I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing love to a thousand {generations} of those who love me and keep my commandments.
I always wondered about the generations thing here. Does the love (a thousand generations) override the punishment (3-4 generations)?
And isn't it all a bit unfair. Shouldn't one be judged on ones own merits rather than the merits of ones grandparents?
But then again perhaps there's quite a good chance most people have had a righteous ancestor in the last 25000 or so years, so most of us are probably ok.
(35)He said to them, "When I sent you out without a purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?" They said, "No, not a thing." He said to them, "But now, the one who has a purse must take it, and likewise a bag. And the one who has no sword must sell his cloak and buy one. For I tell you, this scripture must be fulfilled in me, 'And he was counted among the lawless'; and indeed what is written about me is being fulfilled." They said, "Lord, look, here are two swords." He replied, "It is enough."
.....
(47)While he was still speaking, suddenly a crowd came, and the one called Judas, one of the Twelve, was leading them. He approached Jesus to kiss him; but Jesus said to him, "Judas, is it with a kiss that you are betraying the Son of Man?" When those who were around him saw what was coming, they asked, "Lord, should we strike with the sword?" Then one of them struck the slave of the high priest and cut off his right ear. But Jesus said, "No more of this!" And he touched his ear and healed him. Then Jesus said to the chief priests, the officers of the temple police, and the elders who had come for him, "Have you come out with swords and clubs as if I were a bandit? When I was with you day after day in the temple, you did not lay hands on me. But this is your hour, and the power of darkness!"
No deep questions this time, but I was reading this passage yesterday and just didn't understand the reference to the swords, particularly in the first section I quoted. Why the swords? And wouldn't Jesus' last statement here have held more sway if his followers didn't have swords with them themselves at that moment? Or am I just missing something obvious? (very likely!).
Now there was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a member of the Jewish ruling council. He came to Jesus at night and said, “Rabbi, we know you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the miraculous signs you are doing if God were not with him.”
In reply Jesus declared, “I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again.”
“How can a man be born when he is old?” Nicodemus asked. “Surely he cannot enter a second time into his mother's womb to be born!”
Jesus answered, “I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit. Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit. You should not be surprised at my saying, ‘You must be born again.’ The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit.”
“How can this be?” Nicodemus asked.
“You are Israel's teacher,” said Jesus, “and do you not understand these things? I tell you the truth, we speak of what we know, and we testify to what we have seen, but still you people do not accept our testimony. I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe if I speak of heavenly things? No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven–the Son of Man. Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the desert, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life.
“For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.
We haven't been very good about this blog have we? But this week I'm doing a spot of preaching, so a bit of help would be very useful. This is the passage, though the last sentence isn't in the reading as obviously we only put the nice bits in.
Ok, so the religious guy comes to find Jesus at night (either because he didn't want to be observed or because he was busy during the daytime) and wants to find out who Jesus is and what his message is really all about. He doesn't ask a question, so that's reading between the lines somewhat.
Jesus gives three pictures to explain his message:
(1) The being 'born again' thing (but not literally you silly).
(2) The wind blowing but you don't really know where its going or where its come from.
(3) The snake in the desert (see Numbers 21 - God sent poisonous snakes because the Israelites moaned about the food. They started to get bitten so God told Moses to make a bronze snake on a pole so they'd get better again).
I sort of understand (1) but Jesus doesn't really explain how one goes about being 'born again'.
No (2) I don't really understand.
No (3) makes sense, though I really don't understand or like the original story as I've hinted. Surely the one of the points of the first few books of the Bible is that inanimate handmade objects are no substitute for God.
I'm really uncomfortable about the direct 'whoever believes will have eternal life, whoever doesn't will perish' idea. Mainly because the Bible makes it clear repeatedly that believing and acting are very closely tied together and so as western Christians our actions or lack of them are probably going to wind us up in the 'not believing' camp.
Oh dear. Not particularly cheery. Someone help me out here.
For everything there is a season, and a time for every matter under heaven:
a time to be born, and a time to die;
a time to plant, and a time to pluck up what is planted;
a time to kill, and a time to heal;
a time to break down, and a time to build up;
a time to weep, and a time to laugh;
a time to mourn, and a time to dance;
a time to throw away stones, and a time to gather stones together;
a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing;
a time to seek, and a time to lose;
a time to keep, and a time to throw away;
a time to tear, and a time to sew;
a time to keep silence, and a time to speak;
a time to love, and a time to hate;
a time for war, and a time for peace.
I chose this passage, which has always been one of my favourite passages from one of my favourite books of the Bible, as although over the years it has brought me I don't know how much comfort, more recently it's been niggling a bit at me. In the bad times I find it endlessly comforting to know that I'm just in "a time", and that the God who is beyond time has other times for me (another favourite verse of mine is in Psalm 31:14-15a (also NRSV): "But I trust in you, O LORD; I say 'You are my God.' My times are in your hand"). But the idea of God having "A Plan" isn't one that sits that comfortably with me, as it seems to imply a passivity on our part. If I'm in a time of war or loss or being plucked up (or whatever) then maybe I should just sit back and ride it out, as it's only "a time". Where is the scope for being actively involved in God's purposes for the world in the context of a philosophy of "a time for this and a time for that"?
Keep reminding them of these things. Warn them before God against quarreling about words; it is of no value, and only ruins those who listen. Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a workman who does not need to be ashamed and who correctly handles the word of truth. Avoid godless chatter, because those who indulge in it will become more and more ungodly.
For some reason this was the passage that occurred to me when I was thinking about a few verses to put to start off the Bible blog. I don't know why really. I suppose my question is 'how does one "correctly handle the word of truth"?'. By not quarreling. Perhaps that means being nice to each other in the comments.
I sometimes wonder whether Paul's comments to Timothy (or to anyone else for that matter) are supposed to follow on in a logical fashion, or whether they are a load of different oddments of wisdom that are supposed to be looked at in a 'one-a-day calendar' fashion.
I don't understand the chatter bit. I like chatter. Perhaps not godless chatter though. Thoughts?
The Message by Eugene H. Peterson, Copyright (c) 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996,2000. Used by permission of NavPress Publishing Group. All rights reserved.
New Revised Standard Version Bible, copyright 1989, Division of Christian Education of the National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States of America. Used by permission. All rights reserved.
We'll be using other versions of the Bible too - the copyright information will be posted here.
Hello. This is the Wibsite's first collaborative blog. A number of us will be posting bits of the Bible and talking about it. Sometimes talking about it as part of the blog post itself, sometimes just inviting your thoughts in the comments. We're not preaching. We're not saying we've got all the answers, or in some cases any answers.
Please join in in the comments sections.
The Bible text itself will be in bold. Our ramblings will be in non bold.
If any other wibloggers would be interested in posting occasionally on this blog please get in touch - dave (at) wibsite.com.
The Bible Blog 
5
Permalink