Law of Moses: Animal Mistakes

Posted on January 2, 2024 by Bryan Hodge

Kosher (or Kashrut, meaning “fit” or “proper”) laws concerning clean and unclean food are set forth in Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14, and other passages.  These laws may be summed up this way: (1) Land animals must have cloven hooves and must chew the cud (Leviticus 11:3-8; Deuteronomy 14:3-8).  (2) Water animals must have fins and scales (Leviticus 11:9-12; Deuteronomy 14:9-10).  (3) Birds may be eaten.  However, forbidden are birds of prey, birds that live off of carrion, and bats (Leviticus 11:13-17; Deuteronomy 14:11-18).  (4) Flying insects and creeping things in general are forbidden.  The exception are certain leaping creatures with jointed legs.  These include locust, crickets, and the grasshopper (Leviticus 11:20-23, 41-45; Deuteronomy 14:19).  (5) No animal that dies of itself is to be eaten (Deuteronomy  14:21; Leviticus 11:39-40).  (6) Eating the blood is forbidden (Leviticus 7:26-27; 17:10-14, etc.).  (7) A young goat was not to be boiled in its mother’s milk (Exodus 23:19; 34:26; Deuteronomy 14:21).

Bible critics have problems with how some of the animals are listed and described in Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14.  The believed that the Bible has made some mistakes. 

1.  Bats.  Bats are listed under the category of birds (Leviticus 11:13-19; Deuteronomy 14:11-18).  However, the are not birds, but mammals. 

It is unreasonable to force our current method of classification on the Bible.  Carolus Linnaeus (1707-1778) is considered the father of taxonomy.  Defending The Faith Study Bible explains that “(God) did not divide animals into mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibians.  In fact the “creeping things” mentioned later in Leviticus 11 (vss. 29-30 cf. Genesis 1:24-25) include both mammals (such as mice) and reptiles (lizards).  Clearly then, God divided animals according to their locomotion and environment rather than whether or not they have hair, lay eggs, or nurse their young.”  Moreover, “the term ‘bird’ in Leviticus 11:13 (as well as Genesis 1:20-30) is translated from the Hebrew word op, which literally means ‘flying creatures… that this word is not used solely for ‘birds’ is evident from Leviticus 11:20-23 where it is used with Sherets in reference to ‘winged creeping things’ (ASV) such as flying insects” (ibid).  Bats are categorized with birds because they are winged creatures. 

2.  Hares.  Hares are said to chew the cud (Leviticus 11:6; Deuteronomy 14:7).  However, they do not have multiple stomachs.  They are not ruminants like cows, goats, sheep and deer. 

No, but they do appear to chew the cud.  “First, critics must acknowledge the fact that we frequently describe things as they appear to take place and not necessarily as they actually happen” (ibid).  We speak of the sun rising and setting.  “Rabbits often look like they are chewing their cud.  In fact, so convincing is this appearance that, according to Walter Kaiser, Carolus Linnaeus… at first classified the coney and the hare as ruminants.  In short, it may be that rabbits were listed as ‘cud chewers’ based on simple observation” (ibid).

Hares and rabbits practice something called refection.  “Grass is extremely hard to digest due to its high cellulose content… unlike most hoofed ruminants, hares do not have four-chambered stomachs.  So, they eat their own droppings instead.  These soft, green pellets, known as cecotropes, retain many undigested nutrients, including important minerals and protein.  By eating their droppings as soon as they pass, the animals extract this vital sustenance… All lagomorphs (hares and rabbits) use this strategy, known as refection” (Why Do Hares Eat Their Own Droppings? By Polly Pullard, discoverywildlife.com).  Defending the Faith Study Bible comments, “So although rabbits do not regurgitate previously swallowed food, they do swallow their partially digested food a second time… it is entirely proper to conclude that Moses simply defined ‘cud chewers’ more broadly than modern scientists.” 

3.  Fowl.  “All fowl that creep going upon all fours, shall be an abomination unto you (Leviticus 11:20 KJV).  Since when do birds go on all fours?

The error is in the translation.  “The Hebrew sherets op is more accurately translated ‘winged creeping things’ (ASV), ‘winged insects’ (NASV, ESV, RSV), or ‘flying insects (NKJV, NIV).  Interestingly, in Deuteronomy 14:19, where these same creatures are discussed, the King James translators used the phrase ‘creeping things that flieth’… what’s more, both history and the fossil record reveal that extinct reptiles also had arms and claws attached to membranous wings.  Though scientists believe these flying reptiles mainly walked upright, at the very least their ‘hands’ would have been used for climbing trees and handling food so they would have used ‘all fours’” (ibid).

4.  Locust, crickets, and grasshoppers.  They do not go on four legs but six legs (Leviticus 11:20-23).

We sometimes use numbers which are not to be taken literally.  We speak of centipedes and millipedes.  We do not mean that these creatures have one hundred or one thousand feet.  Defending the Faith Study Bible provides the following illustration.  In George Orwell’s novel Animal Farm (1946) the pigs first gave the farm animals “Seven Commandments.”  Then they later simplified things with this maxim “four legs good, two legs bad.”  Four legs referred to the animals on the farm.  It did not exclude the birds.  Two legs referred to man. 

Granted.  But why does the Bible speak of insects going on all fours?  Here is a possible explanation.  “The phrase likely means that, in contrast to birds (listed just previously – Leviticus 11:13-19) which walk upright, ‘winged creeping things’ walk horizontally – they ‘go upon all fours’” (ibid).

Posted in Apologetics, law of moses, science, Word Study | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Law of Moses: Food

Posted on November 22, 2023 by Bryan Hodge

In this series, we are examining some of the 613 Mitzvot (commandments) contained in the Torah (the law of Moses as revealed in the first five books of the Hebrew Bible).  It is our aim to understand them better and to be able to answer critics.  We are considering these topically.

1.  Clean and Unclean Food.  The law of Moses divided animals into two broad categories: clean and unclean (Leviticus 11; Deuteronomy 14).  These animals are sub-divided into types of animals: (1) Land animals (Leviticus 11:3-8; Deuteronomy 14:3-8); (2) Water animals (Leviticus 11:9-12; Deuteronomy 14:9-10); (3) Birds (Leviticus 11:13-17; Deuteronomy 14:11-18); (4) Insects and creeping things (Leviticus 11:20-23; Deuteronomy 14:19).

Why are the animals divided into clean and unclean categories?

Health    Part of the reason may have been for physical wellness.  Consider some of the animals listed as unclean: (1) Swine (Leviticus 11:7-8; Deuteronomy 14:8).  “The ‘pig is a scavenger and therefore will eat almost anything.  In doing so, on occasion it ingests the parasite, Trichinella Spiralis, which is the cause of trichinosis in humans.  Left untreated this disease can be debilitating or even deadly. Pigs are also known carriers (as intermediate hosts) of the tapeworm Taenia Echinococcus Granulosis, which causes tumors in liver, lungs and other parts of the body.  Raw or undercooked pork can be quite dangerous when consumed by humans.  Pigs can provide safe meat if they are fed properly and if the muscle tissue is cooked correctly.  But such conditions often did not prevail in ancient times” (Bert Thompson, Rock-Solid Faith, Vol. 1, p. 236).

(2) Shellfish and fish without fins and scales (Leviticus 11:9-12; Deuteronomy 14:9-10).  “Although shellfish are edible today there are inherent dangers in eating ill-prepared types such as oysters… the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has produced a twelve-page tract warning people about the dangers of eating raw or partially cooked oysters [Carlos’ Tragic and Mysterious Illness: How Carlos Almost Died by Eating Contaminated Raw Oysters (2003)].  In the tract, the FDA warns that some raw oysters contain the bacteria Vibrio Vulnificus… Eating oysters if they are not cooked properly can be potentially fatal.  Thus the wisdom of the Mosaic prohibition is evident to the honest observer.  In a time when properly handling and preparation procedures were difficult to achieve, the best course of action simply would have been to avoid the risk of eating potentially contaminated foods, especially since the contamination cannot be detected by smell or sight” (Kyle Butt, Flawless Food Laws, apologeticspress.org).  However, it is not only shellfish.  The commandment would keep them from certain poisonous/venomous fish such as the blowfish and the lionfish.  All poisonous fish have no scales.  It would also keep them from toxic sea creatures such as jelly fish, sea anemones, and octopi (Kyle Butt, Science and the Bible, apologeticspress.org; Eric Lyons, God knew All Along, apologeticspress.org). 

(3) Bats (Leviticus 11:13-19; Deuteronomy 14:11-18).  “While it is true that many animals are susceptible to rabies, bats are especially so.  The American College of Emergency Physicians documented that between 1992 and 2002, rabies passed from bats caused 24 of 26 human deaths from rabies in the United States” (Kyle Butt, Flawless Food Laws, apologeticspress.org). 

(4) Reptiles (Leviticus 11:29-31).  “Interestingly, reptiles have a much higher rate of carrying salmonella bacteria than do most mammals, especially those listed as clean in the Old Law.  The Center for Disease Control has repeatedly warned people about the possibility of being infected with Salmonella passed through reptiles” (Kyle Butt, Flawless Food Laws, apologeticspress.org).

God’s Laws were meant for man’s good (Deuteronomy 6:24; 10:13).  There may be intended health benefits to some of these commandments. 

Other Reasons

There may have been other reasons for these commandments.  Some believe that these commandments were given to test Israel’s obedience.  Others believe that these commandments were given to separate Israel from other nations.  J.M. Fuller suggested, “The basis of the obligation to maintain the distinction was the call of the Hebrews to be a peculiar people of Jehovah.  It was to be something in their daily life to remind them of the covenant which distinguished them from the nations of the world” (ed. David Brown, The Southwest Lectures – The Books of Leviticus and Numbers, p. 94). 

Critics

Critics have problems with how some of these animals are listed, and how they are described.  We will consider these criticisms in another article.

2.  Milk and Meat.  They were not to boil a young goat in its mother’s milk (Exodus 23:19; 34:26; Deuteronomy 14:21).

Why?  This may be given because of pagan worship practices.  James Burton Coffman comments, “For generations men could discern no reason whatever for such a prohibition… However, the mystery was unlocked in 1930, when the reason for this pagan practice was discovered in Ugarit literature.  The pagan used such a broth to increase fertility of their crops” (Coffman, Deuteronomy p. 160).  Wayne Jackson writes, “It is now known… that boiling a kid in milk to appease certain deities was a common Canaanite ritual… Some Jews, even today, misunderstanding the nature of this injunction, will not eat dairy and meat products at the same meal.  Actually, though, the original command was simply designed to inoculate Israel against mimicry of heathen religion” (Wayne Jackson, Biblical Studies in the Light of Archaeology, p. 24). 

Were there other reasons?  Some think so.  Dennis Prager suggests, “It is wrong to boil an animal in the substance with which its mother gave it life… The purpose of the prohibition must… be to affect us – specifically to refine human character… there is something mocking and even cruel about boiling a kid in the milk of its mother… Philo wrote: ‘It is grossly improper that the substance which fed the living animal should be used to season or flavor it after its death’ And Milgram… ‘A substance that sustains the life of a creature (milk) should not be fused or confused with a process associated with its death (cooking)… Mother’s milk, the life sustaining food for the kid, should never become associated with its death” (Prager, Exodus, p. 345-347).

Posted in Apologetics, food, law of moses, Scientific Foreknowledge | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Law of Moses: Grooming

Posted on November 21, 2023 by Bryan Hodge

In this series, we are examining some of the 613 Mitzvot (commandments) contained in the Torah (the Law of Moses as revealed in the first five books of the Hebrew Bible).  It is our aim to better understand them and to be able to answer critics.  We are studying them topically.

1. Do not shave the head, nor disfigure the beard.

This commandment was given to the priests of Israel (Leviticus 21:5-6).  Why this commandment?   It has something to do with holiness to God (Leviticus 21:5-6).

But why?  God does not have to provide a reason.  However, many believe that this had to do with idolatrous practices.  Herodotus (5th century B.C.) said of the Arabians, “The only gods whose existence they acknowledge are Dionysus and Urania, they copy Dionysus, they say, in the way they cut their hair – that is, they cut it round in a circle, with their temples shaved” (Herodotus, The Histories Book 3, section 8).  This may be the reason.  Are we willing to follow God’s commandments even when we do not understand the reason, even when He does not give a reason?    Hugo McCord has pointed out that there are two kinds of commandments in the Bible.  He said, “The source of all wisdom, ‘the only wise God’ (Romans 16:27) put two kinds of laws in the Bible… Laws which relate to what is ‘good or right in conduct or character’ are called ‘moral’ (Webster).  Laws which have no connection ‘with moral standards’ … are called ‘amoral’ (Webster)” (Article: Amoral commandments).  Sometimes it makes sense to man to follow the first.  However, it takes real faith to follow the second (e.g. how to worship; plan of salvation).

Some follow only when it makes sense to them.  N.B. Hardeman used this illustration.  “A father bid his son to erect a house on a certain part of his farm.  He then says: ‘put up a barn one hundred and fifty feet to the north and dig a well twenty-five feet east of the house.’  The boy erects the home and builds the barn as indicated, but either refuses to dig the well at all or locates it other than commanded.  Now, I want to say that this boy had not obeyed his father in a single item.  He built the home at the appointed place, not because his father so ordered, but because it suited him.  So with the barn.  Why not dig the well?  Simply because it is not according to the boy’s own fancy.  He failed in one point and evidenced a spirit of disrespect and disregard” (Hardeman Tabernacle Sermons, Vol. 1, p. 154).  True faith obeys even when the reason is not understood. 

2.  Do not shave head, disfigure the beard, nor cut the flesh. 

The children of Israel were not to do these things “for the dead” (Leviticus 19:27-28; Deuteronomy 14:1-2).  This commandment was given to the children of Israel as a whole, not specifically to the priests.  Why this commandment? It has something to do with them being a holy people to the LORD (Deuteronomy 14:1-2) James Burton Coffman comments, “The cuttings and the baldness mentioned here were ‘pagan acts of sacrifice, the blood and hair being offered up to the heathen deities or to the dead but deified ancestors.’  That such cuttings of the body with knives was a standard procedure in pagan worship is also noticeable in Elijah’s contest on Mt. Carmel (1 Kings 18:25-ff” (Coffman, Deuteronomy, p. 158).

Does this forbid one from being pierced or tattooed in our time?  No, this seems to concern idolatrous practices.  Moreover, we do not live under the Old Testament today.  It is not our standard (Ephesians 2:14-ff; Colossians 2:14-ff).  The right or wrong of piercings and tattoos must be determined for us from the teachings of the New Testament.  However, this is a study for another time. 

      

Posted in Faith, God's Sovereignty, law of moses | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Law of Moses: Clothing

Posted on November 15, 2023 by Bryan Hodge

Some of the laws of Moses seem odd to us.  For instance, why were fabrics not to be mixed in a garment?  (Leviticus 19:19; Deuteronomy 22:11).

Bible critics are known to use some of the laws to suggest that the Bible is unjust.  For instance, doesn’t an eye for an eye lead to a world of blindness?

In this series, we will examine some of the 613 Mitzvot (commandments) contained in the Torah (the law of Moses as revealed in the first five books of the Hebrew Bible).  It is our aim to understand them better and to be able to answer critics.  We will divide these by topic.  Some will be odd or difficult to us.  Others will not be.

1.  Be Covered.    

God wanted His priest to be careful to be modest.  They were not to be naked before the people (Exodus 20:26; 28:42-43).  James Burton Coffman quotes Robert P. Gordon saying, “Ritual nakedness, especially for priests, was a feature of some ancient pagan religions; it was to be quite otherwise in Israel (Coffman, Exodus, p. 401).  Dennis Prager comments, “Ancient worship often involved cult prostitution and sexual displays.  The Torah, in its ongoing battle against pagan practices, insists nakedness has no place in worship…” (Prager, Exodus, p. 277).

It was not the priest alone.  God wanted His people covered.  He covered Adam and Eve in “tunics of skin” (Genesis 3:21).  Wilson’s Word Studies says, “a tunic, worn next to the skin… generally with sleeves, to the knees, but seldom to the ankles.”  To uncover the thigh was to be naked (Isaiah 47:1-3). 

2.  Blue Thread. 

The children of Israel were to make tassels with blue thread on the corners of their garments (Numbers 15:37-41).  These were to be visible reminders to keep the commandments of the LORD (Numbers 15:39-40).  Blue is the color of the sky above.  Perhaps, blue was intended to remind them of heaven, and God above.

This blue thread would also set apart Israelites from others in dress.  It would be easy to identify one as Israelite.  Every day they wore an outward sign that identified them with Jehovah.  They represented Him.

3.  Do Not Cross-Dress. 

The children of Israel were not to confuse their sex by how they dressed (Deuteronomy 22:5).  There was to be a distinction in the dress of males and females. Why this commandment? Dennis Prager commented, “Many scholars believe this prohibition is related to ancient transvestite religious rituals” (Prager, Deuteronomy, p. 339; see also, Wayne Jackson, Does the Bible Forbid Women to Wear Pants?, christiancourier.com).  Others have suggested that this may concern dress that accommodates homosexuality (Wayne Jackson, Does the Bible Forbid Women to Wear Pants?, christiancourier.com).  However, the reason for the command is not stated. 

Wayne Jackson made this observation, “We should recall, however, that in biblical times, clothing for males and females was different only in style and details, not in kind.  Men did not wear trousers and women did not adorn themselves with skirts and blouses.  While it undoubtedly is true that God wants some sexual distinction apparent in men’s and women’s garments, it is not legitimate to say that all women’s pants are wrong or, for that matter, that Scottish kilts are sinful for the men of that culture.  A woman can be feminine in a modest pant-suit (cf. 1 Timothy 2:9-10) and men can still be masculine in a robe-like garment as in some Near Eastern countries today” (ibid).

4.  Do Not Mix Fabrics. 

Israelites were not to mix the fabrics in the garments that they wore (Leviticus 19:19; Deuteronomy 22:11).  Specifically mentioned is wool and linen (Deuteronomy 22:11).  Why?  We are not told.  Moreover, God does not have to tell us why.  James Burton Coffman commented, “We cannot be sure why some of these things were forbidden, but in all likelihood they were connected with pagan customs and superstitions in which God did not allow Israel to take part… one principle stands out, that is, things which God has separated should not be joined together” (Coffman, Leviticus, studylight.org).

However, there is an interesting theory that this has to do with holiness, separating the sacred from the profane.  The High Priest wore a garment which was composed of thread (thought to be wool) and linen (Exodus 28:6-8; 39:3-4).  It may be that God was distinguishing the sacred from the profane.  He did so with the holy anointing oil;  it was not to be duplicated for common use.  (Exodus 30:31-38).

Posted in Clothing, law of moses | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Little Jimmy Shepherd

Posted on November 10, 2023 by Bryan Hodge

“The late B.C. Goodpasture used to tell of the time when James A. Harding held a meeting in Clark Co., Kentucky.  The year was 1877.  When an elder of the church was asked about it, he said it was ‘…not much of a meeting.  Oh, brother Harding did his usual powerful preaching, the attendance was fair, but the results were negligible.  Only little Jimmy Shepherd was baptized’” (History of the Restoration Movement: James Walter Shepherd 1861-1948, therestorationmovement.com; this is a reprint of Dennis Gulledge’s article: Can You Count the Apples in a Seed?). 

J.W. Shepherd (1861-1948) went on to do many good things in the Kingdom of God.  He graduated from Kentucky University’s College of Bible (1884).  He became a preacher.  He did foreign work in New Zealand (1888-1890) and Australia (1890-1892).  He served as  office editor for the Gospel Advocate (1905-1912).  He later did domestic work with churches in Detroit, Michigan, Washington D.C., Richmond, Virginia, and Birmingham, Alabama.  He wrote Handbook on Baptism.  He compiled, edited and contributed to several David Lipscomb books including: Queries and Answers; Salvation from Sin; and the Gospel Advocate Commentary series – Romans; 1 Corinthians; 2 Corinthians and Galatians; Ephesians, Philippians, and Colossians; Thessalonians, Timothy, Titus and Philemon (Information gleaned from therestorationmovement.com and Voices Crying in the Wilderness: A History of the Lord’s Church with Special Emphasis on Australia by David Roper). 

One may not know the good that he is doing when he sows the seed (Mark 4:26-28).  However, we are told that when the seed comes in contact with a good heart it grows and bears fruit (Mark 4:8).  Let us sow the seed. 

Dennis Gulledge remarked, “Someone has said that you can count the number of seeds in an apple, but you cannot count the number of apples in a seed.  When applied to the preaching of the gospel that means that you can count the number of people who respond to gospel preaching to be baptized, but you cannot count the number of good things done in the life of one person who becomes a Christian, as in the case of James W. Shepherd” (ibid).  Never underestimate the value of one soul brought to Christ.

Posted in evangelism, Preaching, Restoration History, Soul Winning | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Strange Shifts in Language

Posted on October 24, 2023 by Bryan Hodge

There are some strange and unexpected shifts in language found in the Hebrew Bible (i.e., our Old Testament).  These shifts occur not just in one or two places.  They occur throughout the Hebrew Bible.  Let’s consider a few…

1. “Then the LORD rained brimstone and fire on Sodom and Gomorrah from the LORD out of the heavens?” (Genesis 19:24).

The wording is odd.  Why does it read, “from the LORD”?  Is this simply emphasizing that the LORD is doing this?  Or is something else being said?  Adam Clarke points out in his commentary that some believe two persons of the Godhead are being mentioned.  He admits that this is possible, but “does not appear to me to be plainly indicated here (Adam Clarke, Vol. 1, p. 125).

2. “God tested Abraham … then He said, ‘ Take now your son, your only son Isaac, whom you love …and offer him as a burnt offering …’ … The Angel of the LORD… He said, ‘…now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son… from Me’” (Genesis 22:1-2, 11-12).

Why the shift from “God” (3rd person) to “Me” (1st person)?  Is this simply language of agency?  Or is more intended?  One source has remarked, “In every passage where the angel of the Lord appears, there is also an odd shift in pronouns.”  Then the source adds that this occurs “since the angel of the Lord is mysteriously identified separately from God and also as God Himself (Genesis 22:15-16; Exodus 3:2, 4, 6, 7, 11; Judges 6:11-16)” (One for Israel, The Pierced God, oneforisrael.org). 

3. “(Israel) blessed Joseph and said, ‘God, before whom my fathers Abraham and Isaac walked, The God who has feed me all my long life to this day, The Angel who has redeemed me from all evil, bless the lads…’” (Genesis 48:15-16).

The one petitioned or invoked is called two things.  He is twice called “God.”  He is also called “The Angel” (The Messenger).

The Angel of the LORD is a puzzling character to many Bible students.  He at times seems to be called God (Genesis 31:11 cf. 31:13; 49:15 cf. 49:16), and even receive worship (Joshua 5:14; Judges 6:11-12 cf. 6:19-20). However, he also seems to be distinct from the LORD (Exodus 23:20-ff; Judges 6:21-23).  [For more information see the following articles by B.H. – (1) Angels (Part 3); (2) Who Did It?].

4. “I overthrew some of you, as God overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah, and you were like a firebrand plucked from the burning; yet you have not returned to Me, says the LORD” (Amos 4:11).

Why the shift from “I” (1st person) to “God” (3rd person) back to “Me” (1st person)?  The NIV struggled with this, rendering it “I overthrew some of you as I overthrew Sodom and Gomorrah…”  However, it provides this footnote “Hebrew God.”  James Burton Coffman provided this possible explanation, “Some critics make a big thing out of God being referred to in this verse (Amos 4:11) in the third person, whereas the first person is otherwise prominent throughout; but this is not due to any interpolation, and only signifies that Amos… reverted to quotations from the Pentateuch in mentioning Sodom and Gomorrah” (studylight.org).  The Pulpit Commentaries says “The substitution of the name of God for the personal pronoun, when the Lord himself is speaking, is not uncommon in Hebrew.  Here it rather takes the form of a quotation (or reference B.H.) from Genesis” (studylight.org).  This seems to be the answer in this verse (Genesis 19:25 cf. Isaiah 13:19; Jeremiah 49:17-18; 50:40)

5. “Then he showed me Joshua the high priest standing before the Angel of the LORD, and Satan standing at his right hand to oppose him.  And the LORD said to Satan, the LORD rebuke you Satan!  The LORD who has chosen Jerusalem rebuke you!” (Zechariah 3:1-2).    

This is odd.  Why did the LORD not simply say, “I rebuke you”?  The Angel seems to be identified with the LORD and yet distinguished from the LORD.  Coffman thought this was a witness to God’s “compound unity” which is more explicitly stated in the New Testament (studylight.org).        

6. “And I will pour out on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem the Spirit of grace and supplication; then they will look on Me whom they pierced.  Yes, they will mourn for Him as one who mourns for his only son, and grieve for Him as one grieves for a firstborn” (Zechariah 12:10).

The LORD is clearly the speaker in the first part of this verse, when it says, “I will pour out… the Spirit… then they will look upon Me whom they pierced” (Zechariah 12:10).  This says that the one pierced is the LORD.  When did anyone pierce the LORD?  John references this passage after Jesus was pierced with a spear (John 19:34, 36-37).  The implication is Jesus is the LORD, that is Jehovah.

In the latter part of the verse there is a shift in the language.  “They will mourn for Him… and grieve for Him” (Zechariah 12:10).  Why the shift?  Keil and Delitzsch suggested that “The transition from the first person to the third points to the fact that the person slain, although essentially one with Jehovah, is personally distinct from the Supreme God.  The lamentation for the only son (cf. Amos 8:10) and for the firstborn is the deepest and bitterest death-wail” (studylight.org).  The third person refers to the Messiah.

Conclusion

What is the point?  When you read and come across a shift in language, it is not a mistake or an accident (unless a copyist erred in transmission).  It is there for a reason.  It says slow down.  Think about the passage.  This shift might be important.  There may be something of value to learn.   

I am convinced that some of these shifts only make sense in light of the complex nature of the Godhead.  There is the unseen God.  Then, there is God interacting with man (e.g., The Angel of the LORD, Jesus, the Spirit). 

Posted in Angels, God, Godhead, Word Study | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Columbus Day

Posted on October 4, 2023 by Bryan Hodge

“Columbus Day was declared a national holiday by Franklin Delano Roosevelt (declared 1934 B.H.)  Since 1971, Columbus Day has been observed annually as a federal government holiday on the second Monday of October” (Columbus Day 2023: History, Traditions, and Changes, farmersalmanac.com).

Since the early 1990’s there has been growing resentment of this holiday.  Some wish to change it to Indigenous Peoples’ Day.  Several states now recognize this day, including Texas (Texas Governor Greg Abbott Signs Indigenous People’s Day and Indigenous People’s Week Resolution, ictnews.org).  Why the opposition to Columbus Day? 

(1) It is pointed out that Columbus was not the first to discover the New World.  He was not even the first European to do so.  Columbus landed in the Bahamas on October 12, 1492.  A Viking named Gunnbjorn Ulfsson sailed near Greenland in the 10th century.  Eric the Red colonized Greenland about 980.  His son, Leif Erikson reached Newfoundland and Labrador (Canada) by about 1000 A.D..  This is almost 500 years before Columbus.  Moreover, some are not sure that these were the first Europeans.  There are legends of earlier visitors form Ireland and Wales (early exploration of the Americas, kids.britannica.com).  There is also a theory that Admiral Zheng He of China reached America over 70 years before Columbus.  However, this is greatly disputed (Who Discovered America? Zheng Who? By Joseph Kahn, January 17, 2006, nytimes.com).      

(2)  Columbus, and those who followed him, brought many evils to the people already living in the New World.  (a) Some of these were unintentional.  CNN says, “In 1492, there were an estimated 250,000 indigenous people in Hispaniola, but by 1517, only 14,000 remained, according to Oklahoma Medical Research Foundation.  Some historians believe that the impact of European and African settlers in the New World possibly killed as much as 90% of the native population” (Why Christopher Columbus Wasn’t The Hero We Learned About In School by Alicia Lee, cnn.com).  (b) Some were intentional.  “Columbus and his men enslaved many of these native people and treated them with extreme violence and brutality, according to history.com. Throughout his years in the Americas, Columbus forced natives to work for the sake of profits.  Later, he sent thousands of Taino ‘Indians’ to Spain to be sold, and many of them died during the journey.  The natives who weren’t forced to look for gold in mines and work on plantations” (cnn.com). 

Those who defend the observance of Columbus Day argue: (1) While Columbus was not the first to discover America, he was the first to truly open up the New World to the Old World.  His discovery changed the world.  (2) While it is true that Columbus was not without his sins, who is?  John Hirschauer asks, “‘Indigenous People’s Day’: Which ‘Indigenous People’ do you have in mind?  Is it the Kalinago people, who ate roasted human flesh, with particular infinity for the remains of babies and fetuses?  Is it the Aztecs, who killed an estimated 84,000 people in four days in the consecration of the Great Pyramid of Tenochtitlan?  Be specific, please” (A Defense of Christopher Columbus by John Hirschauer, October 14, 2019, nationalreview.com).  (3) It is not his sins that we celebrate, but his courageous exploration. (4) “The purpose of Columbus Day was to encourage Americans to be more accepting of immigrants – specifically Italian immigrants. The Italian explorer …was the symbol of the holiday, not the focus” (PragerU video: Why Immigrants Should Love Columbus Day by Alana Mastrangelo, prageru.com).

Thoughts

I do not really care if we continue to observe Columbus Day, do away with it, or change it to Indigenous Peoples’ Day.  It is not important to me.

However, there are some thoughts that I want you to consider.  Must one be without fault to be remembered or honored with a national holiday, a monument, or a name on a building? 

If so, then let us never do so again.  Every man and woman who has ever lived (with but one exception) has sinned (Romans 3:23).  This is true of George Washington, Martin Luther King Jr., and anyone else one may want to mention.  Granted, some men’s faults are more obvious and egregious than those of others. 

Humanity has a sin problem.  Thank God that there is remedy!  “For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Romans 6:23).  “For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works lest anyone should boast” (Ephesians 2:8-9).  “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins” (Acts 2:38).  “Repent therefore and be converted that your sins may be blotted out” (Acts 3:19).

                

Posted in culture, History, holiday | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Anton Lavey and The Church of Satan

Posted on October 3, 2023 by Bryan Hodge

Anton Szandor Lavey (1930-1997) was the founder and High Priest (or “The Black Pope”) of The Church of Satan. It was founded on April 30, 1966, in San Francisco, California. Lavey wrote The Satanic Bible in 1969.

It turns Biblical teachings upside down. Here are a few examples: (1) “Why should I not hate mine enemies … Love your enemies and do good to them that hate and use you – is this not the despicable philosophy of the spaniel that rolls on its back when kicked? Hate your enemies with a whole heart, and if a man smite (sic) you on one cheek, smash him on the other! Smite him hip and thigh, for self-preservation is the highest law!” (2) “Say unto thine own heart, ‘I am mine own redeemer.'” (3) “Blessed are the strong, for they shall possess the earth – cursed are the weak, for they shall inherit the yoke!'” (4) “Blessed are the victorious, for victory is the basis of right – cursed are the vanquished, for they shall be vassals forever!” (Excerpts from The Book of Satan in the Satanic Bible, pp. 30-35).

However, the aim of this article is not to review the teachings of The Church of Satan (Though, I will say that the Satanic Church really seems to be more about the worship of self, than it does the worship of Satan). Instead, it is to explore why Anton Lavey so despised “Christianity.” There may be a few lessons in this for us to consider.

1. Hypocrisy of Behavior

When Lavey was young, he worked in a carnival as an assistant to a magician. We are told by Burton H. Wolfe in the introduction to The Satanic Bible, “‘On Saturday night’ Lavey recalled in one of our long talks, ‘I would see men lusting after half-naked girls dancing at the carnival, and on Sunday morning when I was playing the organ for tent evangelist at the other end of the carnival lot, I would see these same men sitting in the pews with their wives and children, asking God to forgive them and purge them of carnal desires. And the next Saturday night they’d be back at the carnival or some other place of indulgence. I knew then that the Christian church thrives on hypocrisy'” (Introduction in The Satanic Bible, p. 4).

We need to be careful how we live before others. Nathan told David, “The LORD also has put away your sin… However, because by this deed you have given great occasion to the enemies of the LORD to blaspheme” (2 Samuel 12:14). May we be careful (cf. Romans 2:21-24; 1 Timothy 6:1; Titus 2:1-5; Matthew 5:16; 1 Peter 2:11-12).

One additional point: God will take care of the real hypocrite who does not repent (Matthew 24:45-51, etc.). Hypocrisy does not please Him. God does not want us to be hypocrites (e.g., Romans 12:9; 1 Peter 1:22; 1 Peter 1:7). (Note: Hypocrisy is mere pretending, acting, playing a part on stage. It should not be confused with one who is sincerely trying to live up to God’s standard but falling short at times. I point this out to say that not everyone who falls short is actually a hypocrite. A real hypocrite is not genuine or sincere.)

2. Hypocrisy of Love

“There has never been a great ‘love’ movement in the history of the world that hasn’t wound up killing countless numbers of people, we must assume, to prove how much they loved them! Every hypocrite who has ever walked the earth has had pockets bulging with love” (Love and Hate, The Satanic Bible, p. 64).

There certainly has been much blood shed in the name of Christianity, and by those who claim to be followers of Christ. However, The New Testament does not teach this. Do not blame it. The sword by which Christians are to spread and defend the Gospel is the word of God (Ephesians 6:14-17).

Also, consider this. What does one mean when he charges the Christian with hypocrisy? I believe that he means that the Christian is not living up to the standard which he professes. However, this does not in itself make the standard wrong. Do not blame the standard for man’s sin.

3. Hypocrisy of Doctrine and Church Practices

“Times have changed! If you want proof of this, just look at how liberal churches have become… If many religions are denying their own Scriptures because they are out of date, and are preaching philosophies of Satanism, why not call it by its rightful name – Satanism? Certainly, it would be for less hypocritical…If priest and ministers were to have used the devices to fill their churches one hundred years ago that they use today, they would have been charged with heresy… It is the ‘Devil’ who caused women to show their legs, to titillate men… which are revealed by young nuns as they walk about in their shortened habits… Many churches with some of the largest congregations have the most hand-clapping, sensual music – also Satanically inspired. After all, the Devil has always had the best tunes. Church picnics, despite all of Aunt Martha’s talk about the Lord’s Bountiful Harvest, are nothing more than a good excuse for Sunday gluttony; and everyone knows that lots more than Bible reading goes on in the bushes. The fund-raising adjunct to many church bazaars is commonly known as a carnival, which used to mean the celebration of the flesh; now a carnival is okay because the money goes to the church” (Some Evidence of a New Satanic Age, The Satanic Bible, p. 47-ff).

His point is that many churches seem to be giving the people what they want. The message and practices are crafted to fit what people want. He is correct. Many play a game called Christianity. In some cases, church is more of a social club than a church belonging to Christ. In other cases, church is a business. It is about power and money.

This should not be. We are to preach the word in season and out of season (2 Timothy 4:1-2). Truth should never be compromised for the sake of popularity (Galatians 1:10 cf. 4:16; 1 Thessalonians 2:4).

4. Lack of Relevance

“Past religions have always represented the spiritual nature of man, with little or no concern for his carnal or mundane needs” (Some Evidence of A New Satanic Age, The Satanic Bible, p. 48).

This simply is not true concerning the Bible. For example, the book of Proverbs deals with many things in life such as: Work (6:10-12; 13:4; 14:23; 21:5); Money (10:4; 13:11; 14:23 22:7; 22:26-27); Marriage (5:15-19; 12:4; 18:22; 21:19; 31:10-31); Parenting (13:24; 19:18; 20:7; 22:6). The New Testament also speaks of the things of life, such as: Marriage (Ephesians 5:22-23; Colossians 3:18-19); Parenting (Ephesians 6:1-4; Colossians 3:20-21; Titus 2:4-5); Use of the tongue (James 3), etc. The truth is many reject the Bible because it does have so much to say about how we live in this life; but, it just does not say what they want it to say.

5. No Joy

“Today, as always man needs to enjoy himself here and now, instead of waiting for his reward in heaven” (The Satanic Bible, p. 54).

Some seem to think of Christianity as a life without joy. However, this is not a Biblical view. There is nothing wrong with enjoying life on earth. “God… gives us richly all things to enjoy” (1 Timothy 6:17). “Rejoice with the wife your youth” (Proverbs 5:18).

Moreover, the Christian can have joy and peace even when life is difficult (Philippians 4:4-7). Our joy is not wholly or necessarily dependent on earthly circumstances (John 16:33).

6. Evil World

Lavey was for time a photographer for the San Francisco Police Department. He said, “I saw the bloodiest grimiest side of human nature… people shot by nuts, knifed by their friends; little kids splattered in the gutter by hit-and-run drivers. It was disgusting and depressing. I asked myself: ‘Where is God?’ I came to detest the sanctimonious attitude of people toward violence, always saying ‘it’s God’s will.'” (Introduction in The Satanic Bible, p. 5).

The issue of evil, pain, and suffering is vexing. Few (I hope) want to see the innocent suffer.

God allows sin and suffering in this life. He has His reasons (Such is beyond this study. For more information see the following articles: Why? by B.H.; Comfort in Suffering by B.H.). Let’s remember that God allowed Jesus to suffer and die upon a cross.

Consider this: What is wrong with suffering if one follows Lavey’s standard? He said the following: (1) “Death to the weakling, wealth to the strong”; (2) “Are we not all predatory animals by instinct? If humans ceased wholly from preying upon each other, could they continue to exist?” (3) “Is not ‘lust and carnal desire’ a more truthful term to describe ‘love’ when applied to the continuance of the race” (4) “Blessed are the bold, for they shall be masters of the world – cursed are the righteously humble, for they shall be trodden under cloven hoof!” (Excerpt from the Book of Satan, The Satanic Bible, pp. 30-35). Do you think this type thinking will reduce suffering in this world?

Posted in Apologetics, Example, Proverbs, satan, Suffering | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Busy Leaders

Posted on September 26, 2023 by Bryan Hodge

Colin Powell once said, “Leadership is solving problems.  The day soldiers stop bringing you their problems is the day you have stopped leading them.  They have either lost confidence that you can help or concluded you do not care.  Either is failure of leadership” (Colin Powell, My American Journey, p. 50).

Great leaders in the Bible were busy helping others.  Consider: (1) Moses was so busy settling problems that he needed helpers (Exodus 18:12-ff).  The man who picked up sticks on the Sabbath was brought to Moses (Numbers 15:32-36).  The daughters of Zelophehad brought their concern before Moses, Eleazar and the leaders of Israel (Numbers 27:1-8).  (2) David was asked to solve a problem for a woman of Tekoa (2 Samuel 14:1-ff).  (3) Solomon solved a maternity dispute (1 Kings 3:16-ff).  (4) Ezra was brought the issue of intermarrying (Ezra 9-10).  (5) Esther was brought an existential problem by Mordecai. Haman had conspired destroy to Jews from Persia. Esther was in a position to help save the Jews (Esther 4). (6) Nehemiah was made aware of usury and dealt with it (Nehemiah 5).  (7) Jesus was brought many questions (e.g., Luke 11:1; Matthew 13:36, 17:19; 18:1; Mark 10:10) and many requests (e.g., Matthew 14:29-30; Luke 5:12; 18:38). He once performed a miracle on the way to a miracle (Matthew 9:18-26; Mark 5:21-43; Luke 8:40-55). He was very busy. (8) Paul received a bad report from those of Chloe’s household concerning the church at Corinth (1 Corinthians 1:10-13).  He was asked questions by the church at Corinth and Thessalonica (1 Corinthians 7:1 c.f. 7:10; 7:12; 7:25; 8:1; 12:1; 16:1-2; 16:12; 1 Thessalonians 4:9; 5:1). There were daily concerns (2 Corinthians 11:28).

Those who would be leaders in the church should expect to be busy helping others with their problems.  Consider: (1) James 5:20, “Is anyone among you sick?  Let him call for the elders of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil” (See article: “Pray/Sing/Call” by B.H.).  (2) 1 Corinthians 6:5, “Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you, not even one, who will be able to judge between his brethren?”  This was shameful.  Someone among them should be able to resolve disputes.   Leaders solve problems.  If you are dealing with people, there will be problems.

Posted in Elders and Deacons, leadership | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Linen Sash

Posted on September 14, 2023 by Bryan Hodge

“Go and get yourself a linen sash, and put it around your waist, but do not wash it in water” (Jeremiah 13:1).

These instructions were given by the LORD to Jeremiah.  Jeremiah went and did according to the word of the LORD (Jeremiah 13:2).

Why not wash it?  Wayne Jackson comments, “Its progressive dirtiness would be a visual aid to highlight the nation’s growing filth” (Wayne Jackson, The Prophets, p. 140).

“Take the sash hat you acquired, which is around your waist, and arise, go to the Euphrates, and hide it there in a hole in the rock” (Jeremiah 13:4).

This message is also from the LORD to Jeremiah.  It came sometime later.  Jeremiah again obeyed (Jeremiah 13:5).  He removed the sash and hid it in a hole in a rock on a river.    Which river?  The Hebrews seems to read the Euphrates.  It is rendered the Euphrates in many translations (KJV, NKJV, NASB, ESV).  It is rendered Perath (another name for the Euphrates) in the NIV.  The ESV Study Bible explains that some understand it to be referring to another place saying, “The Euphrates River lies hundreds of miles from Anathoth.  A slight change in spelling in the Hebrew text from the name Perat yields “Parah” a place less than 3 miles from Anathoth; and some interpreters think that is what was intended, with a later copyist’s error resulting in the more common perat (‘Euphrates’).”  I see no necessary reason to change it to Parah.  If Jeremiah went to the Euphrates, this was quite the undertaking (250 miles each way, a total of 1000 miles in two round trips). How far would we go to obey God?

“Arise, go to the Euphrates, and take from there the sash which I commanded you to hide there” (Jeremiah 13:6).

This message is also from the LORD to Jeremiah.  It came “after many days” (Jeremiah 13:6).  Jeremiah once more obeyed (Jeremiah 13:7).

What did he find?  He found the sash “ruined… profitable for nothing” (Jeremiah 13:7). 

What did it mean?  (1) Israel and Judah should have faithfully held fast to God.  This was their glory.  “ ‘ For as the sash clings to the waist of a man, so I have caused the whole house of Israel and the whole house of Judah to cling to Me’ says the LORD, ‘that they may become My people for renown, for praise, and for glory; but they would not hear’” (Jermiah 13:11).  Clinging to God is connected with hearing Him.  (2) They were no longer profitable in His service.  “This evil people, who refuse to hear My words, who follow the dictates of their hearts, and walk after other gods to serve them and worship them, shall be like the sash which is profitable for nothing” (Jeremiah 13:10).  They no longer represented Him well.  They did not listen to Him, but followed their own heart (cf. Jeremiah 7:24; 9:13-14; 11:6-8; 16:10-13).  (3) They would be humbled.  “This says the LORD: ‘In this manner I will ruin the pride of Judah and the pride of Jerusalem.’” (Jeremiah 13:9).  As the sash was hidden in a hole and suffered ruin, even so the LORD would ruin their pride.  Robert Taylor Jr. comments, “This would be accomplished by the lengthy Chaldean captivity of seventy years” (Robert Taylor Jr., Studies in Jeremiah, Vol. 1, p. 103).  Captivity is in the text (Jeremiah 13:15-17).  Captivity would change them (Jeremiah 13:9 cf. Leviticus 26:14-20; Jeremiah 29:12-14; Ezekiel 11:18 cf. 7:20; 16:41; 20:38; 23:27, 48). 

What is the application for us?  Our fruitfulness and fellowship with God is still linked to our obedience to His word (e.g. John 14:23-24; 15:1-8; 1 John 1:6-7; 2 John 9).  How are we doing?  Are we faithfully holding fast to God and His word?  Or are we following our own hearts?

Posted in Clothing, Fellowship, pride, prophets, Textual study | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment