PILGRIM LUTHERAN CHURCH
  • Home
  • About Us
    • What We Believe
    • History
  • Events
    • Upcoming Events
    • Photo Gallery
  • Pastor's Blog
  • Bulletin
  • Contact

A Sabbath Day's Journey

By: Rev. Paul Landgraf
What is a Sabbath day's journey? First of all, it is a Jewish expression. We measure distances in meters or yards. The Jews had a certain distance that they could walk on Saturday before it would be considered work. So their synagogues that they went to on Saturday could not be very far away. The word appears only in Acts 1:12 and indicates a distance of about three-quarters of a mile.

With that in mind, I think it is important to remember the origins of Christianity. Just because we have an Old Testament, it does not mean that we call it the 'Outdated Testament'. Much of the Old Testament has a literary structure that we are not aware of because of our modern emphasis on chapter and verse divisions. Within many of these blogs, I try to get the reader to see a bigger picture, a larger perspective that often includes the Old Testament and the environment that was present when the New Testament was seeing the Light of the day.

Second, a Sabbath day's journey is intentionally short. These 'journeys' with a text, almost always one of the three readings for that Sunday, are deliberately brief discussions. This blog was never designed to be a comprehensive look at any text. Sometimes a specific word is studied in detail. But, as a whole, a blog entry, by itself, is meant to be quite brief.

Finally, since the term 'Sabbath day's journey' appears in Acts, it is meant to appeal to a wide variety of people. This blog is meant for those who cannot come on Sunday mornings. And it is also for those who do come on Sunday mornings but would also like a further study of the text. It is also for those who live somewhere else in the world (besides Drake and Freedom, Missouri, USA) and would simply like a further study of the text. It was meant to get these different groups of people to start thinking about the biblical texts. Part of the reason for this blog is that I am not able to have a bible class on Sunday mornings with either congregation, and so, to have a blog like this seemed like a good idea. I hope it is helpful for you, in whatever situation you may be.

Any feedback would be greatly appreciated. And thank you for taking the time to read this!

August 29th, 2020

8/29/2020

0 Comments

 
The Old Testament text for this Sunday is back in the book of Jeremiah [15:15-21]; we were there a couple times earlier this summer. I have mentioned in the past that the book is quite long but quite overlooked when it comes to its number of appearances within the three-year series. And what may contribute to that overlooking is the fact that the Greek translation of that book is significantly different from the Hebrew text.

Some may consider this unimportant, but if you know Greek (and many knew that language right before the time of Jesus because of Alexander the Greek and the extremely large Greek Empire), and if the entire Bible is written in a language that you know, this suddenly becomes a very important thing. For you the entire Bible has now opened up, and it becomes a grand recounting of the most significant things that ever happened in the history of the world; you can read it from beginning to end, and then you can read it again!

Having a significantly different Greek text though, that can be a bit distracting. The Lutheran Study Bible summarizes some of the matter in its introduction to the book (the Greek translation is designated by ‘LXX’ to stand for the number 70, traditionally the number of translators that were used; this number is also seen in the commonly used title for the work, the ‘Septuagint’):

State of the LXX Text. The Greek translation of Jeremiah is significantly shorter and does not represent c 2,700 words that appear in the traditional Hebrew text. This fact has puzzled interpreters since the second century. Also, the LXX text does not have the same order as the traditional Hebrew text. In particular, Jeremiah’s oracles about the nations (chs 46-51) appear after 25:13 (“Jeremiah prophesied against all the nations”) and have this order:

           LXX Order       Traditional Hebrew Order (ESV)
            Elam                Egypt; 46:2-28
            Egypt               Philistia; ch 47
            Babylon           Moab; ch 48
            Philistia           Ammon; 49:1-6
            Edom               Edom; 49:7-22
            Ammon           Damascus; 49:23-27
            Kedar               Kedar and Hazor; 49:28-33
            Damascus        Elam; 49:34-39
            Moab               Babylon; chs 50-51


Fragments of a Hebrew manuscript discovered at Qumran (4QJerb) show that the LXX version of text may be based on a shorter Hebrew edition (fragments of the traditional Hebrew text [4QJera] were also discovered in the same cave). Jerome provided the earliest and perhaps the best explanation for these differences when he proposed that the Book was shortened because of its repetitious nature. Modern commentators have noted that the LXX version drops commonly repeated phrases (e.g., “Thus says the LORD,” dropped 64 times); “LORD of hosts, the God of Israel” is usually shortened to “LORD”; fathers’ and grandfathers’ names are dropped from descriptions of persons; and proper nouns are often replaced with pronouns. All these changes badly affect the Hebrew poetry, suggesting that the shorter version is the later edition. For these reasons, interpreters continue to prefer the traditional Hebrew text [The Lutheran Study Bible, published in 2009 by Concordia Publishing House, St. Louis, Missouri, page 1204.]
You can see that there is a lot in the quote above. And that, in itself, is a good reminder that these books of the Bible can be read again and again, and new things can be seen each time.

This is also a good reminder that a shorter text does not always mean an earlier text. With the four gospel accounts, because the Gospel according to Mark is the shortest, many people imagine that this account was written first, and then the others had more to add to it later, and that is the source of the other accounts. But it could have happened in another way. Shorter versions could also be later ones.

To be fair, because there is no clear record of timing, it could be said that a shorter (Hebrew) version could be written at a similar time to the longer version. An important point to be made is that the chronology of the texts is not important. This is not a race; the one that is first is not the most important. ALL four gospel accounts are important. And both versions of Jeremiah have some value.

The shorter text may have had more appeal to those who were not good at reading the Hebrew. The above quote spoke of how the shortening in the Greek translation of the text ‘badly affect[ed] the Hebrew poetry’. Also, another difference was that the ‘fathers’ and grandfathers’ names are dropped from descriptions of persons.’ These are things for which the Greek reader would have little concern.

It is also interesting to note that near the middle of the book (chs 30-33), there is the famous ‘book of comfort’, a beautiful gospel in the middle of such terrible law. This is also in the Greek version, but it is a bit later. Near the middle in the Greek version are the oracles against the nations, and this is something that would be of great interest to those who could were of another nationality. (It should also be noted that people outside of Greece could read Greek, because this language was the important language of commerce. The New Testament was written in ‘Koine’ Greek, and that word means ‘common’.)

In the end, this ultimately means that the LORD cares for all nations. And ALL his words to his people, whoever they are, are precious. And receiving the gifts that those words give makes for a truly happy ending.
 
0 Comments

August 23rd, 2020

8/23/2020

0 Comments

 
Has there EVER been a simple answer? As I study the meaning of the word ‘answer’, I am inclined to answer that question negatively. To give what would seem to be a simple answer is still a very complicated thing, especially when you look at the meaning of that word in the scriptures and I believe its careful placement there.

This Sunday, the Old Testament text continues to be in Isaiah [51:1-6], and the text starts by addressing those who ‘pursue righteousness’ and ‘seek the LORD’. Then the text goes on to give a couple of commands to ‘look’ in certain places for, as it were, an answer. On the surface, it seems like a simple thing. Verse 2 may literally be translated in this way:

Look to Abraham, your father, and to Sarah, she gave you birth; when he was one, I called him, and I blessed him, and I multiplied him.

I thought it would be a good thing, therefore, to look at Abraham and some of the special things that happened to him. He is only one person, two if you include Sarah; how difficult could that be?

There are certainly some significant stories in the Old Testament before the coming of Abraham. There is the Creation, the Fall, the Flood, and there is also the tower of Babel that multiplied the languages. And those are certainly significant events. But, when it comes to the one person of Abraham, there are also some significant and not so simple things going on within those texts.

Right after the Fall into sin, when the LORD was asking Adam, ‘Where are you?’ the text does not say that Adam ‘answered’. The word used there simply means to speak or to say. So, technically, the first time the Hebrew word ‘answer’ is used in scripture is in Genesis 18:27, when the LORD is meeting with Abraham. And I should at least mention that the LORD’s presence in this text is significant and unusual. Now the LORD had just promised to Abraham regarding the city of Sodom that, if he found fifty righteous ones within it, he would spare the entire place for their sake.

The text then says this: ‘And Abraham answered, and he said….’ It seems that, at that place, the word should probably be translated as ‘he responded’ or something like that. And this sort of thing happens frequently, that the word ‘answer’ comes up, but a question was not asked. I recently learned that, about the year 150 A.D., someone thought that when these two verbs came together in the Old Testament, because of its unusual repetition, that was a signal that what was said was under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. [See the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, volume 3, published by Eerdmans in 1965, page 945.]

It is also interesting that this same repetition of the same two verbs appears a few times also in the gospel accounts of the New Testament. And sometimes you have the text in this way: ‘And he answered, saying…,’ and sometimes you have the text in a slightly different way: ‘And answering, he said…’.

The Isaiah text reminds us to look to Abraham. And what does Abraham say when he ‘answers and says’ for the very first time? Here, again, is a literal translation: ‘Behold, now I was bold to speak to the Lord, and I am dust and ash.’ And the word for answer, interestingly enough, is basically the same word as ‘humble’; and I wonder about the extent of a connection between these two words. [See William Holladay’s work, A Concise Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, also published by Eerdmans, 1971, pages 277-8.]

There is another feature within the translation of the Old Testament into the language of the New Testament that is close to this idea that an answer or a response is something significant. And this characteristic often appears in the New Testament, although it usually does not appear in translations or even in some discussions regarding the text. Sometimes a writer describes a past action as happening in the present tense. This is usually called the historical present.

Sometimes the text says, instead of that Jesus SAID this, it says, literally, that Jesus SAYS this. This is usually understood to be a way to express the vividness of the event. [See Daniel B. Wallace’s Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament, published by Zondervan in 1996, page 528.] And that is usually the end of the discussion regarding its purpose.

But the appearance of the historical present often happens somewhere in the middle of some story, as a response to something. This Sunday, the Gospel text is from Matthew 16[:13-20], and after the disciples give back to Jesus their response of what others say about him, the text actually says that JESUS SAYS to them, ‘Who do you yourselves say that I am?’

The very first instance of an historical present in the Old Testament translation into the language of the New Testament also happens with Abraham, and it also happens when he receives the word of the LORD, and they start to discuss this issue of being childless. Abraham—using his original name, Abram—is the one who says the very first historical present. Here is a literal translation of that text (again, from the Greek and not the Hebrew):

And after these things, the word of the Lord came toward Abram in a vision, saying, ‘Stop fearing, Abram; I am shielding you; your reward will be very great.’ And Abram SAYS, ‘Master, Lord, what will you give to me? And I am leaving childless, and the son of Masek, my homeborn female slave, this Eliezer of Damascus (emphasis added, Genesis 15:1-2).’

In all of these Bible passages, one might have expected more of an emphasis on what the LORD says. Why not always have HIS words in the present tense? Why not have the LORD speaking AND saying? Why not have him start a conversation and make sure people are listening to him? That is certainly not the direction that these texts are going.

With the idea of a response being connected to both the historical present and the phrase, ‘he answered and said’, it is interesting to consider at least the slight possibility of those two things being connected.

It would take too long to study the extent of this connection in detail. But at the heart of the matter may be the type of kingdom that the LORD has set up in the scriptures. His kingdom of power is certainly not the primary focus; he certainly does not push his way into our lives as was described above; he certainly did not do that to Abraham. And his kingdom of glory has not yet come; he is saving that for the end of time.

His kingdom of grace is the kingdom that seems to predominate within these special writings. A kingdom of grace makes a difference, but in a not-too-obvious way; it does not draw attention to itself. But, eventually, something important and something quite wonderful gets wonderfully done.

That is, of course, what happened with Abraham. As was mentioned above, the Old Testament text for this Sunday says, ‘When he was one, I called him.’ And the LORD blessed him and multiplied him, but in a slow and not-so-obvious way. That is usually how the kingdom of grace works.

I have heard that, when comparing the four gospel accounts, the different numbers of historical presents within the accounts was connected to the amount of education of the writers; more historical presents meant more ‘colloquial, vivid speech.’ [See the above book by Wallace, page 528.] I think that a more important issue than the amount of education for the writer is the type of graceful kingship that each writer wanted to emphasize within each particular account. And I also think that the different verbs that they turn into the present tense point to one of the four different living creatures of the LORD’s throne. The throne tells the story behind the king’s authority.

In the Gospel according to Matthew, the living creature is a man, and by far the most common historical presents in that account have to do with speaking. In the Gospel according to Mark, most of those historical presents have to do with actions, and that living creature is a lion, and a lion certainly has some significant actions. In the Gospel according to Luke, the living creature is the ox, and this is normally understood to be a domesticated animal, one that can get along with people and other animals. And the historical presents within that account are connected to a wide variety of people as Jesus gets closer to Jerusalem and Palm Sunday.

The Gospel according to John is significantly different from the other accounts, and this is also seen in the uses of the two things mentioned above. And the living creature connected to that gospel account is the eagle, the only one that flies, and flying gives it a different perspective. First of all, the number of historical presents is significantly more in this gospel account than the other accounts. As the eagle sees farther than the other living creatures, that perspective of a graceful kingship frequently shows itself in the present tense, and even into our twenty-first-century lives.

The second thing to mention about this gospel account is that there is a greater emphasis on the answering aspect in the use of ‘he answered, and he said….’ (If you are interested in the details—and it may not seem like much—instead of the usual phrase that appears in the three similar gospel accounts, ‘and, answering, he said,’ there is the more frequent phrase in this gospel account, ‘and he answered, saying…’.)
​

It is natural to think that, with this living creature, the perspective of this account is more far-reaching, even to the present day. The actions that are done within this account give an opportunity for a ‘response’, an ‘answer’, and this is made quite clear when, near the end of the account, the writer writes that these things have been written so that YOU may believe (John 20:31). The LORD’s grace-filled kingdom certainly has a significant size. 
0 Comments

August 15th, 2020

8/15/2020

0 Comments

 
This Sunday we are back in Isaiah, the Old Testament book that gets a lot of attention in the New Testament. Short sayings from this book come up often in the four gospel accounts. And this Sunday’s text [Isaiah 56:1,6-8] contains another example of that.

Jesus, during the last week of his life, when he cleanses the temple, quotes from this section of Isaiah and says, at least in one of the accounts, ‘my house shall be called a house of prayer for all the nations (a portion of verse 7).’ I think it is fascinating to look at what happens after that in the three most similar gospel accounts; here are some literal translations of those texts:

And he says to them, ‘It has been written, ‘My house will be called a house of prayer, but you yourselves are making it a den of robbers. And blind and lame came to him in the temple, and he healed them. But the chief priests and the scribes, seeing the marvels which he did and the children crying in the temple and saying, ‘Hosanna to the son of David,’ they were angry and said to him, ‘Do you hear what these are saying?’ And Jesus says to them, ‘Yes, have you never read that out of the mouth of infants and nursing ones you prepared praise (Matthew 21:13-16)?’

And he was teaching and saying to them, ‘It has been written, has it not, that my house shall be called a house of prayer for all the nations? But you yourselves have made it a den of robbers.’ And the chief priests and the scribes heard, and they were seeking how they might destroy him, for they feared him, for all the crowd was amazed (extremely literally, ‘filled out’) at his teaching (Mark 11:17-18).

And entering into the temple, he began to throw out the ones selling, saying to them, ‘It has been written, “And my house shall be a house of prayer”, but you yourselves made it a den of robbers.’ And he was teaching day by day in the temple, but the chief priests and the scribes were seeking to destroy him, along with the first men of the people, and they did not find what they might do, for all the people hung upon hearing him (Luke 19:45-48).

These three similar accounts are similar in a lot of things, but when it comes to a response about what the temple is, there will be a variety because the authority that is connected to the temple is closely connected to the authority of Jesus, and each of the four accounts give a different emphasis regarding the authority of Jesus.

One of the differences in the texts above is in terms of verb tense. (I hope that this does not bring up bad memories of English class!) Immediately after Jesus quotes the text from Isaiah, there are differences in the action of the temple being made a den of robbers. In the first reading, Jesus says that you ARE MAKING it a den of robbers—a present action.’ In the second, Jesus says that you HAVE MADE it a den of robbers—this may be understood as a past action with some sort of enduring results. In the third, Jesus says that you MADE it a den of robbers—a simple past action.

If you are about to ask which of these Jesus really said, I cannot answer that question. I was not there with a recording device when it happened. Perhaps he said all three. The point of him having said these words in three different ways gives three different perspectives to the issue at hand. Jesus has three different types of authority in these three gospel accounts, and each type of authority ultimately emphasizes a different aspect of his wonderful act of salvation.

By Jesus saying that they ARE now making the temple a den of robbers, I would consider that the most serious accusation. The implication is that they should stop immediately what they are doing. But the text immediately stops our focus on this topic, and it turns toward something else that is quite serious as well. Jesus begins to heal people, people who are usually looked down upon. And the anger of the religious leaders is attributed to the effect of Jesus upon other people—the people who were healed, but also the little children—and these are people who are literally looked down upon!

By Jesus saying that they HAVE MADE the temple a den of robbers, that is also a very serious accusation. One way to describe the action of the verb is to say that the action was in the past, but that action continues to have ramifications and some influence. And there is nothing else that Jesus does that gets in the way. The religious leaders want him dead, simply on the basis of those words that he said. It also says that the leaders feared Jesus—although they will fear the crowd in the next chapter (see 12:12). In this text the focus is definitely on Jesus and what he said. He is standing alone, and all authority is ultimately his.

Finally, by Jesus saying that they simply MADE the temple a den of robbers, this is only an action in the past. And that one statement does not seem to cause a big problem. The story, in a way, ends here. The next verse summarizes his teaching in the temple, and the religious leaders, like above, want him dead, and the text gives a reason for this not happening, because ‘the people hung upon hearing him’. Jesus’ authority reaches out to people, and people reach out to him and, somewhat figuratively, ‘hang’ on him.
The way these religious leaders are described in the third example is unusual. They ‘were seeking’ and they ‘did not find’. Perhaps that is a way to describe what others are going through, especially when you look at the book of Acts.

Whatever account you look at, the religious leaders are getting angry. But they end up being angry for different reasons. In Matthew, it was because of people. In Mark, it was because of Jesus’ words of the text. In Luke, it was because of his teaching elsewhere, him being a support. Jesus is certainly a multi-faceted bundle of good news.
0 Comments

August 8th, 2020

8/8/2020

0 Comments

 
The Old Testament text for this week is from the book of Job [38:4-18]. How often does THAT happen? To answer that question: not very often at all. If you do not include that a text from the book of Job is given during the Easter Vigil, and at the Easter Sunrise Service in year C, and also when there is a service because of a national or local tragedy, a text from Job only appears two times in the three-year series. (And both of those texts are from this same chapter.)​

If you do not know the theme of Job already, you can get a hint of that theme from those times mentioned above—Easter and a tragedy. After the disciples were finished with the first Good Friday, they must have been extremely hesitant to call it a GOOD Friday! And, in the same way, the day after there is a national or local tragedy, many people will be hesitant to call that day a good one.

Sometimes the theme of Job is stated in terms of a question such as this: Why do bad things like tragedies happen to good people? The trouble with stating the theme of a biblical book with a question is that it can focus the person too much on the answer. I am certainly not against answering peoples’ questions. [Please contact me if you have a question you would like to ask!] But when it comes to the theme of scripture, there is much more to consider than just asking a few questions. There is a much bigger issue at stake.

Roger Marcel Wanke approaches this topic with his book, Praesentia Dei--in other words, ‘the Presence of God’. He does not see much of a salvation theme within the book of Job, but he notes the importance of God’s presence throughout the book. [We can all be grateful that the book was not written in Latin. The book is actually in German though. Its longer title is Die Vorstellungen von der Gegenwart Gottes im Hiobbuch. It was published by De Gruyter in 2013.]

We can see that emphasis on God’s presence in the text for this week. The first verse of the text, verse 4, starts with this basic question: ‘Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation?’ The presence of God is certainly the starting point there. And there are a lot more questions throughout the book that bring up the issue of God’s presence. I will not be able to mention too many of them here.

We can see this emphasis on presence at the very beginning and the very end of the book. The book starts by introducing Job for five verses, and then is this somewhat literal description: ‘And it was that day and the sons of God came to present themselves before Yahweh, and Satan also came with them.’ This is the way that the problem is laid out before the reader/listener. After some discussion, the LORD allows Satan to attack Job, and thus the reason for the rest of the book.

Near the end of the book, when the LORD has his ‘last say’ in the matter, he brings up to Job—and this is a ‘big’ issue as well—the big creatures of behemoth and leviathan. Here are some more literal translations of some of the emphases on presence. Regarding the first, the LORD says (again, somewhat literally): ‘See, now, I made behemoth with you (40:15a).’ Regarding the second, he says: ‘No one is fierce enough to arouse him, and who is he that can stand before my face (41:10)?’ Questions like these can help to put people in their proper place, and they also put the LORD in his.

Even closer to the end of the book, when the text says that the LORD ‘accepted the prayers’ of Job (see 42:8-9), the literal translation of the phrase is to ‘lift up the face’ of Job. Here, again, is an emphasis on presence. For the LORD to lift up someone’s face, he must get pretty close.

A person can certainly benefit from realizing the presence of God. The riots, burnings, and murders that are currently going on can often result from someone who does not believe in a God who is present. People can also ask a lot of questions that they do not feel are answered. The book of Job certainly contains a lot of questions, and there is not a simple answer after every one of them. There is something much more important than an answer to a single question.

A more important starting point is the presence of God, and that starting point gives us a way that brings us back to the gospel, and that is the true center of the Bible. As I have stated elsewhere, the gospel is that Old Testament word that points to a messenger who was designated to give some important news. (In 1 Samuel 4:17, the messenger is bringing the news of the lost battle to Eli, a very important person.) Now, obviously, the good news about Jesus as Savior completely overshadows that old news.It is not just the matter if a book emphasizes God’s presence OR God’s salvation. Both are interconnected. We cannot be in God’s full presence because of sin, and Jesus was the messenger designated to take care of that problem. And the way he did that is a way that is usually quite surprising to the person who has not heard about that yet. 

0 Comments

August 01st, 2020

8/1/2020

0 Comments

 
Could there be a Christmas celebration in August? It almost seems like it is that way In the Old Testament text for this Sunday [Isaiah 55:1-5]; at least the text starts out a LITTLE bit like that. In the original language of the text, the first word is ‘Ho’, and that sounds a LITTLE bit like Santa Claus. There is even one time in the Old Testament when the text says, ‘Ho, ho (Zechariah 2:6; although that particular text never appears in an Old Testament text for the Sunday readings, and it is usually translated into other words: ‘Up, up,’ or ‘Come, come’).’ In this Old Testament I still hoping to find a ‘Ho, ho, ho.’

The texts that usually contain this word are not usually in an Old Testament text that is read on Sunday morning. That is because the word is usually translated as ‘woe’. We usually hear that word with the sentence, ‘Woe is me.’ The way in which this word is normally used in the Old Testament is somewhat the opposite, when GOD says, ‘Woe to those who….’ And then some characteristics are given. And it makes sense that those texts are passed over when looking for a text to read on a Sunday morning.

The Hebrew dictionary gives three basic areas which this word can cover: lament, threat, or ‘encouraging, inciting’ [Holladay, A Concise Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, published by Eerdmans in 1971, page 78]. But in Isaiah it is frequently translated with the word ‘woe’. But the text for this Sunday is the very last time that word is used in the entire book, and that use in Isaiah 55 is extremely positive. But the first two times it is used in Isaiah (1:4 and 1:24), the structure is somewhat similar, that the first time it is used negatively, and then it is used positively.

What I have appreciated about the book of Isaiah is its use of its first chapter as a sort of an outline for the rest of the book. You do not need a study bible for an outline to study this particular book of the bible; just look at the first words of the book. And here is a translation of the two times that this word appears within that first chapter [from the English Standard Version; copyright 2001 by Crossway Bibles, a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved]:

Isaiah 1:4 ‘Ah, sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity, offspring of evildoers, children who deal corruptly! They have forsaken the LORD, they have despised the Holy One of Israel, they are utterly estranged.’

Isaiah 1:24 ‘Therefore the Lord declares, the LORD of hosts, the Mighty One of Israel: “Ah, I will get relief from my enemies and avenge myself on my foes.”’

Hopefully you can see that the word ‘Ho’ is translated as ‘Ah’. The first verse is obviously condemning Israel, but the second one goes in a significantly different direction. In the verses which follow, the prophet basically talks about going through fire to become a pure metal. That text eventually says that Jerusalem ‘shall be called the city of righteousness, the faithful city (verse 26).’

The title for the LORD given in the first verse above, the ‘Holy One of Israel’, is a common title, but only in Isaiah. In the second verse, the title ‘Mighty One of Israel’ only appears here within this entire book. The closest that we have is in Isaiah 49:26 and 60:16, and both of those times the description is the ‘Mighty One of Jacob’.

That special combination of words, ‘Mighty One of Israel’, is a strong statement of good news. The word ‘mighty’ in the Old Testament is usually attached to powerful things such as bulls, horses, and very powerful people. But Israel is a special name that was given because Jacob was allowed to wrestle with God and he did not instantly lose (see Genesis 32:22-33). How can someone be mighty who loses in a wrestling match?
​

This God is Mighty in the different way in which he has chosen to act. The second-born sons, the smaller nations, those who have been humbled by the Law, those things mean something significant to THE Mighty One. In the end, by going through the bad, something better turns out in the end. It is good to have combinations of good words come up frequently in our minds, especially the ones that point out the proper distinction between the Law and the Gospel, and especially the words which point out the greatness of God’s grace.
0 Comments

    Archives

    January 2023
    December 2022
    November 2022
    October 2022
    September 2022
    August 2022
    July 2022
    June 2022
    May 2022
    April 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016

Proudly powered by Weebly
  • Home
  • About Us
    • What We Believe
    • History
  • Events
    • Upcoming Events
    • Photo Gallery
  • Pastor's Blog
  • Bulletin
  • Contact