Postings on Proverbs 12:13

“An evil man is ensnared by the transgression of his lips,

But the righteous will escape from trouble” (NASB)

The poem “Sticks and stones” naively proclaims, “words will never hurt me.” Solomon disagrees, as this proverb is about how our own mouths can hurt us, terribly.

Who?  An evil man vs. a righteous man

What?  Is ensnared vs. will escape from trouble

Where?  Anywhere

When?  Anytime

Why?  Transgression vs. [righteousness]

How?  The implication is both of their mouths are what cause one being ensnared and the other escaping from trouble

Words?  Evil, ensnared, transgression, righteous, escape, trouble

Notice, it doesn’t say the righteous man avoids trouble, but that when he’s in trouble his mouth helps him escape (see Longman 275).

Notice, your character comes out of your mouth – the lips of evil men transgress – or as Jesus put it “The good person out of the good treasure of his heart produces good, and the evil person out of his evil treasure produces evil, for out of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaks” (Luke 6:45) and “But what comes out of the mouth proceeds from the heart” (Matthew 15:18).

The metaphor of a trap vividly expresses how “lethal speech [can] take a victim by surprise and…destroy him before he can deliver himself” (Waltke 530). 

When I was a kid, my mom used to tell me “if you didn’t have a mouth you’d never get in trouble” (oh, the irony that I’ve been getting paid to talk for over a decade now!).

There are so many sins that come from our mouths, and I’m sure that when you read the words “sins of your mouth” that one particular kind of sin comes to mind, whether it’s lying or gossip or ridicule or disrespect or being combative or a number of them or something else.  So, what do you do?

First, know our mouths reflect our hearts.  They convey what we really want, what we think we need.  So, what is it you wanted when you lied – a person’s respect? To protect your reputation?  To advance yourself?  Often people gossip to make themselves seem stronger or better than they actually are – is that you?  What’s behind your words?  Why did you say what you said?  Critical to know what’s driving your words?

Second, when you know what’s driving you, you’ve likely found some lie you’re telling yourself.  How?  When it comes to lying, the lie might be “Their respect is more important than my character” or “than the truth” or “than what God thinks.”

Third, if we really dig deep here we may find an idol, a functional god that controls our thoughts and our actions more than the one True God, Jesus Christ, does.  We turn from our commitment to Him as our Savior and Lord and believe / trust the lie of the idol who promises some form of rescue from something bad if we’ll do what it says.

If you’re honest, your mouths show your desperate need for a Savior who spoke perfectly, in every situation to every person for 30+ years. This Savior doesn’t promise He’ll just clean your mouth up. He promises to trade the recording of every word you’ve ever said with every word He said, His perfect, sinless, mouth-righteousness becoming yours, and at the same time, He promises to take the punishment you deserve for your sinful, imperfect, wretched recordings. Then, after that great exchange, He will begin the work of cleaning your heart, which will automatically clean your mouth.

“Out of the mouth, the heart speaks.” What does your mouth say about your heart? What does your mouth say about who you’re most committed to? Is your mouth setting traps for you – I know mine has and probably is! So, what are you going to do about it?

I hope that helps!  TII!!!

Postings on Proverbs 12:11

“He who tills his land will have plenty of bread,

But he who pursues worthless things lacks sense” (NASB)

Observation: What does Proverbs 12:11 say?

The word “but” shows this is an antithetic parallelism, the second line being the opposite of the first line, a fact which helps with interpretation.

Who?  Anyone

What?  One man has plenty of bread, while the other man pursued worthless things.

Where and When?  Anywhere and at anytime

Why?  The first man had plenty of bread because he tilled his land; the second man pursued worthless things because he lacked sense

How?  Not sure

Word Studies: plenty, pursues, worthless, “lacks sense”

Line 1 seems to be a specific example of hard work, while line 2 is a general statement. Line 1 just seems obvious—no farmer can have bread unless he tills his land first.

The reason for blessing in line 1 is tilling land; the reason for wasted pursuits in line 2 is lacking sense. The blessing in line 1 is having plenty of bread; the curse of line 2 is pursing worthless things.

How does “lacks sense” correspond to tilling one’s land?  How does pursuing “worthless things” correspond to having plenty of bread?

If the parallels above match the text, then this verse is a chiasm (AB, BA), meaning the emphasis in the proverb the middle section, the B, plenty of bread and pursuing worthless things, namely, the focus is on the results.

Notice, both lines show people exerting energy, one for something worthwhile (having bread) and the other for things that are “worthless.”

Interpretation: What does Proverbs 12:11 mean?

The fool in line 2 is characterized by a “lack of heart” (a literal translation of the words the NASB translate “lacks sense,” which means without judgment or insight [Waltke 91], not having the sense to see how wrong or empty one's decisions are [Waltke 95]). Longman saying “it may be said that those who lack substance (heart) purse that which lacks substance (“emptiness”).”

Waltke makes more sense than my statement above about this proverb being a chiasm when he takes tilling as parallel to pursuing or chasing, and the “land” as parallel to worthless or empty things, which he calls “ventures or gambles that do not involve hard work and/or contribute to the common wealth” (528).

Application: What does Proverbs 12:11 mean to me?

Son, no one did this better than the Savior.  Jesus never pursued worthless things.  He always made the most of His time (Eph 5:16).  How did He do this? By saying only what God told Him to say (John 12:49-50) and doing only what God wanted Him to do (John 4:34) because, He said, "I do not seek My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me" (John 5:36, see also John 6:38, 17:4).

Also, notice the wisdom in this verse.  Both men were working hard (tilling and pursuing). Both men were focused.  Both men were driven.  The difference is not their work ethic; the difference is what they’re working at, one was worthwhile (tilling his land so he could eat), the other was “worthless,” empty, producing nothing of any real benefit.

Wise men, men who don’t “lack sense,” can see through the many encouragements they get on a daily basis to pursue “worthless things” and keep their minds fixed on pursuing what’s best.  Tilling land to have plenty of bread means planning, foresight and delayed gratification, doing hard work now for a future pay off.

Fools are regularly enticed by, succumb to, and even vigorously defend their right to do what's worthless.  They trade what’s best for what’s comfortable, what’s fun, and what’s easy.

Son, what kind of man will you be? I’ve been praying since you were born that you would be a wise man, a man who lives for the smile of God on his life (e.g., 2 Cor 5:9), a man who can say with Jesus "I glorified God on earth by accomplishing the work which You have given Me to do" (John 17:4), and this verse is one of hundreds that tells you how.

I hope that helps!  TII!!!

Postings on Proverbs 12:10

“A righteous man has regard for the life of his animal,

but even the compassion of the wicked is cruel” (NASB)

Before asking “What does this text mean?,” we must first ask “What does this text say?”  So, some of these questions may be obvious to you, but I ask them anyway because sometimes obvious questions lead to not-so-obvious answers.

Observations:

1.     What kind of parallelism is this? “But” suggests antithetic, but the two sides of the parallelism don’t seem to connect to each other, at least at first, but remember Proverbs 2:4 suggests wisdom does not give up her treasures easily.

2.     Who? A righteous man is contrasted with the category, wicked people.

3.     What? Regarding “the life of his animal” is contrasted with actions that look compassionate, but are actually cruel.

4.     Where & When? Anywhere and at anytime

5.     Why? The first does what he does because he is righteous, the second because he is wicked.

6.     How? Probably a myriad of different ways for both actions and intentions

7.     Does this refer to the animal’s life in general, caring that it has life, or caring what kind of life it has, or caring about the difficulty of the animal’s life, or caring about what the animal wants?

8.     How can compassion be cruel?  I could understand it better if it said their compassion is sinful, or selfish, but not cruel.

9.   Why does the author put "even" in the second part?

Word Studies

1.     Regard = “listens to, pays attention to, and internally empathizes with the need” (Waltke 1:526)

2.     Life = “the passionate drives and appetites” (Waltke 1:90, 526)

3.     Compassion = “the tender yearnings, affections, and love by a superior for a helpless inferior” (Waltke 1:527)

4.     Cruel = “insensitive, merciless, willfully, knowingly and unrelentingly inflicts pain on others” (Waltke 1:312)

I really don’t get how this verse is a parallelism or what the wisdom is, so I'm going to talk it out because that seems to help me.  I guess compassion is what links both sides of the parallelism. 

The righteous are just compassionate, even to the desires of their animals.  The wicked are not sensitive to people at all, let alone animals, but inflict pain even when being compassionate.  I need more help, so let's go to the commentaries.

Both Waltke (1:526-7) and Longman (273) say this proverbs is an argument from the lesser to the greater, namely, if the righteous man cares for his animal how much more will he care for his fellow man?  Waltke also says the second stanza is sarcastic because the wicked are by nature God-ignoring and others-disregarding (527) so "even" their compassion causes harm.

Now I see some of the wisdom here (I say “some of” because I don’t presume to think I see all the wisdom in this verse).  First, people often project a better person than they actually are, so you can learn a lot about what a person is on the inside by how they treat their animals.  Second, there can be a correlation, though not 100%, between how people treat their animals and how they treat people—if they abuse one they’ll likely abuse the other (sometimes, like in many animal rights circles, they treat animals better than they treat humans, especially, unborn humans).  Third, some acts that might fall under the category of compassion can actually harm people, even those that are trying to be helped.  Finally, some people are so insensitive to other people that they are actually cruel when trying to be kind.

I see this wisdom so clearly in my wife, who just loves our dog Riley.
She thinks about her needs, cares about how she’s doing and what life is like for her.  She does many kind things for her, and I often mock it in my head if not out loud.  However, after studying this proverb I’ve been feeling conviction for how I’ve encouraged her not to be very concerned about Riley because “she’s just a dog.”

We can also see this wisdom clearly in Jesus (Col 2:2-3), who taught us that if God takes care of birds how much more will He take care of us (Matt 6:26), and who never did anything cruel, but was so sensitive to the needs of others, both physical and especially spiritual, that His compassion drove Him to teach (Mark 6:34), to do miracles (Mark 8:2), to heal (Matt 14:14; Mark 1:41, 9:22), to weep (Matt 23:37-39) and, obviously, to endure the Cross.

I hope that helps! TII!!! 

Blood on Our Hands

While reading The Cross of Christ by John Stott, I was struck by the following quotes:

"'Were you there when they crucified my Lord?' the old [song] asks. And we must answer, 'Yes, we were there.' Not as spectators only, but as participants, guilty participants, plotting, scheming, betraying, bargaining and handing him over to be crucified. We may try to wash our hands of responsibility like Pilate. But our attempt will be as futile as his. For there is blood on our hands. Before we begin to see the cross as something done for us (leading us to faith and worship), we have to see it as something done by us (leading us to repentance)" (63) ... "If the cross is not central to our religion, ours is not the religion of Jesus" (71) ... "It is impossible for us to face Christ's cross with integrity and not to feel ashamed of ourselves" (85).

Have you ever seen yourself as a guilty participant in His murder? A betrayer? Knowing the truth, but avoiding total commitment like Pilate? Resenting His authoritative demand for worship and obedience like the religious leaders? Not fitting into what I want a Savior to be like Judas? Have you seen the Cross in light of your sins, that your sins put Him there, or has it become a history lesson this time of year?

Work hard to continually see yourself in light of the Cross. When you do, you see yourself as you really are.

True Approval

Another quote from my research, this time from J.A. Motyer's commentary on Philippians 4:4.

To those of us who, sadly and pathetically, seem to long and live for the approval of others he writes, "The essence of the matter is so to value Jesus Christ, and so to long for the smile of his approval, that nothing else matters. He is all our joy" (Philippians 210).

Edwards on Demonic Faith

I'm preaching a couple hours on lies people believe about salvation to our junior high group here at Compass. The sermon has been done for a while, but for last minute input I just finished reading Jonathan Edwards', True Grace Distinguished from the Experience of Devils, a sermon he preached in 1752 on James 2:19 "You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder."

It was a very good sermon that contrasts false marks of saving faith that a person can have from true ones. While there is a lot I want to reproduce here, I'll just leave you this gem:

"[Seeing the beauty of Christ] is a special gift of God, which he gives only to his special favorites. Gold, silver, diamonds, and earthly kingdoms are given by God to people who the Bible calls dogs and pigs. But this great gift of beholding Christ's beauty, is the special blessing of God to His dearest children. Flesh and blood cannot give this gift: only God can bestow it. This was the special gift which Christ died to obtain for his elect. It is the highest token of his everlasting love, the best fruit of his labours, and the most precious purchase of his blood."

Seeing the beauty of Christ is what Edwards gives as the main mark of true conversion (cf. 2 Cor 4:3-6). If you liked this quote and would like to read the whole sermon, click here.

Jesus Has Returned!!!

Did you know that Jesus came back? He did and he's in Orlando, Florida (having been there, Jesus messed up returning there) and his name is Dr. Jose Luis De Jesus Miranda.

Thank you to the Drudge Report for making me aware of this ridiculous story. You've got to love all their 666 tattoos, huh?

Don't forget these very important words from Jesus Himself, which totally refute this and all the rest of these false Messiahs:

"For many will come in my name, saying, 'I am the Christ,' and they will lead many astray. ... if anyone says to you, 'Look, here is the Christ!' or 'There he is!' do not believe it. For false christs and false prophets will arise and perform great signs and wonders, so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect. See, I have told you beforehand. So, if they say to you, 'Look, he is in the wilderness,' do not go out. If they say, 'Look, he is in the inner rooms,' do not believe it" (Matt 24:5, 23-26).

Tribalism vs. The Gospel

While discussing trends that are facing the church in the 21st century, David Wells speaks of "the growing bonding of kin...in the new expressions of tribalism--nationalistic, ethnic, and generational" (22).

To this growing trend--which I think is blatantly evident in the niche churches that market exclusively to subgroups so as to be "specific things to specific people"--the gospel is directly opposed.

In Ephesians 2:11-18, Paul argues that Christ achieved relational peace between Jews and Gentiles on the cross where he said "For [Christ] himself is our peace, who has made the two [Jew & Gentile] one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace" (vv. 14-15).

Churches must be marked by this relational peace. Any racism, classism, ageism, musicism, income-ism, or any other -ism, or any ministry model that glories in and perpetuates our differences has the effect of reintroducing war to a battlefield Christ already brought peace to. It pretends that this very important--though often neglected--work of relational peace that Jesus achieved on the cross never happened.

A people who're truly seeking to have a cross-centered, gospel-focused, Christ-exalting life and ministry cannot let this be.

Backtracking to Jesus' Lost Tomb

Click here to read a Jerusalem Post article about how scholars who were interviewed for the documentary are now revising some of the claims they made about the Talpoit tomb being the Lost Tomb of Jesus.

Worship, Pastoring, and The Savior

Here are some highlights from my Bible reading today.

A psalm of worship...

Psalm 67

0 A Psalm. A Song.
1 God be gracious to us and bless us, and cause His face to shine upon us-- Selah.
2 That Your way may be known on the earth, your salvation among all nations.
3 Let the peoples praise You, O God; let all the peoples praise You.
4 Let the nations be glad and sing for joy; for You will judge the peoples with uprightness and guide the nations on the earth. Selah.
5 Let the peoples praise You, O God; let all the peoples praise You.
6 The earth has yielded its produce; God, our God, blesses us.
7 God blesses us, that all the ends of the earth may fear Him.

...a mission statement for pastors...

"We proclaim Him, admonishing every man and teaching every man with all wisdom, so that we may present every man complete in Christ. For this purpose also I labor, striving according to His power, which mightily works within me" (Colossians 1:28-29).

...and to exalt the Savior.

Jesus "is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities--all things were created through him and for him. And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of the body, the church. He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent. For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross" (Colossians 1:15-20).

Jesus in Western Society

It is important to know the purpose / thesis of a book to give a context to what you're reading.

With that in mind, the purpose of David Wells' Above All Earthly Pow'rs is:

"...to be able to say more exactly how Christ, in whom divine majesty and human frailty are joined in one person, is to be heard, and is to be preached, in a postmodern, multiethnic, multireligious society" (7-8).

This purpose makes this book critically important because I think this issue is one of, if not the most, pressing concerns facing church leaders in the 21st century.

That is why I personally found this book to be so fascinating and penetrating that I read it twice and am blogging through it quite slowly now. I want to think more on this issue so if you know of anymore books that seek to accomplish a similar purpose, please list them in the comments.

What if Jesus Had Never Been Born?

If you haven't seen read this yet, please take a few minutes to read this short meditation on the question What Would Not Be If Jesus Had Not Been Born? here.

Before I go to bed tonight, I think I'll spend a few minutes meditating on this question in my journal. If you have any you'd like to add, please take a second to leave it in a comment below.

Merry Christmas!

Oneness Pentecostals & Jesus Christ

There is no denying that Oneness Pentecostal writers teach both monotheism and that Jesus is fully and truly God. They do not hesitate to go to all the proof-texts Christians would to prove His deity (e.g., John 1:1, 20:28; Rom 9:5; Titus 2:13; 2 Pet 1:1). At the same time, they also teach that Jesus is God in the flesh so that He is fully and truly man as well.

However, the orthodoxy of the statement “Jesus is God” is determined by how one defines the phrase "Son of God."

They affirm that “Jesus is the Son of God,” but that title refers exclusively to Jesus during His incarnation so that “the humanity of the Lord Jesus is the Son” (italics mine) (Magee, Is Jesus in the Godhead or is the Godhead in Jesus?, 32). Therefore, Jesus being the Son of God is a temporary role with a very distinct beginning and ending.

So, if Jesus is not the eternal Son of God, what was He before His incarnation? Answer: Jesus was the Father not the Son. In fact, during the Incarnation “the Father and Son are two natures in the one person, Jesus Christ” (Bowman, “Oneness Pentecostalism and the Trinity,” 25). In other words, for OP’s “to say Jesus is both the Father and the Son is to say that he is both God and man” (Boyd, Oneness Pentecostals and the Trinity, 32).

When talking to OP's, one of the reasons they deny the Trinity is because it's too hard to understand. Well, rather than doing away with all mystery in their system, they instead transfer the mystery to the Incarnation. Their most respected author readily admits that people “cannot understand the dual nature of Christ and cannot correctly separate his two roles” (Bernard, The Oneness of God, 171).

Therefore, Bible verses that appear to reveal distinctions between persons (e.g., Jesus praying to the Father, loving the Father, doing the Father’s will, both Father and Son sending the Spirit, etc.) are actually the two human and divine natures interacting with each other. His human struggles (e.g., pain, thirst, not knowing information, etc.), two wills (Luke 22:42; John 6:38) and especially His death also demonstrate this—Jesus’ human body (the Son) died on the cross while His spirit (the Father) did not.

Why is this important? When speaking with an OP you must be careful because they will adamantly agree with you that “The Son of God died on the cross,” but again, “Son of God” means Jesus’ human nature not that He is God.

Be careful when doing evangelism to define your terms. Ask, "Do you believe Jesus is the Son of God?" When they say "Yes," then ask "What do you mean by that?" If you don't, you’ll be “two ships passing in the night” during your conversation. You’ll get no where since you've been spinning your wheels in the mud of confusion as you talk past each other. Never assume. Always ask questions.

This is also a very good example of how important it is to know the view of the person you're trying to reach with the gospel. You may even leave thinking "This person's saved" because you didn't know the right questions to ask.

How Would Jesus Vote?

Here are two political ads posing as news articles to sway Christian voters, especially at least, the first one. Click here and here to read both salon.com articles.

My response: As evangelical Christianity has become more and more enculturated with the result that our God, Savior, churches and Bible are now tools of manipulation in the hands of pundits and politicians, it's pathetic, but not surprising that the world sees us more as a voting block than a driven, compassionate, articulate, winsome, sold-out group of Christ's followers who just happen to vote once every two years. Should I expect this will happen though, considering the nature of our political system?

Before Constantine and after the Reformation much of Christianity was known for being counter cultural, but it seems Christians in the West have been conquered by the culture. At least, that's what I see in the first article with the pastor who "runs his church services like a rock show."

Also, it's no wonder they're being manipulated by Rep. Ford. He's using the same tactic on them that the pastor is using on his church. Rep. Ford is saying, "If I like Jesus, they'll like me." The pastor's saying, "If they like me, they'll like Jesus"--both are the classic bait & switch that's everywhere in our culture.

Why are we just another voting block that's either pandered to for votes, or depicted as the enemy of a different voting block to garner their vote when we're opposed? Both sides are using us!!! Agh!!! I just pray that in my own heart and in the life of that church, we'll get off the fence between the culture and Christ, and live a life inflamed with the majesty and glory of God in all things.

By the way, to answer the question above: Jesus wouldn’t vote because what king’s want kings get.

Jesus is NOT your Homeboy

This is another in a long line of examples in our culture that trivialize the least trivial Person, by any standard, who's ever existed. No one needs to debunk Christianity through dialogue and debate anymore. Today, it's simply overlooked as insignificant because it's Founder is no longer seen as the One before whom "every knee should bow" (Phil 2:10) as Lord and King of the Universe. In the minds of most He's become another pop culture icons that have their "day in the sun" before being put on the shelf as they wait to be reinvented. No wonder God rests so inconsequentially upon a Christianity who thinks we honor Him when we market Him like a commodity and consume Him like a product. What happened to witnessing with our lips and our lives, not with our t-shirts and tattoos?