|
 |
April
9
|
|
|
|
|
Reading
1 - Numbers 27
Click
here to Listen
|
v.
5 - Let us learn from this reaction. When we have a request/dispute
etc. of which we are not sure of the answer, then we should bring it before
the Lord - and examine scripture very carefully and especially very open-mindedly,
so as to discover the judgement of God on the issue. We should at all times,
like Moses, take our causes before the Lord. Every practice that we involve
ourselves in, be it individually or together, should be tested against this
yardstick. Ex.18:16-19,
25:22, Lev.24:12,13. Prov.3:5,6.
Peter Cresswell |
|
v.16
- Moses' reaction as always was unselfish. He thought not of himself - he
makes no plea for his life or for a change in God's mind - but is concerned
for the people being left leaderless. This man is such a wonderful example.
Peter Cresswell
|
|
v.
8 - 11
This reads so much like a precise legal document which of course is what
it was. Whereas we might write an individual will incorporating our own
preferences what we find here is a Divine will for the transferring of the
most important asset - inheritance in the land - which all had to abide
by.
Peter
Forbes |
|
27:18-23
By now Moses knew that he would not be allowed to enter the land of Canaan.
A lesser man would have baulked at appointing a successor. However Moses
was no such 'lesser man' he was God's servant - (Numbers
12:7 etc: so he appointed Joshua as his successor - 'as the LORD commanded'
(27:23)
Peter
Forbes
|
|
:18
Maybe that Joshua was to be the successor was not too surprising - after
all he had been Moses' minister for the whole of the wilderness journey
(Exodus
24:13) - humanly speaking his successor would have been his eldest son
but God selects according to His choice. We should be so grateful that He
works like this We have been called, not according to birth but according
to His election.
Peter
Forbes
|
|
|
Reading
2 - Proverbs 19
Click
here to Listen
|
v.
14 - In the context of the way that scripture uses marriage, we have
another exhortation here to be married to the right things - that we might
be a prudent 'wife' to Jesus when the bridegroom returns. Prov.18:22,
31:10-31, Jas.1:17
Peter Cresswell |
|
v.11
- The control we should have over our anger is clear throught Proverbs and
is picked up elsewhere. It is clearly not always wrong to be angry - Jesus
was angry when he threw out the money changers and this was not wrong, as
Jesus did no wrong. Our anger, however, should not be a quick reaction to
a situation we have not considered carefully. Prov.12:16,
14:29, 15:18, 16:32, 17:14, Col.3:12-13, Jas.1:19
Peter Cresswell
|
|
v.
21
Acknowledging that our actions are determined by the Lord's will is first
seen in King David. 2
Samuel 15:25,26
and restated by his son Solomon Proverbs
19:21 Jeremiah
draws the attention of those who would speak falsely to the fact that Yahweh
determines actions. Lamentations
3:37 This clear
Old Testament concept then passes into New Testament use being seen first
in the Lord Luke
22:42 And then
in the apostles Acts
18:21 Romans 1:10 15:32 1Corinthians 4:19 16:7 Hebrews 6:3
Peter
Forbes |
|
:16
These words for the basis for Jesus' words [Luke
10:28] to the young ruler. Of course it is not possible to keep all
the commandments. So one cannot be justified by works. Any thoughtful Jew
would realise that and look beyond simple obedience to see the spirit of
God's requirements.
Peter
Forbes
|
|
:24
This image of the slothful man is bizarre. We cannot anyone being so idle
that they would not eat! However this is God's assessment of the man who
is idle when it comes to seeking His wisdom. Remember God's assessment is
often not ours.
Peter
Forbes
|
|
|
Reading
3 - Philippians 3 & 4
Click
here to Listen
|
3
v. 2 - The word concision means 'mutilation'.
Paul is making the point that the practice of circumcision in the hands
of those that through their ignorance were attempting to constrain gentile
believers to follow that practice, was rated as the mutilations of the heathen
worship round about them. Jesus had completely removed the partition that
was previously established by the act of circumcision under the old covenant
and replaced it with a new and better covenant.
Rom.2:28,
Gal.2:3,4, 5:1-6, Rev.2:9, 3:9.
Peter Cresswell
|
|
|
3
v.4-6
The appeal to his credentials by Paul, just as in 2Corinthians
11:22-28, is
because there was someone in Philippi who, being lifted up in pride, was
presenting herself as being someone important.
4
v.2 The mention
of Euodias and Syntyche by name in the context of being of the same mind
demonstrates are area of conflict which was destroying harmony in the
ecclesia. Notice that whilst Paul censures them he requests the rest of
the ecclesia to v3
'help those women'.
Peter Forbes
|
|
2002
3:2
'Beware of the ... concision' - that is the Jews who would have the gentiles
be circumcised.
3:3
Those who would have the gentiles be circumcised trust in the flesh says
Paul. That is they reject the grace of God that is available through Christ.
4:6
'be careful for nothing' would be better 'in nothing be anxious'. The use
of careful in this way can be seen:- Luke
10:41 And Jesus answered and said unto her, Martha, Martha, thou art
careful and troubled about many things: showing the sense of carefulness
is anxiety.
Peter Forbes
|
|
|
3:10-11
In speaking thus Paul echoes his own words in Romans
6:5
4:14-18
So Paul had been supported by the brethren and sisters in Philippi. Now
(:19)
Paul wishes them to draw from their care for him that God would also take
care of them.
Peter Forbes
|
|
ATTITUDES
AND RULES
Joshua Harris, in his book, I Kissed Dating Goodbye, said this, "Rules
by themselves won't change our hearts, but once we've taken on a new attitude,
protective boundaries can help keep us on course" (pg. 117)
When Paul said to "Watch out for those dogs, those men who do evil,
those mutilators of the flesh," he was speaking about people who tried
to make Christians live by the Law of Moses, and more than that, all the
traditions that went along with it. They were attempting to take Christians,
who had been freed from their bondage, back to the law and make them rely
on their own works and what they themselves could achieve, rather than relying
on the grace of Christ.
Living by rules can never change us. That is why we could not be saved by
the law. But the protective boundaries of the law, once our attitude and
lifestyle is centred on Christ, will certainly help. Paul said that all
he had once put his confidence in - the way he had kept the law, the way
he had been brought up and his heritage - were all counted as nothing in
Christ.
So let's not be proud of the things we do or the rules we keep, but live
in the attitude of humility, in the grace that comes from God.
Robert
Prins |
|
