Proverbs 12:15-28 Study Guide

Posted Posted in Sunday School

Verses 17-20, 22 talk mostly about words so I would like to focus most of our time on discussing the topics regarding what we say.

15 The way of a fool is right in his own opinion, but the one who listens to advice is wise.

Already kinda covered verse 15 last week.  However, I don’t remember talking very much about that first line.  I just want to point out what that first phrase is saying (The way of the fools is right in his own opinion). In other words, a fool will think he is right.  The opposite would be to say a wise man will know he doesn’t know everything.  I think this is a fascinating concept. Often in a discussion, the people talking the most and the loudest are really the least knowledgeable about what they are arguing about.  The wisest people I know are consistently up front about what they don’t know.   This is something I want to grow more in, but I hope in my teaching Sunday School class, you have consistently heard me say, this is what I think, or this is how it looks to me, instead of being dogmatic and saying THIS IS HOW IT IS!

16 A fool’s annoyance is known at once, but the prudent overlooks an insult.

This is interesting to me because I keep trying to teach Ian that control of his own emotions and responses is something he needs to learn. He just may not punch Kedrick whenever he loses his temper.  Control of your emotions is a major task of adulthood. Uncontrolled people that go into adulthood and responsibility are terrifying loose cannons. I want to say this respectfully, but one need look no farther than our president for an example.

17 The faithful witness tells what is right, but a false witness speaks deceit.

I’m not sure if I even know what v 17 is saying. ESV and KJV sound pretty different on the first phrase, but I think are actually saying almost the same thing.  So it’s just saying a false witness will tell the truth and a false witness with deceive you (?!).  I’m confused about the significance of that. Isn’t that the definition of a false witness–one that speaks deceit?

18 Speaking recklessly is like the thrusts of a sword, but the words of the wise bring healing.

I think probably all of us have been the victim of a reckless tongue.  No doubt it was quite destructive!  Maybe some of you still feel the pain from words a parent or close acquaintance spoke to you years ago.  But isn’t the challenge to remember the destruction we can cause when we are on the giving end of the tongue? Many of us are fathers and leaders and I think have extra responsibility to be thoughtful in our words. The second half of the verse explains how the wise brings healing through what he says. That is the challenge for us. We can destroy or heal with our words. V25 is another way of phrasing that.  I don’t get to see my boss that often because of the nature of my job.  Recently, she gave me public recognition at a staff meeting and it was just amazing how encouraging it was for me to get some praise from her.

Can you relate stories of being pierced with reckless words?

Can you give examples of how a wise word brought healing to you?

What are your strategies for watching your words?

Do you find it a challenge as a father/leader to consistently build up instead of tearing down?

Eph 4:14 so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes. 15 Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ,

This verse shows that we need people who can use constructive words for the body of Christ to become mature.

19 The one who tells the truth will endure forever, but the one who lies will last only for a moment.

What is v 19 saying? Is this just a statement that lying will destroy you? If so, what are the implications? Obviously, as pious Matthew 5 believers, we value honesty pretty highly.  But do we love it? Do we actually hate lying like God does?  V 22 fits well here: The Lord abhors a person who lies, but those who deal truthfully are his delight.

What is it about lying that God hates? Why do you think he delights in those who deal truthfully?

What does it look like to deal truthfully? That seems so much deeper than just not ever telling a lie.

27 The lazy person does not roast his prey, but personal possessions are precious to the diligent.

Obviously you can apply this directly–if you go hunting, better make SURE you get that deer to the butcher’s or you are lazy. But I think the verse is really making a statement about the character of the lazy and the diligent.

Why would the lazy person not roast his game?

Why would the diligent care about his possessions?

How do you teach this to your children?

 

Proverbs 11:1-15 comments 1-29-17

Posted Posted in Sunday School

First of all, Proverbs is hard for me to do a lot of traditional study material on.  It feels like these are more short general truths that should just be discussed in class as we work to internalize.  So I’m not sure I will continue posting a lot on Proverbs for now, but probably some…

Here are a few ideas for this passage:

  • V 1: What is it about measuring devices that either infuriates or delights the Lord?
    • Scriptures that talk about it?
      • Lev 19:35 You shall do no wrong in judgment, in measures of length or weight or quantity.
      • Deu 25:13 You shall not have in your bag two kinds of weights, a large and a small.
  • 2: Pride/humility
    • If you are proud, there is only one way to go (down).   Disgrace…does God perhaps intentionally give the proud extra disgrace?

5 Likewise, you who are younger, be subject to the elders. Clothe yourselves, all of you, with humility toward one another, for God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble.

  • But why is there wisdom with the humble? Is it correct to say that humility breeds wisdom?
  • Righteous: a prominent theme in this passage (vs 3-11).
    • What does it mean to be righteous? What is righteousness?
      • Synonyms in this passage (ESV): Integrity, upright.  Antonyms: crookedness, treacherous, but mostly wicked/wickedness.

Definitions of Hebrew terms for Righteous and Wicked:

H3477 (UPRIGHT)

ישׁר

yâshâr

yaw-shawr’

From H3474; straight (literally or figuratively): – convenient, equity, Jasher, just, meet (-est), + pleased well right (-eous), straight, (most) upright (-ly, -ness).

 

H6666 (RIGHTEOUSNESS)

צדקה

tsedâqâh

tsed-aw-kaw’

From H6663; rightness (abstractly), subjectively (rectitude), objectively (justice), morally (virtue) or figuratively (prosperity): – justice, moderately, right (-eous) (act, -ly, -ness).

 

H6662 (RIGHTEOUS/JUst)

צדּיק

tsaddı̂yq

tsad-deek’

From H6663; just: – just, lawful, righteous (man).

 

H898 (TRANSGRESSORS)

בּגד

bâgad

baw-gad’

A primitive root; to cover (with a garment); figuratively to act covertly; by implication to pillage: – deal deceitfully (treacherously, unfaithfully), offend, transgress (-or), (depart), treacherous (dealer, -ly, man), unfaithful (-ly, man), X very.

 

H7563 (WICKED)

רשׁע

râshâ‛

raw-shaw’

From H7561; morally wrong; concretely an (actively) bad person: –  + condemned, guilty, ungodly, wicked (man), that did wrong.

Pro 11:3 The integrityH8S38 of the uprightH3477 shall guideH5%8 them: but the perversenessHSS58 of transgressorsH898 shall destroyH7703 them. Pro 11:4 RichesH1952 profitH3276 no tH3808 m the dayH3117 of wrath: but righteousnessH6666 delivereth from death. The righteousnessH6666 of the perfectH8549 shall directH3474 his way:H1870 Pro 11:5 but the wickedH7563 shall fallH5307 by his own wickedness. *-17564 The righteousnessH6666 of the uprightH3477 shall deliverH5337 them: but Pro 11:6 transgressorsH898 shall be taken in their own naughtiness. H Pro 11:7 When a wickedH7563 expectationH8615 shall perish:H6 his and the hopeH8431 of men perisheth.H6 Pro 11: 8 The righteousH6662 is out of trouble, H6869 and the wickedH7563 comethH935 in his stead. *-18478 Pro 11: 9 An with hus mouthH6310 destroyethH his neighbour:H7453 but through knowledgeH1847 shall the justH6662 be delivered. Pro 11:10 When it goeth well with the righteous,H6662 the rejoiceth: and when the wickedH7563 perish, H6 there is shouting. Hr 440 Pro 11:11 By the of the uprightH3477 the cityH7176 is exalted:H but it is overthrownH2C4C by the mouthH63tc of the wicked. H7563
Pro 11:3 The integrityH8S38 of the uprightH3477 shall guideH5%8 them: but the perversenessHSS58 of transgressorsH898 shall destroyH7703 them. Pro 11:4 RichesH1952 profitH3276 no tH3808 m the dayH3117 of wrath: but righteousnessH6666 delivereth from death. The righteousnessH6666 of the perfectH8549 shall directH3474 his way:H1870 Pro 11:5 but the wickedH7563 shall fallH5307 by his own wickedness. *-17564 The righteousnessH6666 of the uprightH3477 shall deliverH5337 them: but Pro 11:6 transgressorsH898 shall be taken in their own naughtiness. H Pro 11:7 When a wickedH7563 expectationH8615 shall perish:H6 his and the hopeH8431 of men perisheth.H6 Pro 11: 8 The righteousH6662 is out of trouble, H6869 and the wickedH7563 comethH935 in his stead. *-18478 Pro 11: 9 An with hus mouthH6310 destroyethH his neighbour:H7453 but through knowledgeH1847 shall the justH6662 be delivered. Pro 11:10 When it goeth well with the righteous,H6662 the rejoiceth: and when the wickedH7563 perish, H6 there is shouting. Hr 440 Pro 11:11 By the of the uprightH3477 the cityH7176 is exalted:H but it is overthrownH2C4C by the mouthH63tc of the wicked. H7563

 

Proverbs 10:1-16 Study Guide

Posted Posted in Sunday School

I’ve never had to teach Proverbs before, and I admit it looks pretty daunting. It feels important to come to some common agreements about how to interpret Proverbs before we jump in.

 

First of all, what section are we in?

  • Proverbs 1-9 start with Proverbs 1:1:

The proverbs of Solomon, son of David, king of Israel… So that section was proverbs of King Solomon.

  • Proverbs 10:1 starts again with The proverbs of Solomon.  However, these seem to be simply a collection of the wise one-liners, so to speak, that were collected while Solomon was king. For example, in my mind’s eye, I picture him passing judgment on a foolish son, then that evening, penning Proverbs 10:1.  As such, most of these verses don’t seem to stick together very well, that is, each wise saying pretty much stands alone.
  • Chapters 25-29 start with the inscription (Proverbs 25:1) that These also are proverbs of Solomon which the men of Hezekiah king of Judah copied.  So basically more of the same, they just weren’t in the “first edition” of Proverbs.
  • Chapter 30 is the wise sayings of Agur the son of Jakeh. The oracle. (Proverbs 30:1).
  • Chapter 31 is The word of King Lemuel. An oracle his mother taught him. (Proverbs 31:1).

 

Context and how to interpret a Proverb:

  • To properly understand and apply one of these wise sayings we will be studying for the next 6 months, I think it’s crucial to remember when and to whom these Proverbs were written.
  • I think it’s pretty self-explanatory that Solomon was the author, and the book was written to Old Testament Jews.
  • God gave Solomon unmatched wisdom, and we know these Proverbs are part of Scripture. So we can safely take them as truth.  (It is true, that in his later years, Solomon somehow turned his back on Wisdom.)
  • God’s covenant with the Old Testament Jews I believe was very different from our New Testament dispensation.  God promised physical blessings and prosperity as his portion of the covenant in exchange for the obedience and undivided loyalty of the Israelites. Most of the narrative portions of the OT graphically illustrate this time and time again.  A graphic example is David and Saul’s conflict with Goliath, or the Philistines in general. However, in the NT, I see very little support for physical prosperity (I’m not saying none!).
  • A crucial task in interpreting and applying Proverbs is to figure out how this wise saying applies to the NT age.  This is a major premise of Anabaptism–that we give precedence to the way of Jesus where it differs from the OT!!!
  • Gary Miller, one of my ministers from Hutchinson, used to say something to the effect that a Proverb is more of a generality about how life should work rather than a definitive statement about how it always works.  I think this concept is very helpful when you look at Proverbs.  Additionally, they tend to just show one side of a coin, but if you put several proverbs together, you might get a more complete picture.
    • For example: Proverbs 10:4 implies that the diligent will get rich. Many Mennonites like this verse and think that poor people are lazy. But what about Proverbs 13:23 that says that The fallow ground of the poor would yield much food, but it is swept away through injustice. So we need to be careful to take each Proverb in the light of other Scripture.
  • Hebrew Poetry: I think it’s also important to have just a basic understanding of Hebrew poetry. What are the defining characteristics of English poetry? (cadence, rhyming words, etc.).
    • Hebrew poetry primarily used rhyming ideas. Almost all of this section of Proverbs utilizes this rhyming device. For example, Proverbs 10:1.  To get the point of the verse, you really need to put both lines together, not that a foolish son will only be a sorrow to his mother.
    • Additionally, when you try to put something in poetry form, I think you tend to trade off a little exactness in exchange for something you can remember. (Just pick up the hymnal and look at the funny language/word order they use.) Obviously, the better you are at rhyming, the more you can mitigate this. But you still have to make all your sentences the same length. In my opinion, a Proverb like this can’t compare in doctrinal weight to a line in Deuteronomy, or to one of Paul’s 3 paragraph run-on sentence.
    • This is not to say that Proverbs aren’t true, but just that you must be aware of the genre as you seek to understand what God was trying to convey in this passage.
  • Summary: the Proverbs are valuable, pithy lines to help us be thoughtful about how the world works but must be evaluated carefully to see how they apply to us NT believers.
  • Note: these are some of my off the cuff thoughts and I would definitely welcome your input to “sharpen my iron”!

Chapter 10:

I hope to do more thinking and studying throughout the week.  However, I am thinking mostly that we can just sort of go through the passage and allow natural discussion about the each proverb.  There is just such a diversity of ideas with such creative wording here that it feels like you really need some time to digest these lines to really get to their heart….

Malachi 4 Study Guide

Posted Posted in Sunday School
  • I think most of this passage might still actually be future.  For me, that makes the passage a lot more complicated.
  • The context is the again the perceived injustice, that is, that the wicked are not being punished nor the righteous blessed.  This concept really starts in the last verse of Chapter 2, and continues through the rest of the book. Chapter 3:16-18 is definitely part of this section…
  • Maybe start by paraphrasing this whole chapter:
    • In the day that God makes up his treasured possession, you will again see the difference in how God treats the righteous and wicked (3:16-18)
    • This will be because the day of judgment is coming. This day of the Lord will make the wicked like stubble in an the oven.  But for the righteous, it will be blessing like the warm rays of the sun. (or you could argue that Jesus is the Sun here.)
    • The righteous will finally rejoice and trample the wicked.
    • Don’t forget the mosaic law–it still applies
    • Elijah: God will send him again before the great and awesome day [of judgment] comes.  His job is to turn the fathers to their children and children to their fathers. But if not, God will curse the land.
  • Now to explain… This day of wrath/blessing must still be future because so far we have not seen the fulfillment of this kind of a day.
    • IMO, this is different from Malachi 3:1, where the messenger comes to prepare the way before the Lord who will suddenly come to his temple. Malachi 3:2 and following must then be referring again to this same great and awful day of the Lord.
  • Why this admonition to remember the mosaic law? (Malachi 4:4)
    • Much of this prophecy is still centuries in the future.  God was reminding the present day Jews to stay faithful to the things they knew.
    • This is a good reminder to us who have a really good revelation (Scripture), but we tend to neglect it’s instruction.
    • Rabbit trail: I think this verse is a really interesting window into how God worked with men to reveal his word (Moses’ law, but the statutes that God commanded him).
  • Now, how to explain this section about Elijah…
    • One possible explanation is that John could have been the Elijah spoken of here, but he was not accepted, so the primary Elijah in view here will come when Jesus comes prior to the Millennial reign. Following is Constable’s exact quote explaining this view:
    • The Lord promised to send His people Elijah the prophet before the great and terrible day of the Lord arrived. An angel later told John the Baptist’s parents that their son would minister in the spirit and power of Elijah (Luke 1:17). Yet John denied that he was Elijah (John 1:21-23). Jesus said that John would have been the Elijah who was to come if the people of his day had accepted Jesus as their Messiah (Matt. 11:14). Since they did not, John did not fulfill this prophecy about Elijah coming, though he did fulfill the prophecy about Messiah’s forerunner (3:1).

    • This interpretation has in its favor Jesus’ words following the Transfiguration, which occurred after John the Baptist’s death. Jesus said that Elijah would come and restore all things (Matt. 17:11). Whether the original Elijah will appear before the day of the Lord or whether an Elijah-like figure, similar to John the Baptist, will appear remains to be seen. Since Jesus went on to say that Elijah had come and the Jews failed to recognize him, speaking of John (Matt. 17:12-13), I prefer the view that an Elijah-like person will come.

    • What John did for Jesus at His first coming, preparing the hearts of people to receive Him, this latter-day Elijah will do for Him at His second coming.  Evidently the two witnesses in the Tribulation will carry out this ministry (Rev. 11:1-13). Who the witnesses will be is a mystery. Evidently one of them will be an Elijah-like person. These men will do miracles as Elijah and Elisha did.

  • At any rate, the primary Elijah must not be John the Baptist because we haven’t seen this great and awesome day of the Lord (judgment day).
  • Turning the hearts of the fathers… possibly meaning literally that fathers and children throughout the land would have their hearts turned to each other.?? (seems unlikely). One commentator thinks it is meant turning the hearts of the children to the father’s mentioned throughout Malachi (Levi, Moses, Elijah), but I’m not sure how that works with turning the father’s hearts to their children?? Or you could take the interpretation of the NET Bible interpreters: He will encourage fathers and their children to return to me.
  • Curse/decree of utter destruction.
    • This is the idea of something “devoted to destruction” (KJV often uses that wording for H2764). Definition and occurrences.  Examples:
      • Leviticus 27:24
      • Joshua 6:17
      • 1 Samuel 15:21
      • Malachi 4 uses remarkably similar language to 2 Peter 3.  This helps me think this is still future.  At any rate, it brings out some key lessons for us.
      • Here a couple takeaways I see:
        • This idea of doing what we know already (e.g. the Mosaic law for OT believers). God has revealed his will to us in Scripture…we are also waiting to see our redemption. We must faithfully continue in what we know to do until He arrives to settle right and wrong forever.
        • The power of that day of judgment will either burn us like stubble or make us grow like the sun’s rays.
        • 2 Peter 3 says two things (at least). That we should not forget that judgment will surely come (even when it looks like everything is continuing as in the past).  Then, in view of this coming judgment, we should be diligent to be found by him without spot or blemish, and at peace. (2 Peter 3:14)

Matthew 1:18-2:12 Study Guide

Posted Posted in Sunday School

Intro

Do you ever wonder what the point is of studying the birth of Christ?  I think we do know instinctively that there is a lot of significance, and key theology, if you will, tied up in the birth of Christ into the world as a man.  I think for me, Christmas has become so routine that I struggle to find the significance in it.

An interesting feature of this passage is that it comes from one of the four gospels.   I find it tempting to read the four gospels, or at least the 3 synoptics almost interchangeably, and forget that the Holy Spirit inspired each one individually for a divine purpose.  Remembering that helps me keep my focus as I study a passage like this that is so familiar it has become common.

  • In light of that, do you know who Matthew’s primary audience probably was?
    • The 1st century Jews
  • This raises what I think is a significant question: What questions/criticisms would a 1st century Jew have about Jesus? I think his pedigree was crucial to his claim to be the Messiah. Without  properly answering this question, Matthew/Jesus could not hope to convince any self-respecting Jews of the day.  Think about the following:
    • Matthew and Luke were the only NT writers who recorded Jesus’ lineage
    • Many Jews were willing to (grudgingly?) call Jesus a Rabbi, but his claims to be Messiah/son of God was much harder to accept
    • Nazarites (people from Jesus’ hometown): Is this not the son of Joseph, and are not his brothers and sisters here?
    • Some called (or at least implied that) Jesus is an illegitimate son (John 6 or so)
    • Was Jesus of born in Bethlehem, not of Nazareth? In other words, does he fit the prophecies about the Messiah?
    • Did the religious elite accept him?
  • Another related question: who/what did Matthew claim that Jesus is? Hint: read Matthew 1:1 (1 The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham).  This is interesting because I think today’s lesson is basically giving evidence for those claims.
    • Jesus is a form of Joshua, used for two other people in the Bible. It literally means salvation.  You can see this reflected in Matthew 1:21.
    • Christ: I have recently become more aware of the actual significance of that term.  It is a transliteration of Messiah, but Messiah is also a transliteration.
      • Finny Kuruvilla: A Provocative case has been made that by the time of the first century, the term Christ would have been widely understood as King , or more fully, God’s anointed King.
      • Messiah literally means rub with oil.
      • David was called messiah (Ps 18:50), in other words, God’s King.
      • It really adds some depth to Jesus’ claims when you start substituting the word King for Christ in the NT.  Why else would Jesus spend so much time speaking of his KINGDOM?
    • Son of David, son of Abraham: I think Matthew is further confirming that Jesus is the fulfilment of prophecy of the Messiah (son of David), and the seed of Abraham that would be for blessing all nations.
  • I think these themes are what you see in today’s lesson.   I would like to entitle this passage, The King’s Birth.

Text

Now the birth of [King] Jesus took place this way… (Matthew 1:18)

  • I think it’s significant that Matthew keeps using Jesus’ title of royalty (Christ).
  • Luke tells the story of Jesus’ conception from Mary’s point of view since he is more concerned with an orderly telling of the story. However, Matthew focuses on what Joseph’s side of the story since that is what is most significant to his audience.
  • What is the significance of Matthew 1:18 before they came together she was found to be with child from the Holy Spirit and Matthew 1:25 but knew her not until she had given birth to a son?
    • It establishes that Joseph is definitely not Jesus’ biological father, but rather that He is the Son of God.
    • An incredible amount of ink has been spilled on reconciling this idea of God becoming incarnate, that is God becoming man.  I am pretty uncomfortable with many of these explanations.  I would much rather stick to the details that are given explicitly in Scripture, such as that Jesus is both the son of God and the son of Mary (mankind).
    • Seriously, what is the implications of knowing that Jesus is God incarnate?
      • Jesus is the Word of God. In other words, he is God literally revealed to us.  He showed us how we could live.
      • This was the only way for the curse of sin to be lifted (to save his people from their sins).
      • He showed that his creation is still good since he was willing to take on humanness.
  • What was the content of the reassurance the angel gave Joseph in the dream about taking Mary as his wife (Matthew 1:20-23)?
    • The child was from the Holy Spirit, not from fornication on Mary’s part.
    • The name for the child–this defined who the child would be (Jesus–savior–because he would be a savior).
    • Jesus’ birth to Joseph’s virgin fiancé was a direct fulfillment of prophecy.
  • Joseph’s character: Joseph is shown to be a just, disciplined and obedient father.

Visitors to the King (2:1-12)

  • Why did Matthew include the story of the visit of the wise men, especially the details of locating him (Jerusalem)? Luke, the other gospel writer who recorded Jesus’ birth, used totally different details for his account.
  • What did the Magi (the Greek word) call Jesus when they approached Herod?
    • He who has been born King of the Jews [emphasis mine]
  • What was the Magi’s stated reason for coming to visit Jesus? Related, why would they have given gifts, perhaps in particular the gifts they chose?
    • They came to worship the King.  Interesting that although Jesus was the King of the Jews, they had come from another land to worship someone who was “not” their king.  Shockingly, the religious elite failed to even follow up on this claim.  They had surely also seen the star.
    • The gifts, at the least, were intended to be gifts you would give royalty (perhaps there was individual significance to the gifts, as well, but that is more likely to be hypothetical).
  • Interesting tidbit: Magi were reportedly a sleazy group of people…
  • Why was Herod and Jerusalem troubled about the report that there is a King of the Jews?
    • I used to think Herod was just being crazy to care so much about Jesus, but I am beginning to think he had legitimate reason to be threatened.  This added significance to Jesus’ claim to be the Christ (King).
    • The Honeybrook Nativity scene pointed out that Jerusalem was troubled because they knew blood would be shed over this (it was).
  • Why did Matthew use the chief priests and scribes to speak the prophecy of where the ruler/Christ would be born?
    • I think Matthew is showing that even the religious elite were, in a backhanded way, acknowledging that Jesus met the requirements of this prophecy of where the ruler would be born.

Practical application

  • To me, there are two major takeaways.  The first, the implications of the incarnation of God, we already spoke of.
  • The other thing I find significant is this issue of how we should respond to a king. In this case, the king absolutely has jurisdiction over our lives. If we do not choose to recognize that now, at some point, God has made it clear that he will cause every knee to bow to Jesus (Philippians 2:9-11).
  • This passage reveals three responses to King Jesus:
    • Reaction (being threatened): Herod
    • Indifference/head knowledge but no accompanying respect: religious elite.
      • We are probably most vulnerable to this response
    • Worship: Magi.
  • What do you choose?

Malachi 2

Posted Posted in Sunday School

Part 1 (2:1-9): These verses finish Chapter 1’s rebuke to the priests 

  • A command is referred to twice in this section (2:1, 2:4). What command is he referring to?
  • What was the offence of the priests that would cause them to be cursed?
  • What was the curse? What is offal/dung, and what is the significance of using it in this curse?
  • Who was Levi and what did God commend him for?
  • The behaviors of the current priests were contrasted with “Levi” in what ways?
  • The church today has a similar responsibility–we are to teach the nations about God.  I think this passage begs the question–how are we at Weavertown doing with the same criteria the priests were held to here in this passage? What do you think God would have Malachi say about us?
Part 2: Profaning the Covenant
  • ​Part 2a: V 10 starts by appealing to the Israelite’s commonalities to ask why are WE faithless and thereby profaning the covenant of our fathers. 
    • First of all, it’s interesting that Malachi switches to WE in this statement instead of YOU.
    • Define Profane (what were they doing to profane the covenant?)  I think understanding what profanity is might be key to internalizing this passage. 
    • ​​What is meant by marrying the daughter of a foreign god?
    • There is a curse for profanity!  Do we profane the Bride of Christ in a similar manner?
  • Part 2b: Two part accusation: weeping during worship and breaking the marriage covenant.
  • Weeping at the altar:  I think an obvious takeaway is that God will not accept our worship/gifts when we have (known?) sin in our hearts.  But what is wrong with weeping at the altar?
  • Faithless to your wife: what exactly were the Israelites doing to be faithless (break their marriage covenant) to their wife?
  • What were the reasons God listed that they shouldn’t break their marriage covenant (besides that you obviously don’t break covenants)?  What is the significance of those reasons?
  • Interesting side note: how does this discussion about divorce inform us about how God feels about divorce (in general, but particularly in our current day)?

Malachi 1

Posted Posted in Sunday School

Author’s note: how do you manage to get a handle on the context of a book like Malachi and cover the whole first chapter in one Sunday?  At the current rate, I’m going to sit down on the job on one or both sections….

 

The oracle of the word of the Lord to Israel by Malachi.

Background to Malachi

Who, What, Where, Why questions are critical to sincere exegesis of any book of the Bible.

Author:

  • 1:1 and 3:1 imply that Malachi was the author. But Malachi literally means “my messenger”, so you could alternately read 1:1 as “The oracle of the word of the Lord to Israel by my messenger” (this is how 3:1 is translated). Some scholars make a case that the author was anonymous (seems unlikely since this would be only prophetic book like that). The reference to my messenger (Malachi) in 1:1 is probably a play on the author’s name.
  • In any case, we know nothing about the author with the possible exception of his name.

Date and Geopolitical Context:

  • “Haggai and Zechariah . . . are noteworthy for the chronological precision with which they related their lives and ministries to their historical milieu. This is not the case at all with Malachi. In fact, one of the major problems in a study of this book is that of locating it within a narrow enough chronological framework to provide a Sitz im Leben [situation in life] sufficient to account for its peculiar themes and emphases.” (as cited by Constable)
  • Need to rely on content of book to approximate the date. It speaks of worship at the second temple, so after 515 BC, which was when the temple was completed.  Most think it was between 515 and 400 BC.  Mostly likely corresponding most closely with events recorded in 2nd half of the book of Nehemiah. Also, it would be near the time of Esther.
  • Reference is also made to the governor, so must  be referring to the satrapy’s Persian-appointed governor.  The newly reformed nation of Israel was struggling for survival with competing satrapies at this time.  You can see some of this with the accusations of the Israelites to God (e.g. 1:2 “how have you loved us?”).   Haggai and Zechariah were the most recent prophets and they spoke a lot about Zion–which didn’t seem to be coming about.
  • “. . . Malachi and his contemporaries were living in an uneventful waiting period, when God seemed to have forgotten His people enduring poverty and foreign domination in the little province of Judah. . . . True the Temple had been completed, but nothing momentous had occurred to indicate that God’s presence had returned to fill it with glory, as Ezekiel had indicated would happen (Ezk. 43:4). . . . Generations were dying without receiving the promises (cfHeb. 11:13) and many were losing their faith.”[14] (as cited by Constable)
  • Probably the best context is to try to imagine what you must have felt like to be a Jew in Jerusalem in Nehemiah’s day.  This is the environment where the story of Esther and the Maccabees occured, and 400 years of repeated foreign invasions and repression without divine encouragment.

Genre and Theme:

  • Burden/Oracle. Hebrew Massa (Strongs 4853) . Literally “burden”.  But also means the message of the Lord.  Here are the 65 ways it is used in the OT: http://biblehub.com/hebrew/strongs_4853.htm

    Update: Here is the summary from the NET Bible Translators Notes which is much better than what I can say: The Hebrew term III מַשָּׂא (massa’), usually translated “oracle” or “utterance” (BDB 672 s.v. מַשָּׂא), is a technical term in prophetic literature introducing a message from the Lord (see Zech 9:1; 12:1). Since it derives from a verb meaning “to carry,” its original nuance was that of a burdensome message, that is, one with ominous content. (NET notes)

  • Malachi is “[…]formally classified as belonging to the genre of oracular prose. The messages are oracular in nature because they represent authoritative prophetic speech motivated or inspired by God himself. By prose, we mean that the literary texture of Malachi s a blend of prosaic and rhetorical features, approaching poetic discourse, but distinctive of prophetic style. …The discourse units in Malachi may be broadly categorized as judgment speeches, since they accuse, indict and pronounce judgment on the audience.” (Hill p. 280).
  • Some call this genre of prophecy “covenant lawsuit”.  The Israelites were breaking their portion of the covenant and God was taking them to court over their infractions.

Lesson

Outline (Constable)

  1. Introduction 1:1
  2. The priests exhorted not to dishonor the Lord (the theological angle) 1:2—2:9
    1. Positive motivation: the Lord’s love 1:2-5
    2. Situation: the priests’ failure to honor the Lord 1:6-9
    3. Command: stop the pointless offerings 1:10
    4. Situation: the priests’ worship profaning the Lord’s name 1:11-14
    5. Negative motivation: the results of disobedience 2:1-9

So chapter 1 really covers 1 1/2 sections if you use this outline.

  • Following the above outline, 1:2-5 is part 1 of the discourse against the priests. This section explains how God loves them.
  • 1:2 I have loved you seems to be a thesis statement for the book.  This undergirds basically everything God is arguing for in the whole book. What a powerful assertion to the disillusioned Jews living in a hostile environment!
  • How does this same idea of God’s enduring love for his people apply to his church 2 millennia after Christ promised to return for us? (we also have the promise of a new Jerusalem)
  • Rhetorical response to God’s love: How have you loved us?
    • First of all, what a dumb response?! How could you say this to God? In reality, isn’t this human tendency?
    • God replies with the example of how he chose Israel over Edom. Edom was also destroyed when the Babylonians destroyed Judah.
    • God promised their own eyes would see the fulfillment of this
    • Side note: The epithet Lord who rules over all occurs frequently as a divine title throughout Malachi (24 times total). This name (יְהוָה צְבָאוֹתyÿhvah tsÿvaot), traditionally translated “Lord of hosts” (so KJV, NAB, NASB; cf. NIV NLT “Lord Almighty”; NCV, CEV “Lord All-Powerful”), emphasizes the majestic sovereignty of the Lord, an especially important concept in the postexilic world of great human empires and rulers (NET Notes)

Situation: The failure of the priests to honor the Lord (v 6-9)

  • Accusations:
    • Evidenced by: polluted offerings > Despised = offering inferior gifts. Deut 15:21 If they have any kind of blemish – lameness, blindness, or anything else – you may not offer them as a sacrifice to the Lord your God.
      • Were these inferior animals the exchange racket that was occurring during Jesus’ day, or was it simply not caring what animals were presented?
      • Pollution = by saying the Lord’s table may be despised. Note: table here refers to the altar, but is probably used to show the symbolism of the meal served after two parties “sign” a covenant, and of eating with the governor (Persian satrapy).
    • You are not honoring or respecting (fearing) me
    • Despising my name
  • God was rejecting their offerings–just like their civil ruler would.  God uses his name, The Lord of Hosts, to emphasize that he was greater than any civil governor or Persian king.
  • Why did they need to entreat the favor the Lord?
    • Because they were bringing down wrath on themselves, not favor.
    • BTW, many point out that Malachi was using the phrases from the priests’ blessing here (Numbers 6:22-27) to emphasize how they were receiving cursing not blessing from the priests.
  • Summary: Does the church despise Jesus by offering polluted offerings?  I.e. what is the equivalent to offering blind and sick animals at Weavertown?

Command: stop the pointless offerings (v. 10)

  • God begs that someone would just close the doors, and shut down all the vain (pointless) offerings. Why does he call the offerings vain?
  • This BEGS the question–does God wish some churches would close their doors due to their pointless worship?

Situation: The Priests’ Worship Profaning the Lord’s Name (11-14)

  • This seems like a recap of the previous argument, but this time with a curse.
  • First, although God begs to have someone close the temple doors, he states that his name will be honored in all the nations, and that pure (acceptable) offerings would be offered.
    • First of all, what a slap to the Jews!
    • This seems to be a prophecy of the spread of the New Testament Gospel.  At any rate, God would saying it was more important to be offering pure offerings then temple offerings.  Definitely not typical Jewish thought.
    • What does from the rising of the sun to its setting mean?
  • In the same way this must have insulted the Jews/priests, I think the church has an obligation to take this critique to heart. If we are not offering pure offerings here at Weavertown, God will get his pleasure and honor from the nations instead!!
    • Desecrated offerings: Again, do we (Weavertown/Beachy/American) offer any of these polluted offerings: the sick, lame, taken by violence, blemished, or break our vows? What is the equivalent in Lancaster County?
  • The passage closes by again emphasizing that the Lord Almighty will be receive his due respect among the nations (if not among his own people!!).

 

Sources:

NET Bible Translators Notes. Available at lumina.bible.org

Constable’s Notes. Available at lumina.bible.org. https://lumina.bible.org/bible/Malachi+1

Andrew E Hill. Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi. Volume 28. Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries.

Esther 9 & 10 Study Guide

Posted Posted in Sunday School

Intro: this is now the Happily Ever After chapter to the story of Esther.

  • 12th month, 13th day: how long was this from when the reversal order had been given?
  • Reversal (9:1, ESV): this seems to be a major theme in the book of Esther.  What was it exactly that was reversed in the book of Esther?
  • Why did fear of the Jews fall on all the people?
  • Why were Haman’s sons listed by name?
  • Why was no hand laid on the plunder, and apparently neither on women and children? (v. 10, 15, 16).
  • Why was another day needed to finish up in Susa, and why impale the sons of Haman if they had already been killed? (Esther’s request, v. 13)  Why did Esther ask for permission to impale them?
  • Feast of Purim instituted (9:16-32):
    • A major reason for the book of Esther seems to be to explain the background for the feast of Purim.  Verses 17-22 explains why Purim got to be two days and why they got started sending gifts of food to each other.
    • Vs 23-28 summarize the entire book and especially why the Jews celebrate Purim.
    • Queen Esther further confirmed the authority of the letter (some think this was necessary because many of the Jews would be resistant to adding a non-Mosaic feast to the already busy calendar.)
    • How should we evaluate the feast of Purim, especially since it is not mentioned in any other book of the Bible? (hint: what does the author say about it?)
    • How should we remember things God has done for us?
  • Final Tributes (Chapter 10)
    • Xerxes: taxed everything in sight.  What is that supposed to reveal about him?
    • Mordecai: honored, advanced by the king, great among the Jews, popular, and sought welfare of his people and spoke peace to them (10:2,3).  What does this say about Mordecai?
      • BTW, in my mind, this is one of the best cases in the book of Esther for the righteousness of Mordecai.  However, here is an article that provides a reasonable explanation of this tribute to Mordecai. (Just to wet your appetite, it also calls Purim a Jewish Mardi Gras.)
  • Conclusion: what is the main point(s) of the book of Esther?

In other news, next Sunday starts study of Malachi.  I would strongly encourage you to read Constable’s introduction to Malachi prior to next week: https://lumina.bible.org/bible/Malachi+1 (select the notes tab in the right column).

Esther 6 study guide

Posted Posted in Sunday School

This chapter seems like a study in the power of God to control world events in unbelievable ways. I keep thinking about it in regard to our presidential election. What “coincidences” do you see in this chapter that were not just coincidences?

  • On that night, the king could not sleep.  Why not?  Also, it must have been toward morning that he gave up and asked for some distraction, since he had just heard about Mordecai’s actions when Haman walked in. 
  • Why had Xerxes, a king who was fanatical about honoring loyalty, not honored Mordecai until now (5-ish years)
  • Not only could the king not sleep, but he was just finished hearing about Mordecai when Haman walked in.
  • Haman totally missed the possibility that the king would want to honor anyone besides him.  Why? Here are a few of my thoughts:
    • First, because of God’s provision here.  Fascinating bunny trail is looking at how God chose to humble and break Haman. Romans 9:14-18 is instructive. God apparently chose Haman’s flaming destruction to show his power. Very similar to how God used the Pharaoh in Moses’ time to demonstrate his power (see Romans 9). 
      • I think the implications are that although we have freedom of choice, it is God’s prerogative (right) to bring glory to Himself through our choices. It is our choice whether he will get His glory through our submission to His will, or by being shredded by His sovereignty.  Compare with Matt 21:44. 
    • Pride. Does Haman’s desires remind you of Satan in that Haman wanted to be honored like the king himself?
    • An aside–do we ever ask for the king’s robe? Are there ways we do what Satan and Haman did? 
      • How does pride blind our common sense?
      • What is pride?
      • What is the antidote for pride?
  • What is the effect on the city when Haman is publicly humiliated before Mordecai? What is the effect on Haman and his wife and friends?  Is there application we can draw here for how God will deal with those who would destroy his chosen people?
Extra credit if we run out of things to talk about: last Sunday there was some discussion in our class about our obligation to the civil government of the country we belong to. If we are going to discuss that, we should start by getting the Biblical data on the table first.
  • Romans 13:1-7
  • 1 Peter 2:13-17
  • Acts 4:19-20