God.' While his purposes, as he imagines them, are for death and destruction, yet because God remains the Almighty, the King on His throne, the acts which seek to fulfill those evil purposes are turned to the good of those who truly serve Him. No! Beware the cry of 'the Anointing!' We are not those who are led by emotions, dazzled by appearances. We are the people of the Word, the chosen of God, and it is to His Word and His voice that we must cling exclusively. We must be wise enough to follow no man further than he follows God, as the Puritan leader once wrote.

One minor question remains in this portion of the family tree. It is said that Arphaxad was born in Shem's 100th year, and it is further said that this occurred two years after the flood. Yet, if we follow the dates as indicated by parents' ages, it would indicate that Arphaxad was born the very year that the flood began. Now, Moses is pretty precise in dating the flood within Moses' lifespan. Both its beginning and its ending are recorded down to the day. That said, it is quite possible that a father's age at birth got rounded off somewhere. One can speculate, of course, as to which of these two statements - Shem's age when Arphaxad was born or how long ago the flood had been at that time - is to have more credence, but I cannot find them to be correlated. What is to be made of this? I don't know. Perhaps my Father in heaven will see fit to enlighten me at some time, but at present, it remains as much a mystery as does so many points about this genealogy.

Generations of Abraham (7/20/04-7/27/04)

Abraham: 1950 - 2125, Isaac: 2050 - 2230, Jacob: 2110 - 2257, Judah: ~2087 - ?, Perez, Hezron, Ram, Amminadab, Nahshon, Salmon, Boaz, Obed, Jesse, David

Here, we enter into consideration of some of the most noteworthy men in the history of God's work. I began to write 'the greatest men,' but they were not all, on full consideration, terribly great. Every one of them had their failings, and some would not seem to have been the nicest of folks to hang about with. Jacob, in particular, is not necessarily one that we might choose for close companion. Yet, as we will see shortly, the hand of God was with him. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob: the three stand together as 'the patriarchs.' They are the foundation of Israel as a people. They define the line of promise. Yet, aside from God they were but men, and men not that unlike any other. However, it was with these three that God entered into covenant, for three generations establishing repeatedly the terms of covenant and the promises He brought to that covenant.

That triple repetition established the certainty of His word. Those to whom He repeated these things should make clear that in matters of covenant, the initiative is wholly with God. There was nothing about these men that would attract the Holy. It was the Holy One who attracted them to Himself. Yet, as powerfully as He worked in and through the lives of the patriarchs, He would later tell Moses, "I never did make Myself truly known to them" (Ex 6:2-3). They knew Him as the Almighty, the Mighty One. They understood His power, but there was so much more to Him than power alone, and this they did not truly see.

I have said there was nothing in these men to attract God, and I will stand by that. However, after God had come to them, there was in them evidence of His presence. There arose, in those early generations, what might be considered a family trait, or a set of traits, really.

The first trait that runs through the family is the habitual building of altars. We cannot follow Abraham far from Haran without standing witness to him building a standing witness to his God. At every encampment, it would seem, he set up an altar to the Mighty One. We don't see quite so much of this in Isaac, but in Jacob, it again becomes a pronounced effect, especially in places where he encountered God most immediately. In Bethel, having dreamed of angelic transits between heaven and earth, he set a pillar and anointed it, knowing that he had been where God is. In Succoth, near Shechem, arriving at the place God had told him to go when returning to Canaan, he built an altar, a place to honor God for having brought him safely home in spite of his previous dealings with his brother Esau. Shortly, he moves back to Bethel and one of his first actions is to build an altar once more. Then, when he moves on to Bethlehem, another pillar is anointed in that place

So what is the significance of this building of altars? I would say that the primary significance is that each altar and pillar was an acknowledgment of what God had done. It was an open admission that it was by God's power that they had come to where they had come to. It was recognition of His providential actions on their behalf. It was an honoring of Him by whom they lived and moved and had their being. It was tribute to the One who ruled them.

There is another, perhaps more wonderful trait that unites these three generations. They prayed to the Mighty One. They conversed with Him. He was not some impersonal 'watchmaker' God such as some modern folks might wish us to believe in. No, He was a personal acquaintance of these men. He was a present help, and He was a Presence. He hasn't changed! He is still all these things and more! What is interesting is that their prayers were generally not for themselves. I'll not say never, but their concerns were for more than that. Abraham was told by God of Sodom's fate, of coming destruction. His reaction was not in the form of, "well, that doesn't effect me." No! He talked earnestly with God, concerned over any righteous men, any chosen ones if you will, who might get caught up in that destruction. Certainly, he knew is nephew Lot was there. Yet, it was not for Lot alone that he spoke, but for any righteous who might live there.

Isaac was also one who prayed beyond himself. Perhaps the most touching thing we read of him is that he prayed for the needs of his wife. There's a lesson for all of us in this, and it's a lesson that's repeated most clearly right through the pages of Scripture. Husbands, care for your wives. How better to do this than to turn to Him who cares for us? How better to care for those entrusted to us than to entrust them to the Good Shepherd? The prayers of a righteous man, it is written, accomplish much. Do they prod a reluctant God into action? No. But the faith that is displayed in earnest prayer, in the prayer which believes that He to Whom we speak is able and willing to answer, is indeed certain to answer, is pleasing to Him. It is a prayer such as will bring Him glory in answering, and He will answer!

Jacob continues this tradition of seeking out the Lord on behalf of his family. In his case, we do not see so much the open prayer for his wives or for his children. However, in the things he pronounced over his children at the end of his days it becomes clear that he had indeed sought God on their behalf, and that God had not been silent. Indeed, his prayers, his conversations with the Almighty, had not been limited to the immediate wellbeing of his family, but had looked far ahead. His pronouncements, the message to his sons that he brought from the Mighty One concerned themselves not only with past and present circumstances in the lives of his children, but also touched on things that would not be evident for centuries yet.

The third trait I see these men having in common is that they took God seriously. They might not know Him fully, they might not obey Him perfectly, but they took Him very seriously. These were men that knew the meaning of covenant. These were men that trembled to consider entering into covenant with such a One, because they knew as well as we do that they were not up to the task of fulfilling their part. Abraham understood this so well that God had to put him to sleep and seal the covenant Himself, taking upon Himself not only His own part in the task, but also Abraham's. This was significant, and it was part, I suspect, of what established Abraham's faith so fully. In taking the whole of the covenant ceremony upon Himself, God was also declaring that the weight of failure was also all on His own part. Abraham was freed from the fear his own weakness bred in him. He knew he would fail of full compliance. He knew that failure would not escape notice. He knew what the covenant ceremony implied as the cost of that failure. Now, he also knew that God had taken that cost upon Himself. Failure of covenant required the penalty of death. Right there, in the making of the covenant, God had declared the purpose He had been unfolding since He first established the promise with Adam. He would pay the price of our failure Himself! That was built right in to the promise He made to Abraham.

Again, we see that the things of faith were passed from father to son. Jacob learned, whether from Isaac or from Abraham, to seek out God in a most personal way. His own ways made it necessary to his survival that he do so. However, it does not seem that his seeking was generally in the nature of "get me out of this mess, Mighty One!" As he progressed to maturity, his encounters with the Almighty bred in him a reverence unknown to his youth. At Bethel, we was awed and impressed. At the river, he was hungry for God. He was willing to wrestle with the messenger of His Holiness. But, when God told him it was time to return to Bethel, Jacob recalled why that place was called the house of God. He recalled that first encounter. He recognized with Whom he had been led, and Whose house he was being told to go to.

With all that, he made certain that not only was he prepared, but that his whole family had purified themselves before they traveled thence. Considering that his wife had taken her father's household idols with her as they left, this was a particularly necessary thing. Laban's branch of the family had not had the training and experience that Abraham had. Nahshon did not worship God. He worshiped the gods his father had worshiped. That was what his family had learned to do. Jacob needed to remind himself, perhaps, Who was truly God, but more than that, he needed to take up his responsibility of seeing to it that those entrusted to him also knew that the Almighty alone was God. All idols had to go.

When we look at these three men, we don't see them approaching God in quite the same fashion, and perhaps this is for the good. Had all three approached God in the exact same way for the exact same reasons, we would doubtless reduce that to ritual and never deviate from the example they set us. However, we see in these three men, a more complete picture of our relationship with God than we would have in any one. Between them, we develop a more whole appreciation of the Lord our God. He is personal. He is in control. He has taken our weakness into account in dealing with us, yet He has also entrusted us with quite a bit of responsibility. We are His family, and He expects us to care for our earthly families as He cares for His. As father of my household, I need to learn what these men knew: how to teach my child that God is God, and how to take their needs to Him who can care for their needs as I certainly cannot.

Father, how I have sensed my weakness in that area coming up for this vacation time. How can I correct what I see in this child of mine, Lord? I cannot. I am at least as powerless to change her as I am to change myself. I can only come to You on her behalf. Oh, God! I look and see my own anger in her eyes so often. It hurts to recognize this, but there it is. Lord, I would not have her to live with that inside her, that frustration and rage just awaiting a reason to explode. Help her, Jesus, to work through whatever it is that troubles her. Help her, Holy Spirit to overcome the negative things she has picked up from her mother and I. I am so thankful, in thinking on this that You have declared that You Yourself are our heritage - hers as well as mine. What broken examples I have provided are not her heritage any more than the broken examples I learned from are mine. You have made that new as You have made me new. Oh! That I, that we, my daughter, my wife and I, might grab hold of that truth!

We are not what we were born into. We are not the product of our environment, our upbringing. At least, we need not be. There are things in each of the patriarchs that their sons did well to hold fast to. There are many more which they would have done well to drop. There's a lot of talk these days about generational curses. We can even find a basis in Scripture for this concept, at least insofar as saying such a concept exists. I doubt, however, that we can justify the idea as it is conceived of by the modern mystics. God has certainly declared that His wrath may bring judgment on many generations, just as His mercy may flow to many generations. This is told to us that we might recognize the weight of our own actions. Even those sins in which we think we harm only ourselves we cannot be so sure about. Which sin is that one which will tip the balance? I am not, obviously, thinking of the true man of faith here, but the concept holds even for us, if such we be. Which act of righteousness is that one which will cause the Lord to reach down in blessing?

Hah! As though anything can 'cause the Lord.' He is Supreme. His will is life and breath to all creation, and shall we cause Him to take action one way or another? In a strange way, the answer to this is actually yes. While His purposes are unchanging, and His planning perfect, yet it is clear that He does react to the behavior of His chosen ones, and even to those who are not amongst the chosen, for they, too, are His creation. He is not so uninvolved that nothing we do touches Him. When His blessings come, it may be no more than His own volition which leads Him to so bless, but it may also come in response to faith. If His curses come, they are no arbitrary act of a mischievous Power. They are a response to choices made by the one feeling His wrath. It may be a final verdict, it may be a matter for the training of one who will be saved, but it is certainly not frivolous.

The question, then, might be: if there is this negative side to the power of God, that He would so curse the actions of one man that it becomes a family trait for generations to come, is there a way to stop that inheritance. Absolutely! You know what, though? I can find no evidence that going off to the local spiritual superman to have them wave hands about you and declare this, that, or the other to be broken off is the way to have victory in this thing. No! The message is as clear on the solution as it is on the problem. If a man will act righteously, though his family be under the very curse of God's wrath, yet God will see his actions and respond with blessing. Even so, though His mercy extends to countless generations, if the descendent He determined to bless responds to blessing with an incorrigible life of sin, his choices will bring his punishment. Justice is not blind!

To those under such a generational curse, if they have come to the church of the Living God, let them hear His word to His children. Let them recognize in heart and mind that they are no longer the child of their father on earth, inheritors of all his fallen and wicked ways. They are come to being children of their Father in heaven, inheritors of righteousness and life! The Father, who has signed their adoption papers and made them His own declares this: "I have brought you to the promised land, now go and possess it" (Dt 1:8)! For the generationally cursed, we can say it this way: I have overcome your life training, I have overcome your genetics and your environmental conditions, and have brought you to the place that you, too, may overcome in yourself the inheritance of your fathers. But, you must act. You must choose which inheritance you would have.

God promised His children that they would know the blessings of many things they had not worked to get. They would have buildings they did not build, fields they had not cleared, wells they had not dug. The gift He gives in salvation is no different. You will have blessings that you have not worked to get. You will obtain a righteousness that you did not earn, enter into a life you did nothing to deserve. Yet, like Israel at the borders of the land, there is that one thing we must do if we would have all these blessings of the covenant in our life: We must go and possess it.

Behold the blessing and the curse! As Israel entered the land to take it, they stood as an example of this conflict. One could look at Israel and Canaan as the visualization of the two inheritances between which we must choose. Canaan had chosen to inherit the worst of each preceding generation. The curse had begun with Noah, yet the word of God makes clear that at any point, the children of a succeeding generation could have stemmed the flow of that curse by turning to the Living God. They never chose. Israel, too, had often clung to the inheritance of the generations before them. Sometimes this was a good choice, sometimes not. The difference, however, was that there were those in Israel who overcame their inheritance. Truth be told, there were those in Canaan who also overcame their inheritance, and thereby escaped the doom of their nation.

Indeed, these overcomers are found in the line of promise. Rahab, the Canaanite prostitute, became the mother of Boaz, next link in that line. She was not rejected because of her earthly inheritance. Rather, she overcame that, traded it in for the riches of heaven, and God was responsive to her choice. Living in the land of promise, she was yet under the curse, under the ban. But there in the midst, she heard the echoes of God's call to Israel - "Go and possess." She did so. Ruth was also from a nation condemned. Israel had been warned never to allow the Moabites into their camps, yet here she was. She had overcome her inheritance, traded it in for the promise of the covenant, and God was well-pleased to accept her into the family. Indeed, her husband Boaz had been peculiarly prepared for her, being Rahab's son. Not many generations later, these two unions of outsiders into the life of Israel's God would produce king David. Talk about overcoming your inheritance!

Now, all that unearned blessing did not come without a warning. Daddy God knows us too well! When these things come upon you, He warns us, don't get so caught up in the things I have given you that you forget Me. Again I say, believer, hear the word of God! He is no different today. He blesses His children with all manner of good things, but if we are so caught up in the things He has given us that we neglect to seek Him who gave, then indeed our blessing has become a curse to us. We live in an age when the church is often caught up in being overly impressed with the gifts. We look about us for those who are manifesting the gifts and the power of God so that we might be near them, might perhaps pick up a little something from the overflow of that power. We are deceived! We recognize, however briefly, that it is by God's hand that we have the things we have, but with the most cursory of thanks, we turn our attention to the things and forget Him once again. We are deceived!

When we come to the next period of Israel, we will see what happens when that deception goes unchecked. When the things, be they material blessings or be they spiritual gifts, turn our eyes from God, those things have become idols, and we have become idolaters. This was Paul's warning to the Corinthians. They sported displays of their gifts of the Spirit like a peacock sports the display of his feathers. How proud they were of these things they had done nothing to earn! Each use of the gifts had become the taunt of a jealous child, "see, Daddy likes me better. Look what He gave me!" Such a mindset has already decided that Daddy is not as important as me. Such a mindset has already begun to turn the blessing into a curse for themselves. The ways of Canaan have begun to creep in. It still happens today. We neglect the correctives given to Corinth and assume we, being so much more advanced in this age, are in no danger of falling into their dangers. And so, we step right into them and don't even recognize it.

Indeed, in doing this thing, we overcome our inheritance, but we do so to our detriment. God seeks to have us overcome the Canaanite in us, to overcome the bad habits we picked up from our elders and to take up the habits we see in Him. Jesus came amongst man and did what He saw that His Father was doing. He came to make clear to us, in the body of a man such as ourselves, what it was we were intended to be, intended to do. We cannot see the Father, so we cannot directly see what it is He is doing. We can see the effects of His actions, as we can see the effect of the wind, but Him we cannot see. Jesus allowed us to see Him in action through His own actions. He showed us what it meant for a man to do as the Father does, what it means to be a son of God. He showed us how to overcome our earthly inheritance and take on the incorruptible inheritance of heaven. If there is one key to overcoming, I think it lies in that warning Moses gave to Israel: "Don't forget Him amidst all the blessings" (Dt 6:13).

We overcome by being overcome. As we give way to the Holy Spirit working within us, we will see the victory over our past. We will see the victory over our heritage. It's not going to be the prayers of this, that, or the other mighty man of God that turns the tide in us. It's going to be our own actions that make or break us. All of which must presuppose God's grace towards us, else our actions are but empty gestures. He will choose whom He will choose. Yet, chosen, we must go and possess. We must work with the Holy Spirit as He works within and upon us. He is irresistible, yet He is no tyrant that He would crush us to have His way. Have no doubt! He will do all His will. Whom He has saved is saved indeed.

Knowing that this is true, can we really think John wrong in telling us that the redeemed cannot possibly continue the life of sin? Don't settle for false hope! Don't fall into thinking that as one redeemed by God you can now do as you please, secure in your future! If such is your thinking, be afraid, be very afraid, for death is crouching at your very door. No, as God is irresistible, His work in us must surely be evident if He is truly in us. Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there cannot help but be the fruits of His Spirit. These alone cannot be counterfeited. His fruit is by far and away stronger evidence than His gifts. Gifts, we are warned, may be faked, and we are hardly such spiritual giants that we cannot be fooled. Never are we told to judge the tree by its power to stand tall, by its power to provide shade or straight timber. It's not in the gifts that we are called to make determination. It's in the fruit of the tree. The fruit gives evidence of the life within. If the fruit is good, so too is the life! If the fruit is corrupt, so too is the life.

Choose you this day which inheritance you will pursue. Choose you this day to overcome what your father and mother have bred into you, and to pursue God with a whole heart. Choose to do better than your forbears. However well they may have modeled the righteous life to you, choose to do better. However egregiously they may have failed you in this regard, choose to do better. Society trains us to be victims of our past. God trains us to set aside our past and pursue an eternal future! Choose you this day, and don't forget Him in all His blessings!

It is our choice, and yet it is God's choice that truly matters. Throughout the period of the patriarchs this is displayed over and over. Some of these, Paul makes us aware of. For instance, we look at Jacob and his brother Esau. Tradition, or whatever had established the blessing of the firstborn, suggested that Esau should be the one chosen to carry on the family line. A comparison of these two men in their youth would suggest to our limited senses that morally as well, Esau was the better option. Yet, God chose Jacob. He was a trickster from birth, seeking to grasp what was not his, and in the end he succeeded in doing just that. Though it required an out and out lie on Jacob's part, he received the blessing that Isaac had intended to give Esau, and that blessing once given could not be reneged upon. He could not look to God and say, 'oh, I meant to deliver that to my other son!' Why not? Because the blessing is, or ought to be, the word of the Lord spoken prophetically over the blessed. That's why Balaam could not curse Israel as they approached the land of promise. Apart from God's word, Balaam knew his own words were powerless and vain. Yet, he could in no way hope to force the word he wanted from God. He could only speak what God gave him to speak.

It should be the same with us. We cannot bless because we wish something blessed. We cannot take back the blessing because it wound up somewhere unexpected. We need to regain the understanding that our words of blessing and cursing, if they have any meaning whatsoever, must be the words God chooses to speak. When we bless, we ought first to pray, to seek out the Lord to know what blessing He would that we should give. If it be blessing at all, it will be His words, but how much more satisfying will it be if we speak in one mind with Him on that thing! How much more satisfying to be in that position of family, one given to know what He is up to and participate in it to the full!

When I consider what Jacob had to do to obtain the blessing, or at least what he felt he had to do, it amazes me that God would be inclined to give it to him. What was it that made this the right course? What was it that Jacob needed to learn from these events? I cannot imagine, yet it seems he was being prepared for some purpose. Over and over, we see him pulling deceptions to get his way. Esau's blessing was just one of many occasions. We also see him getting the same in return, as Laban gets the better of him with his daughters. How did this prepare him for the culminating event of wrestling with the angel? Was it perhaps that he had simply grown used to winning? Was it that he had been conditioned to think he could finagle his way out of even such a thing as that? Was it this that gave him the persistence to become 'one who wrestles with God?' Possibly.

Yet, the blessing given Jacob is hardly the only example we have of God's involvement in determining the line of promise. No accidents are found in that line. Only the fingerprints of divine Providence. When Jacob blessed his many sons, it was clear that he had been some time in prayer seeking the word from heaven for them. It is also clear that God answered. As one who received the blessing of the firstborn out of sequence, he is, perhaps, a bit more careful to set out the reasons he redirects that blessing himself. His older sons have disqualified themselves by their actions. Reuben will not receive the birthright. Neither will Levi. Unbeknownst to Jacob, this was because God had greater plans for the descendants of Levi, but Jacob's pass on that son was fully in accord, if not fully in the know. No, primacy, the right of rule over the family, would fall to Judah (Ge 49:1-12).

There's a choice we can accept from God more easily! Judah had at least shown some signs of character - not perfect character, to be sure, but at least character. It was he who spoke up when Joseph was to be murdered, and thereby prevented his death. True, he didn't take the larger step of preventing all harm, but at least he preserved life. It was he, also, who stood before his father and offered himself as surety for Benjamin's safety in the later trip to Egypt. It was also he who actually fulfilled that promise when the occasion came.

Yet, he was also the one who took a Canaanite to wife, against the word of God. He was also the one who fathered a child on the bride of his son, who sought to keep her from his son, lest he die. No, hardly a perfect candidate, yet he was god's choice. The line of promise would be through him, and it would not be because of his great worth, but because of God's great worth.

Later, when they stood at the borders of the promised land, Moses had representatives of the tribes divide themselves up according to his directions and stand six on one hill, six on another. In obeying this direction, they stood as visual representation of the blessing and the curse - the blessing of conforming to the Law which defined man's role in the covenant, or the curse of disobedience. Judah, in this case, is to be found among those representing the blessing. Even in these matters, God was careful with those He had chosen.

We also find His imprint upon lesser matters in the life of Israel. He is visible not only in the line of Messianic succession, but in other matters as well. We see it in that He chose the one who was to fashion the tabernacle. Moses received the instructions, but it was one of Judah's descendents who was chosen by God to actually do the work. He was also filled with the Holy Spirit to enable him for that work. Here, I am reminded of the lessons learned in studying the Holy Spirit. His infilling is always a mater of enabling us for the work that is ours to do. It's not for good feelings, It's not for comfort - at least not that alone. It's not about entertaining or being entertained by the gifts. Not at all! It's about one thing: Doing the work that God has prepared beforehand for us to do. The Holy Spirit is all about preparation.

God's influence on the line is also seen in some more negative examples. Achan, who violated the ban spoken over Jericho, was also a descendant of Judah. Yet, though he was cut off from among the living, both he and his family, this did not cause trouble for the line of promise. Judah, too, had twins born to him: the one Perez, the other Zerah. Of these, God had already determined which was to be the inheritor of His promises. That lot would fall to Perez. Achan, as it turns out, was not from that line, but from Zerah's line (Jos 7:1).

While those in the line God chose would never be perfect in character, any more than we are, they would also never be so vile as to demand God's wrath upon them. The same clearly cannot be said for those who, while children of Israel, were not chosen for His purpose. This is our great comfort. Whom He has chosen He will not suffer to lose. Like all those before us, we may make mistakes. We will certainly know the occasional sin. We may even follow Jonah's course and run from Him at some point in our life. Yet, in none of this will He suffer His true child to depart for good. He will see to it that His children are restored to Him. This does not give us license, it merely gives us confidence. It gives us confidence that when we wake up, when we recognize the wickedness of our ways, we can come home again. We can call upon our beloved Father for forgiveness knowing that He truly is faithful to forgive us (1Jn 1:9). In a blessing which is perhaps even beyond that known to these men of old, we are also given to know that when He forgives us as He does, He remains righteous and true in doing so. We are given to understand how this thing can be, that He would forgive such as you and me.

As I read through the history of the patriarchs, and of Israel before there were kings, several threads of God's work are evident. The first and most obvious of these is, of course, the thread of covenant. It starts with Abraham, called away from the lands of his father, from the city named after his dead brother. He is told to depart for the land his father had thought to reach and he obeys the call, packing up his family and becoming a wanderer, a nomad. To him, God delivers the incredible promise: "Who blesses you will I bless, and who curses you will I curse. I will bless all the families of the earth through you." Wow! The creator of heaven and earth invests all of this in one man! He looked across the strange land that he was called into, and was told that the whole of it was given to his children. From Egypt to the Euphrates, the whole of the land was deeded over to the sons of Abraham. Now, Abraham's holdings were hardly small at the time, yet what a vast expanse it must have seemed to a childless man. How impossible a thing to conceive for one who had begotten no heir after so many decades. The promise of land was in itself a promise of descendants who would populate the land. And Abraham believed the impossible.

God did not, however, leave it at that. He repeated this promise to Abraham on occasion, strengthening the certainty of that which was promised, providing means to strengthen Abraham's faith. Nor did He forget His word. To Abraham and Sarah it seemed to have gone well beyond the point where God could fulfill what He had promised, yet Abraham believed. So certain was he that God would deliver on His promise that he took upon himself the sign of the covenant. 99 years old and childless still, he showed his faith in this act of belief. God would provide. A few short years later provision came. Isaac was born, and with his birth came word that this was the one to whom God would confirm His covenant promises.

Abraham had his moments of weakness. He thought he might help along God's plan by fathering a child by his slave, but God was not satisfied to have it so. No, this would not be the child of promise. The child of promise would come of the union He had already blessed. When Isaac was grown he, too, heard from God. "Your descendants will bless the nations of the earth, all the nations, for one simple reason: because Abraham obeyed." Oh! The power of obedience when we are faithful to heed our King! By his obedience, Abraham had secured blessings upon all generations! Truly, he is the father of all who are, by faith, made members of the family of God! Isaac, who feared God, heard again that the promise was given to him. I recall that as generation succeeded generation, the Mighty One was known to the tribes of Israel as the God of Abraham and Jacob, but as the Fear of Isaac.

Of the three, it is of Isaac we learn perhaps the least. Surely the experience he had shared with Abraham on Mount Moriah had left a lasting impression on the young man. I wonder if Sarah ever learned of what had taken place. One can only imagine the conversations in the tent if she did! Yet, Isaac had survived the event, and God was well-pleased. Was it, then, fear as we understand fear that Isaac knew for this God who had provided? Or was it a reverence above and beyond what any other could know? How incredibly he had experienced the provision of the Almighty! How he had lived that simple statement of faith his father had spoken. "God will provide."

Jacob, of course, was another thing altogether. I have already commented on the character we see in him. In spite of the deception that was Jacob, thought, God chose to confirm his covenant with this one, and indeed, it was in him that God named the nation that would constitute the descendents of Abraham. They would be known ever more as Israel, they who wrestle with God. History has shown the aptness of that name. They have wrestled, thought to consign the promised blessings to themselves alone, jealously guarded the treasure He entrusted to them. They lost sight, one supposes, of the 'all the nations of the earth' part, and so, when Jesus came, when the long awaited Messiah broke in upon the history of man, they were caught out. But God's promise continues. "If they confess their sins, I will remember My covenant" (Lev 26:40-42). It is that very promise we hear echoed in John's letter. If we confess our sins, He is faithful to forgive them (1Jn 1:9), because of this very promise.

Paul lays out the wonder of this whole story to the fledgling Gentile church. For years, if they had known of the Jews and their obstinate beliefs, they had known it as an exclusive religion, never fully accepting those who would come worship their God from amongst the great unwashed. The Gentiles could worship their God, certainly, but from a distance. There could be no admission into the Holy Place. Paul said no! We have entered into the exact same covenant relationship as they, and this by God's own oath. Flesh and blood never had anything to do with it. It takes only an honest viewing of these early generations to grasp that! It was not the character of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob that commended them to God's consideration. It was His purpose and His determination that they should become strands in the thread of covenant. It continues to be by His purpose and His determination that we, too, are become children of promise (Gal 4:28). It's not by might, nor is it by power, that we come into the kingdom, it's by God's Spirit, says the Lord (Zech 4:6).

I've already considered Balaam and his attempts at cursing Israel, but there are things about his prophetic results that deserve consideration here. What strikes me, in particular, is that his message so often concerns itself with Jacob, not with Israel, but with Jacob. It is Jacob who would prosper. It is Jacob whose king would be greater than Balak. Then comes the more incredible of his messages. The message concerns itself with a time too far removed to be related to David's rise. It speaks of a star coming from Jacob, a king from Israel. (Finally, there is mention of the name God gave that people.) A king would come, and would destroy the nations that had opposed God's people. Yet, of Edom, it is only said He will possess them. The brother of Jacob, though God hated Him, still had a place in God's kingdom. Indeed, "One from Jacob shall have dominion" (Nu 24:17-22)!

What Balaam spoke, and his general tendency towards speaking of Jacob rather than Israel, seems to be consistent with what God's prophets spoke. Following Jacob through the Wisdom and the Prophets is like following the Covenant message itself, and there is much we can learn about the covenant relationship that we share with him by looking at the thread of his name. The sons of Jacob are God's chosen ones (1Ch 16:13). Just as He chose Jacob (Ps 135:4), He chooses all who enter into His covenant family (Isa 29:22). Now, here's a point the Jews should not have missed, for their own great prophet spoke it most clearly. God declares through Isaiah that as He once more chose Jacob, even strangers would join Jacob's house (Isa 14:1). Truly, Jacob's sons are the work of God's own hands (Isa 29:23)! Because this is so, they will sanctify the name of the LORD, they will stand in awe of Him (Isa 29:23). Because God has created these sons of Jacob, they will surely glorify Him (Ps 22:23), and they will be a generation that seeks His face (Ps 24:7).

Again and again God makes His right over His people clear. He commands Jacob's victories (Ps 44:4). He chooses our inheritance for us (Ps 47:4), for He has chosen us to be Jacob's children. He commands the declaration of His dominion, for He rules in Jacob and in doing so, He rules 'even to the ends of the earth' (Ps 59:13). Jacob's sons, He tells us once more, are His chosen ones (Ps 105:6). Are they chosen because they are Jacob's sons? No! It becomes clear as we consider more fully the works of our LORD that they are Jacob's sons because He chose them. They are the works of His hands. He has created them to be raised up as sons to Jacob, though they come from the remotest of nations. After all, as the Creator of all things, He does as He pleases in all of creation (Ps 135:6).

Who, then, is this God of Jacob? Who is this Mighty One whom Isaac feared, but Jacob loved? He is our stronghold (Ps 46:7)! He is angered with Jacob's children when they show unbelief (Ps 78:21-22), because He loves justice, and establishes justice amongst those children (Ps 99:4). He is the Mighty One of Jacob, before Whom the earth trembles (Ps 114:7). It is He, and He alone, who established His covenant with Abraham, gave oath to Isaac, and made of His own covenant an eternal Law with Jacob (Ps 105:10). It is from Him that Salvation comes (Ps 14:7), and He who has the power to redeem His people (Ps 77:15). Knowing His salvation and His redemption, Jacob and his children know that their captivity must come to an end (Ps 85:1). Indeed, even in the midst of captivity, they know Salvation and rejoice (Ps 53:6)! Oh! Forever shall the children of Jacob praise their God!

Indeed, history as borne out the truth of God's declarations. Many nations have sought Him, even as He told Israel they would (Isa 2:3). Hear it again, O nations! He has formed His Christ in the womb, formed Him to be the Servant, faithfully bringing Jacob back, gathering Israel to their God. O! How he is honored in the sight of the LORD, for God is His strength. Yet, the Mighty One is not satisfied to have redeemed Jacob. It is not enough! No, the Christ, the Messiah, He shall be a light to the nations, and God's salvation shall reach all the earth (Isa 49:5-6). Hear it again! "I will bring forth children from Jacob," declares the LORD. "I will bring forth an heir in Judah. It is My chosen ones who shall inherit" (Isa 65:9), "and they shall be My weapon, to shatter nations and subdue kingdoms" (Jer 51:20). Some understood this at Christ's coming. They saw the truth of His declaration that simple descent from Abraham guaranteed nothing. Salvation was not of the flesh, for God could, after all, raise up a new generation to Abraham from the rocks upon the road, should He feel it needful to do so (Mt 3:9). No, it was not Abraham's flesh that attracted God. It was God's presence that built belief in him, and it was his belief that was in turn counted as righteousness (Ro 4:2-3).

The God of covenant speaks to His chosen children, to the sons of Jacob: "Remember that you are My servants. Remember that I made you, and I have not forgotten you. I have redeemed you! I have covered your sins! I, the LORD, have done it!" Rejoice! Rejoice all of creation! For, He has redeemed Jacob, He has shown His glory (Isa 44:21-23)! He has come to those who rejected their sins, and made covenant! He has sworn that His Spirit and His words will not depart from our mouths, nor from the mouths of our descendants forever (Isa 59:20-21)! Indeed, the evidence of your senses will but confirm what you know. That He is your Savior, your Redeemer, the Mighty One (Isa 60:16)! So, though He hide His face for a time, wait eagerly for your King (Isa 8:17).

God became more specific in telling His chosen ones from whence Messiah would come. Yet, He never ceased from telling them the extent to which His Redemption would go. The fruitful branch would come from Jesse's line, the line of David, the line of kings (Isa 11:1), and He would be a sign for the nations (Isa 11:10). He has come, and He rules over the Gentiles, giving them a hope in Him along side Jacob (Ro 15:12)! Indeed, He is great in all the earth!

Another thread that seems to run through the line of promise is that of Bethlehem. When Moses writes of Ephrath in connection with the death of Rachel, he notes that this is synonymous with Bethlehem. Now, it seems that one of Penuel's descendents was actually founder of that city, sharing its name. Yet Ephrath had come first. Hur is listed as the first-born of Ephratha, and Bethlehem is one of his sons. At any rate, one of Hezron's sons, Caleb, married Ephrath. Although it is not certain that this Ephrath was of Ephratha, it seems quite reasonable to think so. Later, Hezron remarried, becoming joined into the family of Gilead. He died, it is recorded, in Caleb-ephratha. It would seem, then, that perhaps he had gone to live with his son.

Now, none of this would be terribly interesting except that as we continue down the line towards Messiah, we find that Ruth was from Bethlehem, as was Boaz. Thus, we find God choosing again. The tribe had been declared, and now He was at work determining the town within that tribe's properties from which would come the King. Naomi had departed from Bethlehem because of drought, but her husband and her sons had died in Moab, to which they had fled. She returned to Bethlehem with only her daughter-in-law Ruth for company and aid, and she proved faithful in that role. When Naomi returned, it fell to one of her relatives to redeem the property of her sons and her husband. There was one to whom it should have fallen, but he was not willing to fulfill his portion, so the lot was handed to Boaz. Short generations later, the first great king of Israel would be born into that family line. He would be the youngest of his family, hardly a likely candidate for leadership. Yet, he had the one qualification that mattered. He was a man after God's own heart.

One must now ask, where does Micah fall in with all this? He was the prophet who declared plainly that Messiah would come from Bethlehem, and it was from his words that Israel had learned to expect this thing. It was plain knowledge in Jesus' day. This is why many were confused to learn that He was from Nazareth. They heard this and immediately rejected Him as an imposter without looking further into it. But, in spite of being a Nazarene, so as to fulfill that portion of prophecy, He was indeed born in Bethlehem. How many wouldl be able to say that? The line drew tighter, the choice narrowed, and in the end there was only the One. It was said that the Shepherd of Israel would arise out of Bethlehem in Judah, and so He had (Mt 2:6). But the sheep had in large part missed it.

Another interesting thread that runs through this period is that of the third day. On the third day, Abraham saw Mt Moriah, where he had been told to offer up his son Isaac (Ge 22:4). It was here that God would reveal that He would provide the Lamb. It was on the third day that Laban learned of Jacob's departure, and took out after him (Ge 31:22), though it would be another seven days before he caught up with the fleeing Jacob. It was on the third day that Simeon and Levi eliminated themselves from the inheritance by attacking Hamor in retaliation for Dinah's violation (Ge 34:25).

It was on the third day that Joseph's predictions in the prison were shown true, and the baker lost his head (Ge 40:20). Yet, Joseph, the type of Christ, was forgotten in the fulfillment. It was on the third day that the LORD would come down on Mount Sinai (Ex 19:11), and the very mountain would be made holy by His presence there. "People, be ready!" That was the message Moses had for them. The Holy was to come amongst them, and they must be ready for that third day. And on the third day, He came with thick clouds and a loud trumpet sounding, and the people were brought out of the camp to meet God (Ex 19:16-17).

The echoes continue in the laying out of the law. The unclean person needed the clean to sprinkle him on the third day, and on the seventh. Thus would he be cleansed of his uncleanness (Nu 19:19). The sprinkling of the third day has come. God has provided the Lamb whose blood truly cleanses! The cry had gone out amongst the tribes of Israel, "People, be ready! On the third day, the Lord will come amongst you." Indeed, for three years, now, the cry had been going out. "The kingdom of heaven is at hand!" "The kingdom of heaven is here!" The waiting was over. The Desire of Nations had come down, and sinful hands had sought to destroy Him. Like Joseph, He was betrayed by one he had saved, and like Joseph, that one would turn around and remember. On the third day, the Holy God came down. He arose from the death He had suffered by His own choosing. He had redeemed the nations as He promised He would. Salvation was come in full, and the sprinkling of His blood had begun the purifying process in all who would accept it.

Another thing that comes out of this period is the joining, or at least the mingling of the royal and the priestly lines. This, too, is a product of the line God established. The connection comes in Exodus 6:23, where we learn that Amminadab, descendant of Judah, and therefore of the ruling family, was also father of Elisheba, who would be wed to Aaron, the first high priest of Israel. Evermore, in the fruit of that union, the two offices, priest and king, would be co-mingled, although the combined role would not be fully realized until Messiah. One wonders if that line had not entered back in to the main line by the time David was born. This might offer some explanation for why it was acceptable for him to occasionally fulfill the priest's role, whereas Saul was destroyed by his attempts to do so.

One last thought remains that I want to pursue in regard to the period of the patriarchs. That concerns the beginnings. The author of Joshua declares that Terah, father of Abraham and Nahor, served other gods just as his forbears had done (Jos 24:2). Yet, when Jacob and Laban confronted each other finally, it was upon the God of Abraham, Nahor, and their father that the two called (Ge 31:53). So, just who was being called upon?

Here is one possible solution to the question. It was Laban who declared the heap of stones they erected to be a witness. It was he who called upon Jacob to swear by the God of Abraham, the God of Nahor, and the God of their father (Ge 31:51-53). Now, 'God' is capitalized in all of these, but is that necessarily accurate? I think not. As I already noted, it is said outright that Terah served other gods. There is nothing said of his coming to serve the God of Abraham. Of Nahor, nothing specific is said, yet the whole conflict that led to this business between Laban and Abraham concerned Laban's household idols. Clearly, then, Laban and his family worshiped other gods, and where did they get this practice, if not from Nahor? From this, it seems more likely that Laban was simply seeking to include every god he knew of in the oath he asked Jacob to swear. Jacob, however, swore by only one: the fear of Isaac. He called upon no other name as witness. He would swear by no other simply because he understood from Abraham and Isaac before him that no other was worth swearing by. The rest were empty lumps of clay and wood. There was only One who could actually hear the oath and enforce it.

Let the Labans of the world, then, call upon whom they will. Let men offer whatever assurances they think they may have to offer, yet there remains only one God: one God of Covenant, one God of Truth. Though oaths be sworn by any and all manner of things, it is He alone who hears, He alone who concerns Himself with the fulfilling of those oaths. Though men swear ever so foolishly, the God of Truth and Covenant honors obedience to what has been so sworn. Jesus pointed out the foolishness of His contemporaries who thought that by phrasing their oaths around heaven or the Temple or pretty much anything other than God Himself, they could avoid concerning themselves with keeping their word. Not so, said the Lord. Whatever words you may choose to play with in swearing your oaths, it is God who hears, and it is God who will be concerned with your being true to your word as He is true to His.

Generations of Kings (7/28/04-8/5/04)

David, Solomon / Nathan, Rehoboam / Mattatha, Abijah / Menna, Asa / Melea, Jehoshaphat / Eliakim, Joram / Jonam, Joash, Amaziah / Joseph, Uzziah, Jotham / Judah, Ahaz / Simeon, Hezekiah / Levi, Manasseh / Matthat, Amon / Jorim, Josiah / Eliezer, Jehoiakim / Joshua, Jeconiah / Er, Elmadam, Cosam, Addi, Melchi, Neri, Shealtiel, Zerubbabel

Now comes what might be the most turbulent portion of Israel's history. Oscillations between faithfulness and idolatry had been a constant theme in the life of the nation, yet the problem seems to be amplified during this period. As turbulent as the period was, though, it also brought definition in some ways. During the era of the kings, the separate roles of prophet, priest, and king became more defined. It was made plain that the roles were not to be combined in one man, until Messiah should come, fulfilling the words of Moses.

Although these offices were distinct, and were to be kept that way, they still had an interdependence one with another. They were separate but they were one. We see this most clearly when David was finally pushed into naming his successor. A rebellious son was naming himself king, but David learned of it and firmly established his own choice. How did he do this? He had Solomon anointed by both the priests and the prophets. Prophet, priest, and king were, although distinct in persons, one in purpose. That unity of purpose was sufficient to drive all support from the rebellion.

There is a picture of the Trinity in this, I think. Certainly, that phrase, 'distinct in persons, one in purpose,' describes the operation of the Godhood quite well. At its best, the triumvirate of Hebrew power reflected their God well, but more often than not the unity was lacking, and its lack evinced the lack of power, the sorrow of God, in Israel at the time. But, the Godhead never suffers disunity. The LORD our God, He is One. Though there be distinction of persons, specific roles assigned to each office, there is perfect unity in purpose. Perfect: lacking nothing, impossible therefore to improve upon.

One notices in the records of Solomon a proper respect for the other offices. Even in dealing with rebellion, the priest was not treated as other men. Two of the key participants in Adonijah's rebellious claim of the throne were Abiathar and Joab. The one represented a rebellious priesthood and the other a rebellious army. Joab, who had been one of the key men in David's army, was killed for his part in that rebellion. Abiathar, however, was not. He was only removed from the priesthood. The priesthood had protected him from the full vengeance of the king. Solomon would not do violence to the representative of God. However, he would remove such a poor representative from his office.

Such respect for priest and for prophet was not a constant feature in the leadership of Israel. There is not much record of poor dealings with the priests, although it is not unheard of. Saul, for instance, had slaughtered priests for their support of David. When it came to the prophets, however, no such security was to be found. Their reception and their treatment was, it seems, a direct reflection on the spiritual condition of the king they counseled. In general, this was bad news for the prophets, for it was a rare king that both needed and heeded their counsel.

Going back to Solomon's treatment of Abiathar, it is certainly worth our while to note that Abiathar's removal from the priesthood was itself a fulfillment of prophecy. The prophets counseled not only kings, but priests as well, and Samuel had counseled Eli. Eli's sons were notoriously corrupt, abusing their office as priests for their own prophet. This would not be tolerated by a holy God. Eli had failed to train up his own children in the ways of the Lord, and refused to discipline them when their abuses were made known to him. Thus, it remained to the Lord to ensure that justice was done. He did so. He declared that Eli's line would be cut off from the priesthood once for all. With Abiathar's dismissal, that sentence was served in full. No longer would one of Eli's descendents be found in that office.

We can take away any number of lessons from all this. We should sense from the record that our own respect for the priesthood should be great, even if the priest himself is undeserving. The office itself remains holy even when filled by the least worthy of men. We should recognize our own need to check ourselves, for we are all priests of the Holy One by His own declaration. He has called us priests and such we are. Yet, if we will not walk worthy of our office, He is righteous and just to cut us off from that service. As all authority is in His hands, it is His both to give and to remove.

We should see in this the critical nature of our parental task. We are called to train up our children in the ways of the Lord. Eli failed of this, and thereby condemned not only himself, not only his sons, but along with them all the generations that followed after. They would live, but no longer in the courts of the Holy God. David, as great a king as he was, also failed to train up his children in the ways of the Lord. Almost to a man, they fell short, two sons in full rebellion against their father, and seeking to take his throne from him. Even Solomon, the one most favored by David, was not trained sufficiently to uphold the example he had in his father. He started well, but his finish was less than glorious. He got lost in the blessings of God and forgot the God of blessings.

Indeed, what we can see in David and Solomon is seen repeatedly in the long line of Israeli kings. They fall into two camps: those who were victorious because of the Lord, and those who so valued their own strength that they despised the Lord. David is, of course, the prime example of the kings whose victory was found in God. The record is clear. His many battles led to victories against surrounding enemies for one reason: The Lord helped him (2Sa 8:14). As no man is perfect, he also had his weak points, but he had this on his side: he repented. He recognized his sin both personally and openly, and when his sins became apparent to him, he knew that the most important concern was that he had sinned against God. He did not ignore his debt to the men he sinned against, but overshadowing the need to set things right with his fellows was the need to set things right with God. His was not the apology of one caught red handed. His repentance was real, and he was willing to accept the full consequence of his actions when God's judgment came. Oh, he would pray hard that perhaps God would be willing to find another way, but he would accept God's word as final and just when His word was made manifest.

Because of his earnest and honest treating with God, there is a most wonderful thing that is said of David. When trouble came, and of course it did, David sought the LORD, and when he called upon God, he always found Him home, always found Him listening, always found Him responding (2Sa 21:1). Would that I could say such a marvelous thing for myself. Too often, though, I know I determine to try every avenue of my own strength, to exhaust every other alternative before I will turn to Him who cares for me. I could blame it on upbringing. I could blame it on professional training. I could blame it on the human condition. But none of these would get to the point of the matter. I should know better. Any survey of the records of Israel's kings should serve to remind me that things are exactly as Jehoshaphat understood them. The battle is never ours, but always God's.

I consider the struggle that has kept me occupied as long as I've been a Christian. Have I ever really stood back and decided to accept God's word on this? The battle is not mine, yet I seem determined to try and win the battle on my own terms, by my own methods. Yet, God's word is "stand and see salvation." Victory was not found at Tekoa by force of arms, nor by cleverness of strategy. Indeed, the strategy was absurd. Stand and sing. That was it. Worshipers to the front lines and sing praises to God. It makes no sense. This is not how battles are won. We must use all our strength, all our minds, and all our will to take the battle to the enemy and subdue him. Ah! But this is exactly what the army of Israel had done! All our strength is in God. To do other than to honor Him wholeheartedly even in such a situation would be to deny that simple truth. All our minds ought to be actively engaged in the love of God. That is, after all, the fundamental commandment of our faith. If our minds are on the trial, if our minds are involved with clever stratagems, then they are not wholly and actively engaged in their proper pursuit. All our will is to pursue His will. He has made His will clear: stand and see salvation. Are we doing that? Am I doing that?

It's a fine line to walk. There is obedience: standing and waiting to see His move. Standing just to the left of this there is presumption: using my inability to change as an excuse to continue as I am. David could, perhaps, have pursued such a course, but he would not then have been a man after God's own heart. There is one ingredient of praise for God which we often want to leave out, that necessary ingredient of repentance. As any parent knows, "I'm sorry" is as often as not an empty phrase. You can force the words out of a disobedient child, but if there is any truth at all to the words, it is that they are sorry to have been caught, sorry to be getting yelled at, sorry that there will be unavoidable consequences. How terrible that my own repentance so often fails to be any better than this. That's not repentance at all, and I know it! Yet, it is often the reality of my attitude.

Father, how can I not recognize as David did, that the sins I so easily allow to overcome me are not matters of no consequence? How can I not see in them an affront to Your holiness first and foremost? Have I been, as it seems to me I have, leaning presumptively upon Your forgiveness without a thought for Your righteousness? I've excused myself, found every manner of explanation to offer for what I do, but it's all nonsense and I know it. No, it's time I accept that I, like David, have sinned against You, and this is the matter that must be dealt with. Shall I ask You, then, to forego the punishment that such actions deserve? Yes! As one whom You have purchased, as a son of Your kingdom, I will indeed ask this, that in Your justice You would remember mercy towards me. I know, Holy Father, that You see the end from the beginning, that You see already the perfect work of Christ completed in this broken man. Yet, have I used that as an excuse not to labor for that same end? Have I become satisfied to remain as I am? Let it not be, my God! Let it not be so!

Holy God, if I stand again amongst Your worshipers, if I serve again in Your house, remind me always that I am not just playing pretty notes, I am not just entertaining. I am pursuing Your battle plan, and defeating my enemy by focusing my all upon You.

I ask You this, as well, my King: that You would make clear to me whether that position I have held these last several years is still the position You would have me to fill. Indeed, I pray right now for the whole of the worship team, with all the stresses and changes that have been upon us. God! Change any heart that needs to change! Don't allow us to fall into the trap of simply performing. Don't allow us to settle for pleasing men, but whatever our direction may be, let our efforts be directed towards pleasing You. If this pursuit of 'excellence' is by Your leading, then let us pursue it with pure hearts. But, Oh! How I fear that our 'excellence' will be no more than deception. How I fear that what we have pursued with earnestness of heart will be lost, and we be left with no more than the appearance. I don't want to wind up that way, Lord! I don't want to see us trade the worship of hearts that love You above all things for that which can only have the form, but not the power.

God! I truly don't know the answers, here. Is technique, tightness, and 'vibe' really what concerns You? Do You really care all that much if every note is placed with precision? My heart tells me that we could become as slick and professional as we like, produce CDs and sell them by the truckload, achieve renown in Christian circles, and find out that we have completely missed You in the process. No, Lord! If You can hear my heart in my praises of You, and You are pleased with the heart You hear, it is enough for me. Let me leave it at this, then: Your will be done, Lord. Your will be done in me, and in those with whom I serve. In this will my heart be well satisfied. If it cannot be thus, then move me to the place where it can, and again my heart will be well satisfied. Use me as You will.

One last example of those who were strong because God was with them is Hezekiah. Now, many look at Hezekiah and are impressed that his prayers were answered in being given fifteen more years to live. I have to say, though, that given the record of those fifteen years, he would have been better off without them. They were the worst fifteen years of his life, and much of the good he did was eroded by the mistakes he made in that period. He is held up as the model for the prayer of healing, yet it strikes me as having been a prayer of willfulness. This was not a matter of being in one accord with God, it was a matter of wanting something different, and God allowed it. Had he truly increased his days? I don't think so. God numbers our days, and He knows full well when, where, and how our days shall end. I have to believe that Hezekiah would have lived just as long had his prayers been more in line with God's purposes. I also suspect that the record of those last fifteen years would have been much better had he been less concerned with healing of the body, and more concerned with the soul.

Healing is not the lesson we ought to take from Hezekiah. His lesson for us is elsewhere, in the Assyrians that came against Judah during his reign. This was a point where Hezekiah's prayers were in pursuit of God's will. The Assyrians were used to winning. They were used to winning against nations that had their little national gods. They were used to those little national gods being of no worth when confronted with the power of Assyrian muscle. They were certain that Israel was just like all these others, and they were happy to make this known to Israel. Hah! So you have your little national god! So did all the others, and where are they? But, Hezekiah knew better. His view of those other little national gods was no different than that of the Assyrians. Of course they had done no good. They were, after all, but bits of wood, stone, clay, and metal. What could they do? But the LORD was a different matter. He was not man-made object, fashioned neither by the hands of man nor by their minds. Indeed, it was quite the opposite. Man, whether Israeli or Assyrian, was every bit the fashioning of His hands. Knowing this, Hezekiah prayed, and the LORD heard him.

No, in spite of all of Assyria's proud accomplishments, there would be no victory for them in Jerusalem. See, all that they had become, all that they had accomplished, had been accomplished by God's planning anyway. Oh! How this offends us! God! How could You? We're hardly the first to be shocked by the unfolding of His plans. The prophets, too, were offended to learn that even the temporary prospering of the wicked was the work of His hands. However, God also made another thing equally plain. As He had planned their rise to power, He had also planned their demise. Their time on the platform of fame would be brief, and their end would be as violent as they themselves were.

How we need to learn this lesson! All the worst connivances of the enemy, all the forces that seem to overwhelm us, to overcome us, are no cause to blame matters on the devil. Certainly, he is at work behind these things, but the situation for us is no different than it was for Jerusalem. If the enemy is on the ascendant, it is by God's will. And, if they are on the ascendant, we can be sure that God has already worked out every last detail of their descent as well. Yes, we must pray against these things that come against us. Certainly, we ought seek His mercy towards us when things are going south. But, we should cry out to Him with the assurance that David, Jehoshaphat, and Hezekiah knew: when we cry out to Him, He hears us! As we praise Him, as we pour out our hearts in thankful exaltation, the enemy falls upon itself, and when we enter their camps, we will find only the spoils of victory.

In contrast to the examples given us in David, Jehoshaphat, and Hezekiah, we have that of men like Rehoboam, Joash, and Ahaz. Rehoboam, we are told, was confident because of the strength of his army. Seeing himself strong, he forsook the LORD, ignored Him. The LORD is not to be ignored. He may have been forgotten by the king, but He had not forgotten the king. He sent Egypt along to show Rehoboam just what his strength was worth (2Ch 12:1-5). Confronted by defeat, Rehoboam looked to God once more, but only for a time, until the sting of defeat was gone.

Joash began his reign with an incredible advantage torn from the jaws of a violent death. He had been hidden amongst the priests when his grandmother went rampaging through the palace. He had been raised by Jehoiada, father of Zechariah. The godly influence of that upbringing can be seen in the way Zechariah turned out, as well as in the way Joash's own reign began. But parental influence comes to an end. Jehoiada eventually passed away, and all that remained was the peer pressure longing for a reversion to idolatry. Joash succumbed. He not only succumbed, but he seemingly sought to surpass those who had influenced him in vileness. Zechariah, faithful son of his father, sought to wake Joash from his spiritual slumber, but Joash ordered him killed for his words - killed in the very courtyards of the Temple. So little remained of his respect for the living God. So complete was his fall that he was killed by his own servants, who took upon themselves the task of avenging the death of Zechariah. Indeed, he was not even given a place in the tomb of the kings, so little was he thought of.

Then, of course, there was Ahaz. He was greatly impressed by strength, especially visible strength. He more or less understood that strength had its source elsewhere, but he never quite grasped where. He saw the strength of the enemy in Damascus, but attributed it to the altar they had constructed for their local god. He decided that he, too, would build such an altar to their god, in hopes of having a share of that strength himself. The source of Damascus' strength was indeed to be found in the spiritual realm, but not in their ridiculous construct of clay and stone. No, their strength was found in God, just as Israel's was. Since Ahaz insisted on looking elsewhere, though, he never quite found that strength he longed for.

Indeed, his eyes scanned the heavenlies seeking the source of strength, but he kept missing the Mighty One. He saw this god and that, and set up all manner of corrupted worship in the Temple hoping to stumble on the right one somehow, and as his distress grew (for none of these attempts had availed anything, and his enemies were yet upon him) so did his unfaithfulness. He offered sacrifices to the gods of Damascus simply because Damascus had prevailed against him in battle. He had, it seems, completely lost any sense of the nation he ruled, and the God who rules the nations.

In this is a lesson for us today. We all share that tendency to honor that which defeats us. We don't think this is what we do, but it is. When we look at our defeats and blame our loss on the overwhelming power of our adversary, we honor our adversary. We forget, even as Ahaz did, that even the enemy's strength comes from the Lord of Hosts. If we are defeated it is because the God of heaven, the One True God, has determined it. Rather than looking at the strength that was opposed to us, we ought to look to ourselves, to our own condition. What is it in us that has required God to do such a thing? What have we done to provoke His wrath? How have we offended His righteousness that He must raise up a discipline against us?

Oh, but we don't want to look at that! So much easier to simply blame it on the general malevolence of the devil! It's not our fault, it's just that this enemy of God is so fierce. That's comforting, certainly - keep the conscience dulled and complacent - but it's totally wrong. Certainly, the enemy roams about like a roaring lion seeking to devour whom he can, but what determines whom he can? Is it some lapse in their own strength? Not at all. If it were, we would all be consumed. No! The one who survives has long since submitted to a higher power, has been bought by a fiercely protective God. Indeed, the same God who protects and rules over us rules over all, whether by their choice or not. The same God who speaks comfort to us also moves the ones we call enemy.

He is not to be resisted by disbelief. The kings of Assyria and Babylon and Persia did not think themselves servants of the Most High. They thought themselves servants of no man. Yet, these men were tools in the hands of the Mighty One. Where they conquered, they conquered by His will, and He determined both their rise and their fall. The same God is still in control today. He allows the rise of powers that are at odds with His righteous rule, but He also determines their limit. If He sends opposition against His own children, it is not that we might admire the strength of our opponents, and it is not some frivolous display of His power to control events. It is sent to teach us, to wake us up from our spiritual slumber. It is sent to discipline and to train us. If all we see in this is the pain, if all we see is the strength of the enemy, we have missed the lesson. What we ought to see in these things is our own weakness, and our total dependence on a Holy God to stand for us. We ought to learn to stand and see the salvation of the Lord.

Instead, our tendency is to look to our own defense, to seek our own strengths to counter the attack. We look for the weak spots in our opponents, connive and plan, looking for a way to turn things to our own advantage. Indeed, like Ahaz, we will look just about anywhere but God until at last He has so worn us down that we must confess our total inadequacy. Oh! That we might learn! Oh! That it would dawn on us that our strength is found in Him. That we might turn first to our Father in heaven, to Him of Whom we know it true that if we call out to Him, He will answer! May we stop pretending we are strong when we know we are weak. May we stop worshiping at the altar of last resort, and turn to the Lord as first resort. May we, when we encounter the fierceness of battle, look not to the overwhelming power of the enemy, but look to our own condition. May we check ourselves, look for the place where we are no longer right with God, and move to correct what is wrong in us. May we then cry out to the God who hears, and then stand praising Him as we witness His salvation!

God had warned His people before ever they came to Canaan that there was a danger. Make certain, He warned them, that you don't forget Me amidst all the blessings that shall be poured upon you. Isn't that exactly what is seen in the example Joash sets? He started out well, and God was well-pleased to bless him, but he got so caught up in the blessings that he forgot about God, indeed, thought God of no account. Strength breeds contempt. This is, as Pastor Najem was pointing out to us just yesterday, the primary problem for the church in America today. We've got caught up in the things. We've accepted the altar of materialism. We are blessing addicts, and although we pay lip-service to the Lord for providing, we only half believe that at best. Like a kid asking Dad for the car keys, Dad is completely forgotten as soon as the keys have been obtained and the car is out of the driveway. Just as soon as we feel certain the blessing cannot be retracted, the Source of all blessing is forgotten. In that moment has our idolatry begun.

The corrupting influence of power and blessing can come in unusual disguises. Uzziah, generally thought well of, was not proof against the corruption of strength. He did not forget his God, he did not so much decide his armies were sufficient and God need not be sought any longer. Instead, his strength and success convinced him that the rules didn't apply for him, that he could pursue God as he wished. The rules clearly did not apply to the king. So, he determined to make his own incense offering in the Holy Place. The priests on duty at the time did their utmost to dissuade him, reminded him that the duty he sought to perform was reserved to the priesthood. But he was the king. He would not listen. He entered in to make his offering. God was not pleased. He got Uzziah's attention where the priests could not, striking him with a leprosy that would remain with him to the end of his days. No longer could he even enter the Temple, let alone consider usurping the priestly office again.

Now, we might ask why this was such an issue in Uzziah's case. Hadn't David occasionally stepped into a priestly role? Nothing untoward happened to him in those instances. What, then, made Uzziah's offering foul? It may be as simple as the degree of approach to the true throne that the two men took. I recall that when David first thought to bring the ark to Jerusalem he had not properly prepared, and one of his men was struck down for his inappropriate touching of the ark, something not even the priests were to do. Did David ever again approach so close to the ark? Surely, he operated in priestly manner on occasion, but I think from that moment forward his respect for God's boundaries was absolute. Uzziah in seeking to offer the incense was stepping across that boundary.

Some things, God simply will not tolerate, and one is this presumptive attitude. Has this changed in the New Covenant life? I'm not sure. We are, of course, privileged to enter boldly into the throne room. This is certainly a change. In earlier times, that place was reserved for the priests only, and even for them it was only allowed at very specific times with very specific preparations and protocols. In our relationship we have been declared a nation of priests, so there is no issue of office for us. We have been prepared by the perfect sacrifice of Christ, the sin offering made once for all, so the preparation has been made. What remains is the protocol. Here, I fear, we may offend. We forget the difference between freedom and liberty, become dissatisfied with the bounded freedom that liberty is. We would have no boundaries, no discipline, no order. But God is a God of order. He brought order out of the chaos that preceded creation. That is what creation was - an ordering of the chaos, everything in its proper place.

We are privileged to call upon the Creator of all things as our Father. We are blessed to be on such terms with Him that we may call Him 'Daddy.' We are so honored in His courts that we may come in at any time to speak with Him. Yet, as His loving children, should we not recall that we are also His subjects? If He is our most honored Father, ought we be the first to show Him the honor His title as King of kings demands? Ought we be the most diligent to follow proper protocol when we are in His courts? He is Daddy, but He is also Lord. The prince may be on the most familiar of terms with the king when they are in their private chambers, but when they are on the dais, it is the rank that matters. There remains, I should think, a line we ought not to cross in our familiarity with the Father. The veil has been torn, to be sure. We may enter in at any time. Yet, we may not behave in any fashion that happens to suit our mood. The throne room is not the place for back-slaps of familiarity, and jocular exchanges of greeting. It is a place of honor, a place for propriety. Let us, then, so often as we enter in, enter with the proper protocol. Let us enter with thanksgiving, approach Him with praises. Let our adoration of Him who sits upon the throne be evident in our earnest attention to the honor that is His due.

Jotham understood better. He remained strong "because he ordered his ways before the LORD." He did not allow his eyes to be turned by the strength of his army. He did not allow victory to become his altar. He steadfastly pursued the course the LORD set, and in this was his victory assured. Because he did not pursue the material good before God, God set the material good before him.

Jeroboam, first to lead the rebel state of Israel, was another case altogether. He, too, had the prophetic word of God to declare his right to rule. Sadly, it must be evident from the very fact that he was pleased by that word that he would not be able to fulfill its requirements. He was promised a heritage on the throne if he would obey the command of God. Yet, that very command was in punishment for rebellion, which fact could not have escaped Jeroboam. How could one be pleased to be the instrument of vengeance against one's own people? But, Jeroboam was more interested in his own prestige. To be a king! What price could be too much to pay for that?

Sadly, he was another of those whom God raised up for a purpose even though their own motives were not of one accord with Him. Like Nebuchadnezzar, he would serve his purpose in God's plan in spite of himself, and, also like Nebuchadnezzar, his end would also come according to the purpose of God. He was set up to punish the rebelliousness of Israel, to awaken the people from their moral slumbers. But, he was not satisfied with that. He wanted it all. He had been promised ten tribes, but he wanted twelve, so he set himself against the men of Judah. He set himself cleverly, arrayed himself in strength. He was very certain of the outcome, having set his men in ambush for the troops of Judah to stumble into. Strength breeds contempt. But, Judah had one advantage that Jeroboam did not. Judah had God. And, in God, Judah had strength beyond measure, wiles beyond the cleverest of military planners, victory assured.

The danger of presumption is evident in the record of this period in Judah's history. Surely if God had promised David a man on the throne for perpetuity, the throne was the safest place for a man to be! Yet, throughout the kingdom years we find God cutting threads out of the line of covenant. The promised salvation is not a blanket offer. It is not given with total disregard for those who might receive it. Like faith without works, the hope of those who would disregard God and yet expect His promises to be fulfilled to them is a dead hope.

Fine gardener that He is, the period of the kings finds God pruning the limbs of that vine which would be Christ. The period of the kings was also the period of the prophets. God was making certain that those who exercised authority as His deputies were not devoid of His leadership, whether they wanted it or no. For some, this was boon. For others, it was fruitless. Asa, for instance, heard God's word from Azariah, and heeded it. He had labored to cleanse the land before, and the word he had from God caused him to labor all the harder. Indeed, so effective was his effort that the whole of the nation entered into covenant with God once more (2Ki 15:12).

Yet, more often than not, the word of the prophet was not as welcome as all that. Joram had killed off his own family in securing his throne. This was the way of kings, after all. But, it was not the way of God's deputies, it was not the reflection of justice and righteousness that ought to be upon the throne of Israel. Elijah's voice carried God's message for Joram. As he had done, so would it be done to him. All his family, all his possessions would suffer calamity. This came not only because of his own deeds in taking the throne, but also because of his deeds upon the throne. He had led Judah back into idolatry, and this was not proper at all. He would be cut off, and in a most foul fashion. Elijah's word, being God's word, held true (2Ch 21:12-15).

Manasseh, we might think was the worst of all the kings of Judah. Indeed, it was his rule that sealed the fate of Judah. His actions, though vile enough, were not the thing that sealed Judah's fate, it was because they so fully followed his lead that the whole nation was condemned. Yet, Manasseh in large part takes the blame. The record left of the nation in this period is perhaps the saddest in the whole history of God's people. The LORD spoke, but they paid no attention. By now, they had witnessed Israel's demise, had seen their kin carried off into exile, had heard clearly that this was in reaction to their idolatrous ways. They had heard all this, and they had heard the warnings given to themselves, but they followed Manasseh's example anyway. Therefore, the LORD declared their sin to be even greater than Israel's (Jer 3:6-8). Could they, then, expect lighter treatment than their sister state?

Manasseh passed from the scene, and in time his grandson Josiah took the throne. None labored for righteousness as he did. He waged such a war against the altars of idolatry that even the high places were removed. He was not even satisfied to stop at the borders of Judah, but pushed on with his cleansing right into Israel, destroying the altars that had been set up in the initial rebellion of the tribes. He did all he could to cut off the idolatrous ways of his subjects, to erase the practice, erase the memory of it, and erase the possibility of its return. Yet, the way of the nation under Manasseh had so angered God that even this would not turn aside His wrath (2Ki 23:26). Josiah might not see it, but the day of vengeance would come.

That vengeance came, at least in its root, in the very line of the kings, the line of promise, as we might think. There came a king worse than Manasseh. Indeed, so black is his reputation that Matthew will not even name him among the ancestors of Jesus. If Manasseh had sealed the fate of Judah, this one sealed the timing of that fate. Jehoiakim came to the throne, and so utterly detestable was he that the prophetic word to him was that his entire line was to be cut off from ruling over Judah. It was over (Jer 22:30).

Still, the people pursued their wicked ways. Talk about presumption! Here in Jerusalem was the official house of God. The Temple was here, surely they were secure against any attack that might come! God would not suffer His house to be trampled under foot, after all. In this assurance, they found their permit to sin as much as they liked. It did not occur to them that with all their idols, their sacrifices to other gods, their offering up of their own children on the altars of evil, they had already trampled His house under foot more than any invading army ever could. Jeremiah warned them that the building they no longer truly honored, though it be the house of God whom they no longer truly honored, would do nothing to stop the destruction which came, after all, from the hand of Him they no longer truly honored (Jer 26:1-6). Yet, they would not believe. Though they would not pursue the LORD of the house, they thought His house ought to be their protection.

Several hundred years later, with Messiah come and gone again, a people that refused to hear God when He walked among them returned to this same condition. Surrounded by the armies of Rome, having defiled the Temple with their ways. They carried on their own internal power struggles in the very courts of the Temple, shedding the blood of their brothers in their thirst for power. As they weakened themselves, the armies of the enemy cut off all supply. The records of this period are simply awful: parents eating their own children, and having to fight off other starving folk for the privilege. How Israel had fallen! And still, they thought that the presence of the Temple must preserve them against the might of angry Rome. The Temple was destroyed, and has never yet been rebuilt. The nation was for all intents and purposes at an end, and would not see itself reconstituted for centuries to come.

What of us today? Have we returned to this false security? Do we truly think that as the nation most productive in creating missionaries we have a security against judgment? It's a tough call. We like to look at the tale of Abraham talking with God when Sodom's destruction was announced. "God, don't destroy the righteous in Your wrath!" Yet, it is clear that in the Exile that ended the Davidic dynasty, it was not only the sinful who suffered. The righteous were expelled alongside the sinful. The remnant remained in the midst of the whole. The same likely held true when Jerusalem was destroyed. Can we, then, really afford to think our nation safe because there remains a remnant of faith in its midst? As the premier producer of all that is lethal to life, can we really expect the Creator of life to withhold His vengeance because there is this small group of believers sitting about?

Indeed, if it be so that He should strike the cancer from His creation, and if in that striking He should perhaps touch some of His elect, what is that to the elect? Have we not been crying out for the time when we can be with Him? Why then cry out should He speed the day? While this is hardly an excuse for doing nothing to change the nation in which we dwell, it is reason never to despair. Whether the nation prospers or it falls, those who remain steadfast in serving the Lord will see His glory. What is the fate of nations to one whose citizenship is in heaven? There is only the labor that our true King has set for us to do. Let us be about that with a whole heart, with complete devotion, and leave the kings of the earth in His hands. After all, who rules, rules by His determination and only so long as He determines they should.

Pray without ceasing, by all means, for the peace of His people, yet know that He is God not only of mercy but also of justice. We dare not pray that He would act in unrighteousness. How can that be the prayer of faith? It would be asking Him to cease from being God! No, if He has determined to cut of certain threads, let them be cut off. The remnant will remain! The covenant which He upholds will stand!

With Jehoiakim gone, Jeconiah took the throne, but only long enough to see the word against his father made full. Indeed, he received a similar word from Jeremiah, being told that none of his line would ever prosper on the throne of David. No, never again would that thread of descent rule over Judah (Jer 22:27-30). Instead would come the righteous Branch, a new sprout from the stump of Jesse. It was to Him that the promise would pass, for He would reign in righteousness and justice (Jer 23:5). So we see that in spite of the threads that were cut from the line of promise, God's promise remained intact. It was a mystery, to be sure, as to how He would cause both the word of promise, and the word against Jehoiakim and Jeconiah to hold true simultaneously, yet He would do it!

Behind the scenes, in the background, God had been preparing a new thread to replace those that must be cut off. Indeed, even as Solomon succeeded his father to the throne, expanding the kingdom, showered with the blessings of God, another was being selected to carry on the covenant line. All eyes were on the king, all attention was caught up in the great wealth and the great wisdom that were accruing to the anointed son of David. None noticed, it seems, the decay that set in as Solomon grew older. None were concerned when he began setting up idols to satisfy the wives he should never have taken. He was still growing rich, so it must be OK with God, right?

But another line was being prepared. God was not surprised by Solomon's decay. He was not surprised by any of the events that came to pass in the history of His people. The plan was proceeding perfectly. Out of sight, a thread was woven. It was woven of names so seemingly insignificant that the Chroniclers of the royal court didn't even think to include them, though they, too, were descended from David. The thread ran off into obscurity. Still, there is at least the hint that this is the line God is looking upon. As the kings of Judah oscillate between good and bad, there is another thing happening.

One hint is given of this other thing. Isaiah saw it and declared it, although few if any heard it with understanding. Eliakim, son of Hilkiah, he will be given the key of David. He will have the power to open and shut irrevocably. He will be firmly established for his time, and the glory of David's house will depend upon him. Yet, the time would come that this one would fail, and all that depended on him would be cut off (Isa 22:20-25). Was this the same Eliakim that we see in Luke's genealogy? It's unclear. What is clear is that Jesus lay claim to that same key that was given Eliakim. Even now, and evermore, He has the key of David, the key that opens beyond shutting, and shuts beyond opening (Rv 3:7).

Of all the names in Luke's genealogy through this period, this is the only name that seems noteworthy at all in the appropriate timeframe, yet even here it seems doubtful that the one we read of is the one he writes of. Other names are familiar to us: Jonah, Judah, Simeon. It would be tempting to think that the Jonah that appears in Jesus' lineage was the same as traveled to Ninevah, but that doesn't seem overly likely. He is listed as the son of Amittai, and would have been active during the reign of Joash. The timing is about right, then, but this would have him the son of Eliakim.

There is, however, one other possibility here. Luke, it would seem, is working from the recollections of Mary as to her ancestry. Something that suggests itself to me in seeing Judah, Simeon, and Levi named in succession here is that she was, at this point, recalling important names, not necessarily in order of descent, but simply as being numbered among her ancestors. Though that can hardly account for the entire list, it could easily cover that range of Eliakim, Jonah, Joseph, Judah, Simeon, and Levi. All of these would be known, somewhat illustrious in the history of the people, although Eliakim might be a bit of a stretch for inclusion in that list. Again, this can be no more than a theory, and a pretty shaky one at that. However, it is curious to see these names woven in amongst the obscure list that Luke presents.

Whatever the truth may be in this case, the two lists join together once more for two generations, before dividing again. Thus, it would appear that we are following not only both parents of Jesus, but also both parents of Shealtiel. Again, all must eventually devolve to supposition in trying to understand the diverging lists that are given us. However, the number of generations we have in both lists is about the same once Matthew's list is corrected for the couple of kings he missed. Luke winds up with a list that, though seemingly so much longer, is actually only two names longer than Matthew's.

One question remains in my thoughts, though. If, through Nathan, God was preparing a thread to replace the one cut off at Jehoiakim, how is it that these are rejoined in Shealtiel, and yet separate again after Zerubbabel? That Joseph's lineage was not necessarily the important one we understand, because Joseph's seed was not involved in the birth of Christ, though the Christ would be his legitimate son. But, how so for Shealtiel?

Whatever may be the resolution of the diverging lists, one thing remains clear - the Covenant. The thread of the covenant of God runs all through this period. During the age of Dynastic age in Israel, word came frequently from God, and in the word that came the line that would lead to Messiah was defined more precisely, narrowing the field of candidates until only One could fill the role.

David spoke of it. He knew that he had been promised one who would sit upon the throne, and he knew this was not a matter of the immediate succession. He speaks of the 'horn of David' who would spring up in Jerusalem (Ps 132:11-17). The orderly line of succession would hardly be a matter of springing up. No, he seems to have been quite aware that his line, though permanently established, would fade for a time. Or, perhaps he had in mind the declared end of his own dynasty - when Shiloh comes. When peace is established, when all is restored to its proper order, then will the promise to David be completed, yet the promise will not be at an end. For that moment comes when Christ takes up His throne on earth as it is in heaven.

David is not alone in seeing the One who must come. Isaiah saw Him. He declared a number of the titles by which this One would be known. He would be named Wonderful Counselor. He would be declared Mighty God. He would be declared Eternal Father, and also Prince of Peace. All of these titles belong to the One who would fulfill the promise made to David (Isa 9:6-9). As I look at those titles, it suddenly strikes me that this is not only the person of Christ who is described. The fullness of the triune Godhead is in those titles. The Wonderful Counselor - the Holy Spirit sent as our other Advocate, our present help, our lawyer. Yes, this same is true of the Christ, He is our primary Advocate, standing in the courts of heaven and pleading our case. But, I can still see the Spirit, the Counselor who stands at our side and advises, and this, too, is wonderful. Eternal Father - this is, of course, the Father. The Prince of Peace - our beloved Christ is He. Mighty God - in this, hear the whole of the Trinity declared in words reminiscent of the original revelation of the Godhead to Abraham. His name He declared to Moses, but to the patriarchs, He had only declared Himself the Mighty One, the Mighty One who said, "Let Us create."

In recognizing Messiah by all of these titles, Isaiah indeed declares that the Triune God is the same of whom Scripture declares, "Behold, the Lord your God, He is One" (Dt 6:1)! How else could both titles - Father and Messiah - apply to Him? How can the Father also be the Prince? A prince must be son of the king, and the Father is son of none. How else Eternal Father? Oh! Sweet Mystery of the Triune God!

Through Jeremiah and others of the prophets, we see how the covenant remains in spite of the threads removed and the threads woven in. It remains a single line. God will bring that Branch, the horn of David, by His own power, for David will never lose Israel's throne (Jer 33:15-26). Interestingly, the fate of Levi is also made certain here, joining the houses of Judah and Levi in the certainty of God's promise. Ever, the throne shall be in David's hand, ever the Temple will be served by the Levites. These two matters are declared as certain as the cycles of the sun. Yet, the certainty of David's line would not save Jehoiakim. Utterly cut off, he, never to have a son on the throne (Jer 36:30). The line would come from David, but not down that path.

Indeed, so fully was the Great Shepherd and Prince identified with David, that Ezekiel, prophesying amidst the exiles in Babylon, would speak of Him as David (Eze 34:23-24). The coming One, Messiah, would be both Shepherd and King over Israel forever (Eze 37:24-25). What a wonderful image that combined view of Christ gives us. He is not only King of kings. He does not simply take up the scepter of power. A king may rule as a tyrant, may serve only the power of his own position with little concern for his subjects. But a shepherd, that is another matter. The shepherd knows his sheep as intimately as his own children. He cares for them tenderly because he knows his own livelihood depends on their well-being. Where a king might send in troops to enforce his wishes, the shepherd must establish trust amongst his charges, such that they will pursue his wishes as their own best interest. Indeed, Messiah is both. To His own, who know His voice, He is the Great Shepherd, the Trusted One, whose voice guides us to pleasant pastures. To those who reject Him, He shall appear the Tyrant King who will be obeyed whether willingly or no. Every knee will bow to Him, but not every knee will have done so gladly.

Hosea declared that Israel would return to their king (Hos 3:5). In part, this may have been targeted at the rebel tribes who had split themselves from David's successors. But, there was a greater message in this. The history of all twelve tribes would be one of turning away from the true Power behind the throne. Yet, in the end, they will return to Him. He who sits on the throne will rebuild David's house. He will cause that house to possess even the remains of Edom, along with every other nation that is called by His name (Am 9:11-12). What a powerful statement that is! I remember coming across this several years ago, and being surprised by it, but could not recall where it was in the Book.

Consider: Edom is the name for the descendants of Esau, the other thread. It was of Him that God declared, "I hate him." Yet, even to such as that His promise reaches out. Even the remains of Edom will come into His courts with praise. There will come a time when the deception of Mohammed will be at an end, and the eyes of Edom opened to the Truth, and they, too, will come and worship the Lion of Judah, the Lamb of God. There will come a time when the tools of terrorism are cast down at the feet of the Prince of Peace.

Indeed, for the present, even the house of David does not recognize their King. He came amongst them, and they concurred in His death, as did we all. The King was come to His kingdom, but rebel forces wrestled Him off His throne. Accusations were ranged against Him of which not one was spoken truly. He suffered the death of a common criminal at the hands of a world filled with common criminals. Yet, the promise was not broken. Indeed, the prophets had seen the whole thing played out centuries beforehand and had left record of what lay beyond that cruel moment. God would, in spite of this raw treatment, pour out His grace upon the house of David, He would open their hearts to cry out to Him, that they might understand what had happened, Who it was who had been killed that day, and mourn for Him (Zech 12:10-12). Further, He would open a fountain to cleanse David's house, to cleanse the holy city Jerusalem of all their sins and all their impurities (Zech 13:1). Indeed, that fountain had been opened even as the King hung pierced upon the cross. It only remains for them to step into the cleansing flow.

As we approach the birth of the Christ, we see the mystery of conflicting prophecies resolved. The Messiah must come from David, yet the line of kings had been defiled to the breaking point. How could this be? How would a descendant come to a broken thread? Ah! But, Mary was also of David's line. To her would be born the long awaited Messiah (Lk 1:27-32). Matthew may have concerned himself with Joseph's lineage, but it wasn't Joseph's lineage that really mattered. His seed was not in it. It was Mary who completed the line of promise, and her line appears to have skirted the kings who had been cut out of Israel's inheritance. Truly, God raised up a King for the throne of David. It was exactly as He had declared it. He would rebuild the house. He would raise up a Branch. No man could lay claim to the birth of this child. It was God's child, the fulfillment of promise, the son of David (Ac 13:22-23).

This fulfillment totally escaped the understanding of the religious leadership of the day. All Israel knew that Messiah must come from David's line. All Israel understood that Messiah was to be born in Bethlehem. All Israel had poured over every scrap of prophecy, especially with Rome on their backs. The people were hungry for the King who would lead their revolt. Yet, with all that they knew, they did not understand. They could not explain David's words regarding this son of David. They couldn't explain how David could call his own son, "Lord." This was a question the Pharisees simply could not answer. Jesus would give the answer many years later, as He poured out His revelation to an apostle in exile. "I am the root and the offspring of David," He declared (Rv 22:16). Hear the answer to the riddle of the son called, 'Lord.' He is descended from David to be sure, but He is also the root. The Branch is the Root. The Offshoot is the Source. He Who is declared the Son of David is also the Source of all, the Word through Whom all that was created was created.

What is truly amazing to me is that through all the turmoil, through all the wickedness of His people, God remained steadfast. Indeed, more than simply keeping His word, He continued to speak in blessing upon the children of God. Through Solomon, God had spoken a blessing that was to touch not only Israel, but all the nations. He blessed the nation, and reminded them of their duty: be wholly devoted to God. He also reminded them of the reason for that duty: "so that all the peoples of the earth may know that the LORD is God; there is no one else" (1Ki 9:1-13). But a few short years later, with Solomon gone and his son on the throne, only Judah and Benjamin would remain under the king descended from David.

All the other tribes had gone with Jeroboam, and one of his first acts was the setting up of alternate places of worship. In Bethel, the very house of God, as well as in Dan, he established 'temples,' with 'altars.' Yet, they also had idols. Truly, his alternative places of worship were places of alternative worship. His goal in this was to give his subjects less cause to think of returning to Judah. It didn't take much effort, really. Indeed, in turning the tribes from Judah, Jeroboam also turned them rapidly from God.

The seed that started the divided nation would grow to fruition. The rebellion against the king and the faith of God's people that marked the start of Israel would continue as its trademark throughout its brief history. In spite of this, they remained God's people, and He would chastise them for their own good. The chastisement was severe, as it must needs have been to bring correction. The whole of the nation was carried off into exile by cruel enemies. What, now, was to become of the duty of Israel? How, now, would the nations be reminded that there is no God but God?

Decades rolled by. Judah was following swiftly on the heels of Israel's example. The remnant was becoming as bad as the rebel tribes had been. The same chastisement was heading their way, and God was making it known. By His mercy, there stood in the leadership at that moment a righteous man, a man concerned with God's will. Hezekiah looked at the condition of his people, took seriously the warnings that God's prophets were declaring to him, and did the only thing he could. He pursued God. He pursued God with the means of atonement that God Himself had provided. He did not simply seek to atone for his own sins, he came to God in hope of atoning for all Judah. Indeed, he didn't even stop there. He sought that same atoning of sin for captive Israel, long since in exile.

How the remnant blessed the whole! By this time, it was really the remnant of the remnant, yet because of one man who was willing to remain true to God, the blessing fell upon the whole nation. Israel would not be condemned entire. The exile would not be forever. Israel would come back to her king and back to her God, and would indeed remind the world that God was the Only True God. The promise remained unchanged. The king of David's line would yet be raised up, in spite of the demise of Israel, in spite of the demise of Judah, in spite of every punishment and every defeat that must come their way, God's people would continue. He would establish them once more in their land, even as He had promised, and Messiah would come. They could count on it.

The 'third day' events also continue through the dynastic period, continuing echoes of the events to come. In this case, the primary example also occurs in the life of Hezekiah. Came a time when the prophets came to him with a sorry message: time's up, your days are numbered. As he had done for the whole of Israel, so now he did for himself. He came to God in earnest prayer, and for better or worse, God answered, giving him fifteen more years on the earth. That answer came when? On the third day. On the third day after he prayed, the healing came, and Hezekiah was restored to life (2Ki 20:5). This is, perhaps, the penultimate of echoes. As Hezekiah had been restored to life on the third day, so the Christ, Messiah, would be raised from the grave on the third day. Yet, He would be raised to life eternal, to sit upon the promised throne forever!

How awesome this God, who throughout history was laying out hints of what was to come! Truly, even if creation itself did not leave sufficient reason to believe, the historical record should be enough. To see the multiplicity of messages that God had given, the never-ending stream of precursors, living parables, and to find them all fulfilled in Christ: what room remains for unbelief? Truly, He has completed the shadows and types in perfection, even as He obeyed in perfection and submitted in perfection. All praise and honor and glory be to His name!

Post-Exilic Generations (8/7/04)

Zerubbabel, Abihud / Rhesa, Eliakim / Joanan, Azor / Joda, Zadok / Josech, Achim / Semein, Eliud / Mattathias, Eleazar / Maath, Matthan / Naggai, Hesli, Nahum, Amos, Mattathias, Joseph, Jannai, Melchi, Levi, Matthat, Eli, Joseph, Mary, Jesus

At this point, any tracing of either line through the means of the Scriptural record is going to be shaky at best. Little remains in the historical record after the Exile. We have what Nehemiah wrote, along with Ezra's record, and then five centuries of which nothing is said. The one thing that might be noted here is that a number of the names seen in Jesus' genealogy through this period do appear in the records left by Nehemiah and Ezra. Are these, or some of these, the ones Matthew and Luke are pointing to? It would be impossible to say. The genealogical record after Zerubbabel is simply unclear.

About the only other point worth commenting on here is the disparity of generations between Matthew's and Luke's accounting. Matthew, of course, has fourteen. Given the omissions seen in other sections of his listing, this may or may not be all there were on that side of the family. Luke has about nineteen generations in that same period. Depending how one correlates the lists, there might be as many as nine more generations in Luke's list than are in Matthew's in the post-Exilic period. It is curious, but I'm not sure there's much of anything one could say about it that would be beyond the level of purest speculation. Perhaps, if one were sufficiently curious, there are sources outside of Scripture that might answer some of this, but my own curiosity does not suffice to lead me in search of such material.

Concluding Thoughts (8/7/04)

Well, I look back across the dates of this particular study, and I see that it has been a month since I began considering the wealth of insights that were uncovered in this overview of history that is Jesus' family tree. There has been a great deal that was worth thinking upon in all that time. There have been periods where I began to wonder if this weren't distraction rather than productive study, but I have arrived at the end of it finally. In closing out my notes on this section, there are two things I would comment on that become, as it were, bookends to the entirety.

First, I would point us back to the beginning through the eyes of Jeremiah. The first and longest abiding promise of God was made to Adam when he first broke God's rule. The whole of history thereafter showed the steadfastness of God in fulfilling that first promise, as well as the unfolding of His plan for fulfilling it. Time saw the promise expanded even as the family of man expanded. But, time also revealed a continual focusing of that plan, a refining of the revelation until it was made clear that only One could fill the part required by the Promise.

Many times, even in the ancient history which is the record of the Old Testament, it seemed clear that the Promise was off, that God's people had messed up beyond redemption. Yet, even in the darkest of periods, when Israel had been deceived into worshiping idols by human sacrifice; even then, God's Promise held. Even then, as He spoke of His wrath and assured His people that chastisement would come, He also made clear that His Promise held. His covenant with Abraham's children, with David's children, remained firm - as firm as the covenant by which He had established night and day (Jer 33:25-26). Consider, that covenant was established upon His word on the very first day of creation, nor has there been a breach of that covenant since!

Some would look at that message and think, perhaps, that the majority of Israel had therefore been excluded. Certainly, the line of promise is exclusive. It always has been. We see that from Abraham onward. The promise was not to every son, but was passed to only one son among the many at each step along the way. With the mention of David's descendants, it is reduced (at least in that moment of time) to one man from among the least of twelve tribes which had descended from Abraham. What had been an expanding list of recipients is, in this case, trimmed back to perhaps a dozen candidates, many of whom would shortly disqualify themselves. Talk about there being only a remnant remaining!

However, we have to understand the terms of the promise. Certainly, the pointers to Him who would fulfill the promise were being selectively trimmed to point down to that couple at the end, to the one woman who would bear the Christ child, and to the one father who would give him legitimacy in the eyes of worldly men. But, consider the promise: "in your seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed." One seed. One child. It was not the nation of Israel that would be the source of blessing, it was the One, singular man who would come up in their midst. David was hearing the same message. It was not every child of his that would sit upon the throne, but only one. It was not the whole of his progeny that would bless the world, clearly. Yet, there would be that One, that One that even David would address as 'Lord.' And in that One, the whole of the earth, peoples from every nation even today, has indeed been blessed, even as God had promised!

At the other end of history stand the words written to the young Christian congregation amongst the Hebrews. The God of Providence, the Creator of all things, the One in Whom we find life, by Whom we breathe and move, the One who caused us to exist at all, He has declared a specific day for each one of us, a day to recognize Him. Call it a day to meet your Maker. Call it a day to discover who your Father is, and to be restored to His joyful embrace. That day is appointed for every man, a unique moment in the life of each unique being that He has created. The appointed time will come in which we each recognize the great I AM. For some, that time will come too late. They will recognize that He is truly God, and that they have truly spurned Him beyond all hope of restoration. Others will recognize Him and bow down in loving adoration, will cry out for joy at the sight of a Father they thought long since lost to them. All will come to their day of recognition. The question becomes, how will you react when recognition comes?

The words of David ring out to us: "Today if you hear His voice, do not harden your hearts." The welcoming call of your Father goes forth today, calling you back to His good graces. He sends words of welcome, longing for you to come home. Will you hear him? Do you think, perhaps, that the time is not yet? That your appointment with Him is some other day? Hear again David's cry, as he cries out the heart cry of God, "Today if you hear His voice, do not harden your hearts." Then understand this: it is "Today" (Heb 4:7). His voice is calling. You can hear Him. You can try and pass of His voice as something else, you can pretend that these words are no more than the nonsense message of a deluded mind, but the Truth remains true. Today, His voice is calling you. Will you give him love's answer, or will you harden your heart to turn away. It is "today". There is no putting off the appointment. When God asks you, "will you love Me as I love you?", there can only be "Yes," or "No" in response. All shades in between are eliminated.

Salvation has come. The path to restoration into your rightful family has been opened. It only remains to hear His voice with an open heart, and come to Him. It is "today". Don't miss out. One day, it will be "today" for the last time. On that final "today," the offer of restoration will have expired. The promise has already been fulfilled. What has continued to our time is a grace period, as it were, in which we might avail ourselves of the fulfilled promise, but that period will close. Those who miss "today" will have one more "today" to face, but it will be a day of unending sorrow, a day to recognize for all eternity that the opportunity of a lifetime, the opportunity of life, was missed. Don't miss it!

Thematic Relevance: (6/12/04)	Matthew immediately establishes Jesus' credentials as a true son of Israel: son of David, and son of Abraham, a legitimate heir of both of these great men. Luke pursues the same course of establishing Jesus' credentials. Interestingly, he begins by establishing that Jesus was the legal and legitimate son of Joseph. He then follows the line back through David, Abraham, and beyond, going back to Adam, and finally, anchoring the line in God Himself. The good news? He is legit! He is Messiah, and upon His credentials there is no blemish!
Doctrinal Relevance: (6/12/04)	Jesus truly came in the flesh. He is firmly established by lineage as a real son of real people with a real history. In short, He is real.
Moral Relevance: (6/12/04)	Jesus is a real and legitimate son. He is established as a legal son of Joseph. He is established as a true son of David, a true son of Abraham. Can I say the same of myself with regard to my Father? Certainly, He Himself has established the legal status, passing papers on my adoption in the work of the True Son. But, do I yet behave as a true son of my Father? A son of David has a heart after God's own heart, even as David did. This is what distinguished David, and this is what will distinguish his sons as more than just physical facts of descent. The sons of Abraham do the deeds that Abraham did, as Jesus pointed out. Abraham believed God. Abraham blessed God, and honored those who honored God. Above all, Abraham obeyed God. Love and desire for Him, faith in and obedience to Him, honor for Him and all who are His: these must characterize the real and legitimate son.
Questions Raised: (7/8/04)	Why fourteen? Why does Matthew's list start with Abraham and work down, where Luke starts with Jesus and works back to Adam? Why Canaan rather than Ham?

Some Key Words (6/12/04)

Paraphrase: (6/12/04)

Key Verse: (7/8/04)

Thematic Relevance:
(6/12/04)

Doctrinal Relevance:
(6/12/04)

Moral Relevance:
(6/12/04)

Questions Raised:
(7/8/04)

Symbols: (6/12/04)

People Mentioned: (6/13/04-7/8/04)

You Were There ()

Some Parallel Verses (7/8/04)

New Thoughts (7/8/04-8/7/04)

General Matters (7/8/04-7/10/04)

Just the Names (7/12/04-7/13/04)

Before the Flood (7/12/04-7/15/04)

Generations of Noah (7/16/04-7/19/04)

Generations of Abraham (7/20/04-7/27/04)

Generations of Kings (7/28/04-8/5/04)

Post-Exilic Generations (8/7/04)

Concluding Thoughts (8/7/04)

© 2004 - Jeffrey A. Wilcox

Some Key Words (6/12/04)

Paraphrase: (6/12/04)

Key Verse: (7/8/04)

Thematic Relevance: (6/12/04)

Doctrinal Relevance: (6/12/04)

Moral Relevance: (6/12/04)

Questions Raised: (7/8/04)

Symbols: (6/12/04)

People Mentioned: (6/13/04-7/8/04)

You Were There ()

Some Parallel Verses (7/8/04)

New Thoughts (7/8/04-8/7/04)

General Matters (7/8/04-7/10/04)

Just the Names (7/12/04-7/13/04)

Before the Flood (7/12/04-7/15/04)

Generations of Noah (7/16/04-7/19/04)

Generations of Abraham (7/20/04-7/27/04)

Generations of Kings (7/28/04-8/5/04)

Post-Exilic Generations (8/7/04)

Concluding Thoughts (8/7/04)

© 2004 - Jeffrey A. Wilcox

Thematic Relevance:
(6/12/04)

Doctrinal Relevance:
(6/12/04)

Moral Relevance:
(6/12/04)

Questions Raised:
(7/8/04)