Isaiah and Cyrus the Great

From the May 15, 2012 eNews issue
(Visit Koinonia House for a FREE subscription)


"Hereupon the Persians who had been left for the purpose at Babylon by the, river-side, entered the stream, which had now sunk so as to reach about midway up a man's thigh, and thus got into the town." - Herodotus


In 539 BC, Cyrus son of Cambyses took Babylon without a struggle. According to the Greek historian Herodotus, Cyrus diverted the course of the Euphrates river, making the river level drop and giving the invading forces the ability to enter into the city that night through the river bed. Nobody noticed them coming in, and the city gates that opened up onto the river were not closed; the Persians were able to just walk
into town. Within a year, Cyrus declared that all the Jews captive in Babylon were free to return home to Jerusalem, as described in Ezra 1.


These two events - the taking of Babylon the Great without a battle and the magnanimous freeing of the Jews soon after - are both remarkable historical events in themselves. What makes them even more notable is the fact that God told about them in Isaiah 44:26-45:1, 13, appointing Cyrus by name 100 years before this son of Cambyses was born.


The Book of Isaiah is one of the most greatly admired and beloved books of the Bible. The New Testament writers quote Isaiah more than all the other Old Testament prophets combined. From a literary point of view, the writing of Isaiah is superb, full of parallelism and euphony; scholars savor Isaiah's obvious attention to the literary art of his writing.


Beyond his writing skill, Isaiah's book is filled with prophecies about Judah and the surrounding lands. It also contains a host of very important Messianic prophecies (7:14-16; 9:1-7; 11:1-16; 32:1ff; 42:1-7; 50:5-8; 52:13-15; 53:1-12; 61:1-3; 65:17), even describing in detail Jesus' crucifixion 700 years before it happened.


In Isaiah 44 and 45, God not only describes the ease with which Cyrus would enter the city with the "two leaved gates" (gates that were not even shut against the invaders!) but also notes that He would "loose the loins of kings" before Cyrus – a euphemism regarding the fear these kings would feel and the mess in their pants they'd make as a result. As a matter of fact, about the time Cyrus' men were entering the city, King Belshazzar, co-regent with his father Nabonidus, was being interrupted in his feast. A hand began to write on the wall to tell Belshazzar that his time was up. Daniel 5:6 puts in not-so-delicate terms how greatly the fear of this sight affected Belshazzar, saying, "his thoughts troubled him, so that the joints of his loins were loosed, and his knees smote one against another." Who says God isn't detailed!


In circles of modern liberal criticism, though, it has become popular to dismiss the idea, held for some 2500 years, that Isaiah son of Amoz wrote the entire book credited to his name. Old Testament scholars have found it fashionable to argue that there were at least two "Isaiahs", perhaps even three or more, and have separated the book into two sections. Chapters 1-39 are credited to Proto-Isaiah, and chapters 40-66 to Deutero-Isaiah. These critics argue that it makes no sense for God to have foretold events that would not have taken place during the life of the prophet. They say that the character of God in Isaiah 1-39 is far fiercer than the gentle God of Isaiah 40-66, that the language is different in the two sections, and that there are two different views of the Messiah between the first part of Isaiah and that written by the alleged Deutero-Isaiah. Ultimately, they do not believe that Isaiah could have written about Cyrus the Great in 700 BC. They cannot believe that the precise information in that prophecy could have been penned 150 years before it came to pass.


These criticisms can sound scholarly on the surface, but they depend far less on evidence than on a bias against predictive prophecy. While these scholars may believe that a bias against the supernatural - and the power of God to speak through His prophets centuries in advance - is scientific in this modern world, the truth is, it's still a bias. It's still just their opinion based on a humanistic worldview.


Honest scholarship strongly supports the historical view that Isaiah ben Amoz wrote the entire book with his name on it. Historically, Isaiah has always been recognized as the author of all 66 chapters.


The Septuagint: When the Septuagint was translated in the 3rd century BC, merely two centuries after Deutero-Isaiah was supposed to have been written, there was no indication that the book had more than one author.


The New Testament: The New Testament writers treat the entire book of Isaiah as one book belonging to one author and quote him more than all the other prophets combined. In fact, in John 12:37-41, John quotes from Isaiah chapter 53 and chapter 6 back to back, giving Isaiah credit for both sections.


The Dead Sea Scrolls: An entire copy of the book of Isaiah was found in the Dead Sea Scrolls. There is no separation between Chapters 1-39 and 40-66. In fact, chapter 40 starts on the last line of the same column that ends chapter 39. As Oswald Allis notes, "Obviously the scribe was not conscious of the alleged fact that an important change of situation, involving an entire change of authorship, begins with chapter 40."


Internally, Isaiah offers extensive evidence of one author: Isaiah's Hebrew. Throughout all 66 chapters, Isaiah uses pure Hebrew. Unlike Ezra and Nehemiah, which use terminology adopted from Babylon, Isaiah's Hebrew is free from the vocabulary that the Jews gained during the exile.


Jerusalem and the land: The destruction and future healing of Jerusalem are described in chapters 1-39, and Jerusalem is described as still standing in chapters 40-66, demonstrating distant prophecy in the first part of Isaiah and an early date for the end of Isaiah. For instance, in 3:8, Isaiah speaks of Jerusalem as already fallen and destroyed in the context of a prophecy about the future. In 6:11-13, which all agree is a passage by Isaiah son of Amoz, God describes the future destruction of the land followed by the return of the remnant. On the other hand, passages like 40:9 and 62:6 treat Jerusalem and the cities of Judah as still standing, as they were before the Babylonian invasion.


Topography: The description of the topography in Isaiah 40-66 is the rocky mountainous land of Judah and not the flat alluvial Fertile Crescent. For instance, 57:5-6 describes the "clifts of the rocks" and the smooth stones of the streams.


Themes: Certain themes and terminology are repeated throughout the book. The "highway" theme comes up repeatedly (11:16; 19:23; 35:8; 40:3; 62:10). Isaiah refers to God as "Lord of hosts" repeatedly throughout the entire book. "The Holy One of Israel" is Isaiah's distinctive name for God used 12 times in chapters 1-39 and 14 times in chapters 40-66. The phrase is only used six other times in the Bible outside of Isaiah.


The significance of idolatry: Idolatry was a major problem in Judah before the exile, but the post-exilic writers Haggai, Zechariah, Ezra, Nehemiah and Malachi do not mention idolatry even while discussing the nation's other sins. Yet, in the latter end of his book, Isaiah continues to speak strongly against idolatry (41:29; 44:9-20; 57:4ff; 65:2-7), indicating an early authorship.


The by-line: Only Isaiah, son of Amoz, is named as the author throughout the book of Isaiah, at the beginnings of chapters 2, 7, 13, 20, 38, and 39. No other author is mentioned at all. Even when Ezra and Nehemiah were bound together, those two books did not get confused and lumped together under Ezra. Yet, "Deutero-Isaiah" was allegedly lost to history. Chapters 40-66 contain some of the highest quality literature in all of written history, yet we are expected to believe that this writer went mysteriously unrecognized until he was "discovered" by recent scholarship.


As Gleason Archer Jr. declared, "There is not a shred of internal evidence to support the theory of a Second Isaiah, apart from a philosophical prejudice against the possibility of predictive prophecy."


Isaiah is an amazing book, filled with the power and passion of God. In it He declares, "I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me, Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:" (Isaiah 46:9-10).


Related Links:
• The Book of Isaiah: Authorship Analysis - Scribd.com
• The ACU Commentary and the Unity of the Book of Isaiah - ChristianCourier.com
• The Unity Of Isaiah - Carelinks Ministries
• How Many Isaiahs? - Koinonia House
• Cyrus Captures Babylon Account in 539 B.C. - Bible-History.com
• Isaiah Commentary Online - Koinonia House

Isaiah 9-10

Quick Review
Isaiah wrote this Book around 740 BC. Israel had split into two: The Northern Kingdom included 10 tribes and was also called Israel, Ephraim, or Samaria (the capitol city of the Northern Kingdom); the Southern Kingdom included 2 tribes, Judah and Benjamin, and was also called Judah, Jerusalem, or Zion. A superpower nation, the Assyrian Empire, was northeast of Israel and had become a threat to the world. The Northern Kingdom teamed up with Syria while the Southern Kingdom teamed up with Assyria.


Overview of Isaiah 9-10
This passage contained 4 messages:
1. To the whole kingdom of Israel, including both the Northern and Southern Kingdoms
2. To the Northern Kingdom
3. To the King of Assyria
4. To the Southern Kingdom


MESSAGE TO ISRAEL (Isaiah 9:1-7)
God knows the Israelites are going to be thrown into trials and gives them 2 great prophecies:
1) Their glory will be restored
2) Jesus will be their Messiah


Isaiah 9:1-5
Zebulun and Naphtali were the two regions that Assyria hit when they attacked the Northern Kingdom. Assyria came in from the north, and those two cities were the two most northern cities. These cities got the worst of the blow when the Assyrians attacked.


One day, however, these two regions will see a great light. And boy, did they see a great light!


Nazareth is a tiny, insignificant town of Zebulun. It didn't even make the map back in the day. Yet, Jesus spent 30 years of His human life in Nazareth! When Jesus began ministering, He moved north to Capernum, a city in Naphtali. Jesus did all His miracles in both of these cities.


Matthew 4:12-17 quotes Isaiah 9:1-2, describing Jesus fulfilling this prophecy. Jesus is the light.


Inspiration: God does great big things in man-defined insignificant places. God does great big things with man-defined insignificant people. Jesus picked the people of Galilee as disciples. These people were uneducated men from Podunk nowhere. God has no purpose for those who see themselves as big shots in their own eyes (because they no longer worship God; they worship themselves!).


1 Corinthians 1:26
God chooses the foolish to shame the wise; the weak to shame the might, etc.


Isaiah 9:6-7
This is one of the greatest messianic prophecies written. It is about Jesus, and it is fulfilled by Jesus.


MESSAGE TO THE NORTHERN KINGDOM (Isaiah 9:8-
This was a judgment message, listing 4 sins and the consequences of those sins. Each listed sin was followed by the statement that God was here to judge.


1st Sin: Pride and Arrogance (Isaiah 9:9-12)
Israel has gotten so arrogant, they think they can do anything. They are saying, God, bring on anything. We can handle it. Bring it!


Judgment: The Israelites are not as amazing as they seem; they will be judged.


2nd Sin: Hardened Hearts against the Lord (9:13-17)
God had sent numerous warnings to urge the Israelites to turn around, but the Israelites have not listened. They have become impertinent.


Judgement: The Israelites will lose their leaders.


Inspiration: Prophets who tell lies are seen as "tails" (Isaiah 9:14). They are supposed to be leaders, the head, but they are instead tails. Spiritual leaders need to tell God's Truth. Telling lies to just make people like them, that's what makes them tails. All Christians need to share the Truth even if the Truth is not popular. Be a Tail in the eyes of the world but a Head in God's eye.


3rd Sin: Wickedness (Isaiah 9:18-21)
4th Sin: Social Injustice (Isaiah 10:1-4)
The Israelites were God's chosen people to show the rest of the world what it means to live righteously. Instead, they took God's blessing and abused it. Instead of showing love, they gave in to their selfish greed for power and money. They lost their heart for God. They did not love the way God loves. They were no longer gentile.


When the heart goes astray, the person goes astray. This is why Proverbs 4:23 tells us to keep our heart diligent!


It's ironic that though the heart of the Israelites had turned away from God, they still carried out religious rituals: sacrifices, burning of incense, etc. The still did all the religious rituals, but their heart weren't in it at all!


Inspiration: God sees through religious acts. Be aware of traditions that are clearly not biblical. Putting ashes on our foreheads, abstain from whatever for 40 days (only to go back to indulgence on Day 41), etc--Is any of this really going to impress God?! God looks at our heart!


MESSAGE TO KING OF ASSYRIA (Isaiah 10:5-19)
This could really also be seen as a message to a dictator.


God used a cruel nation (Assyria) to judge Israel because Israel thought their success belong to themselves and themselves alone. Clearly, God can give just as easily as He can take away.


And though God sent Assyria, God also tells Assyria that woe is coming to them. Assyria hungered for more power, and instead of conquering Israel, they wanted the world. King of Assyria had a God-complex. 


Isaiah 10:9-11, 13-17
God told the King of Assyria, "You are just a means to an end. You are an ax. A saw."


Inspiration: Powerful men are puny in the eyes of God. They may think they are gods, but God can squish them like a cock-a-roach. I'm obviously being facetious, but I hope the point is clear: From God's perspective, we are all tools. We can either be sharp tools, used by the Lord in glorious ways, or we can be dull tools (like King Assyria), used once and tossed away.


We should be careful not to worship man, even godly man, because they are God's tools, too! We worship God, and we focus on how to be best used by God.


MESSAGE TO THE SOUTHERN KINGDOM (Isaiah 10:20-34)
Judgment is coming to Israel, but a remnant will remain--This was the same promise to both the Northern Kingdom and the Southern Kingdom.


God started His message to the Southern Kingdom (Zion) (Isaiah 10:24): Don't be afraid of Assyria. They will harass the Southern Kingdom, but they will not conquer Southern Kingdom.


Isaiah prophesied how the Assyrians would plan their attack from the north (Isaiah 10:28-32). The farthest they will get to Jerusalem is Nob. This prophesy was fulfilled exactly, as chronicled by 2 King 19: Hezekiah was at a loss about what to do in the in-coming attack of the Assyrians. However, Isaiah told Hezekiah to not worry. And we read on to understand why: God sent an angel to the Assyrian camp and took out 185,000 Assyrian soldiers. The Assyrian King returned home defeated. As if that wasn't bad enough, he was murdered by his sons, marking the decline of Assyria.

Acts 21:16-28:31

Notes compiled from my BSF group


Acts 21:16–22:29
With Jesus, the Law was fulfilled. This is why past Jewish rituals are no longer necessary. For example, the Jews no longer needed to sacrifice a perfect animal to atone for their sins because the death of Jesus atoned for all sins forever. Then why did Paul do it? In 1 Corinthians 8:13, Paul urged us to not do things that would cause others to stumble. We need to remember what is the end goal here: Paul is trying to spread the Gospel in a way that other people can listen to and understand. If Paul aggravated his audience before he even gets the chance to talk to them, what is to gain from it all?


The key thing here is that the rituals themselves are not bad. They are no longer necessary, but if they help us remember God’s grace and love, there is nothing wrong with taking part in the rituals. We need to note that these rituals are not demonic rituals. These rituals were Jewish rituals commanded in the Old Testament before Jesus’ time. These were Godly rituals that Jesus fulfilled. This is why we no longer have to do it. In fact, as Gentiles, we don’t need to bring an innocent animal to be slaughtered when we go to church today. Old Testament rituals were not part of our history. However, many Jewish Christians still carry out Old Testament rituals because it helps them remember what God did for them and their people in the past.


In sum, Paul went through with the rituals because he was also a Jew. It was not necessary for him to do those rituals anymore because Jesus did it all. However, it wasn’t wrong for him to do it out of reverence for God. And it certainly wasn’t wrong for him to do it so that his Jewish brothers wouldn’t stumble, so that they could be in friendship and fellowship with Paul and hear the Gospel message.


As a note of caution, I just want us to be vigilant when it comes to keeping rituals in check. The rituals above, I cannot stress more, were not man-made or demonic. The rituals were rooted in God. Though Jesus made those rituals unnecessary, they were still rituals rooted in God. There are other types of rituals that man keep. Some are demonic in nature, whereas others are man-made. There is no way keeping those rituals would help us get closer to God. I realize I'm speaking generally, but I pray for Holy Spirit-led guidance and wisdom in our lives to guide us as we follow God. We need to remember that the most important thing is our living relationship with God. Rituals, after Jesus, are just that: rituals. Godly rituals can help us remember God, but Godly rituals do not build that relationship for us. To build that relationship, we need to actively communicate with God and walk with God. It is not just about following through with the motions of the rituals. It's about getting to know God; it's about understanding His love; it's about being so overfilled with His love, we can't help but share it with EVERYONE! And guys, that's the Gospel!

Zondervan NIV footnote:

* Acts 21:24. living in obedience to the law. Paul had earlier taken a vow himself (see 18:18 and note), he had been a Jew to the Jews (see 1Co 9:20-21), and Timothy had been circumcised (see 16:3 and note). However, Paul was very careful not to sacrifice Christian principle in any act of obedience to the law (he would not have Titus circumcised, Gal 2:3).

* Acts 21:27 seven days. Cf. Nu 6:9. These were the days required for purification, shaving their heads at the altar, the sacrifice of a sin offering and burnt offering for each, and announcing the completion of the priests. Jews from the province of Asia. Paul had suffered already from the hands of Asian Jews (20:19).

* Acts 22:14 to see the Righteous One. Cf. 3:14; Lk 23:47 and notes. To see the resurrected Jesus was all-important to Paul (see 26:16; 1Co 9:1; 15:8). It was that experience that had convinced him of the truth of the gospel and that became the foundation of his theology.

Acts 22

Paul has committed his life to preaching the Gospel. Physical death does not scare him because he is eternally alive in Christ.


Acts 23:1-6
To humans, Paul’s life was horrible. He’s always being harassed, beaten, or thrown into jail, and he lived poorly. To Paul, however, he loved what he did in Jesus’ name. His eyes are on Christ and His eternal kingdom.


I think this attitude is simply breathtakingly inspirational. If anyone needs an example of what it means to live with our eyes on Jesus, he/she should look no further than Paul.


If we're talking about pain, physical or emotional, Paul's most certainly experience it all. It is definitely not a pain-free life, the life of a Christian, but we do it because we are looking at eternity. Paul knew that his life on Earth was to get the Good News to as many souls as possible. It's all about saving souls, because come eternity, only souls matter. Any kind of pain, God has already promised us that all sorrow would be wiped away.


I'm not saying I can adopt Paul's attitude with ease. I think it's very hard, and I think when the pain hits, it's definitely easier to run the other way. But then, so what? So... I ran away... and then what? Kind of like Jonah's predicament, huh? When Jonah ran away, he didn't just abandon his walk with God. He abandoned the people he was suppose affect. The Gospel will not spread itself. If we don't do it, who will?


Acts 23:4-5
Paul apologized for speaking ill against the high priest. He apologized because one of God’s commandments (Exodus 22:28) was to not speak evil about the ruler of your people. We can tell from Paul's apology that Paul didn't mean to speak ill. He simply did not know who the high priest was. This is understandable since Paul had been away for a while and may have lost track of who the present-day high priest was.

* Exodus 22:28 = Do not blaspheme God or curse the ruler of your people.

Acts 23:6-8
Paul related to Pharisees by telling them about his upbringing as a Pharisee. In fact, he was trained by the best and went to the best schools. There was no one better trained than Paul.


Acts 23:12–35
Paul found out about the plot to kill him, and he was able to be avoid the mob and at the same time be tried in Caesarea (where he would get a more fair trial). During his transfer to Caesarea, there were "two hundred soldiers, seventy horsemen and two hundred spearmen" protecting Paul (Acts 23:23). These are examples of how God guides His people around obstacles and leading them to the next challenge.

* Pharisees believe in resurrection, angels and spirits. Sadducees does not believe in any of these (Acts 23:8).

Zondervan NIV footnote:

* Acts 23:11 the Lord stood near. In time sof crises and need for strength, Paul was given help (see 18:9; 22:18; 27:23; cf. 2Co 12:7-10 and notes).

Acts 24–26

Felix took pride thinking he knew the God’s Word, but when he heard from Paul what God’s Word is, Felix didn’t like what he heard, and so he told Paul to stop. In essence, Felix did not respond to God’s call because he was proud. He thought he knew everything when he didn’t. And when Paul tried to teach him about the truth, instead of humbly learning, he refused to listen.


Zondervan NIV footnote:

* Acts 24:2-3 long period of peace ... with profound gratitude. The expected eulogy with which to introduce a speech before a judge. In his six years in office Felix had eliminated bands of robbers, thwarted organized assassins and crushed a movement led by an Egyptian (see note on 21:38). But in general his record was not good. He was recalled by Rome two years later because of misrule. His reforms and improvements are hard to identify historically.

* Acts 24:25 Felix was afraid. Hearing of "righteousness, self-control and the judgement," Felix looked at his past life and was filled with fear. He had a spark of sincerity and concern. When I find it convenient. Lust, pride, greed and selfish ambition made it continually inconvenient to change.

* Acts 24:26 offer him a bribe. Felix supposed that Paul had access to considerable funds. He had heard of his bringing an offering to the Jewish Christians in Jerusalem (see v. 17 and note). So he wanted Paul to give him money in order to secure his release. Paul no longer had the money, nor would he offer a bribe if he had it.

From Paul’s speech before Agrippa, we learn the following:


Jesus is the Messiah (Acts 26:15-18)


The stumbling block of the Jews is that they refuse to repent and turn to God (Acts 26:20-21).


Before Paul was awaken by Jesus, he persecuted Christians (Acts 26:9-16). He went from being someone who hated Christians to someone who devoted everything in his life to Christ. There is no conversation more powerful than Paul's.


Zondervan NIV footnote:

* Acts 26:6 my hope in what God has promised. Including God's kingdom, the Messiah and the resurrection (see v. 8).

* Acts 26:8 Paul had been speaking to Agrippa but at this point must have addressed others as well, such as Festus and the commanders (see note on 21:31), who did not believe in the resurrection. Agrippa was also allied with the Sadducees, whom he appointed high priests, and probably rejected both the resurrection of Christ and resurrection in general.

* Acts 26:11 force them to blaspheme. He tried to force them either to curse Jesus or to confess publicly that Jesus is the Son of God, in which case they could be condemned for blasphemy, a sufficient cause for death (See Mt 26:63-66).


Acts 26:16-18

Jesus gave Paul the following goals:
1. Paul was to be a witness of Jesus, not only that Paul had seen Jesus but also what Jesus had shown Paul.
2. Paul will be sent to the Gentiles, to open their eyes, to turn them from darkness to light, to turn away from Satan and toward God. This is so that the Gentiles can receive forgiveness of sins through Jesus.


Acts 27–28
Paul heroically guided the people on the ship through the storm. Paul was calm because he knew his time was not up, and he knew God would guide him through the storm (Acts 27:23-25). This is exactly how God's men should be able to guide others during crises.


Jonah, too, was caught in the middle of a storm on a ship. However, instead of being a rock for the people on the ship, he was the reason for the storm! The people on the ship were better off once they threw Jonah off the ship!


What was the difference? Well, there are many differences between Paul's and Jonah's circumstances, and I'm not going to address each one in detail. I do think the big picture is placing our faith in God. Learn from Paul. Learn from Jonah. Both ran into situations that were frightening beyond imagination. Paul, instead of running away, he simply planted his two feet firmly in the ground and let God guide him. He may not know how he was going to make it day to day, but he knew God knew, and that was enough for Paul.

We are weak and fallible when we rely on ourselves. When we rely on God, we can trust that He will always deliver.


Acts 27:22–35
The Holy Spirit reassured Paul that he would be there for the trial and that those who were on the ship with him will all survive. The Holy Spirit protected all those who stayed on the ship. The Holy Spirit gave Paul courage (Acts 27:22-25), guidance (Acts 27:31), wisdom (Acts 27:33) and thankfulness (Acts 27:35).


Acts 28
For Paul personally, it’s another great evidence that God is protecting him to continue to do God’s work. If Paul didn’t have God’s protection, Paul would have died a long, long time ago. (Let's just say this wasn't the first time Paul was pursued by angry mobs of people.) But time and time again, we see Paul miraculously surviving through some of the toughest trials in life.


For us, it’s pure inspiration. We can see the miracles of God working through Paul. Through Paul, we not only gain a clear teaching of the Word, we also gain a great teacher, a great example.


Paul is an extremely intelligent person, and his transformation is simply amazing. He went from someone who killed Christians to someone who preached the Gospel around the world, enduring hard abuse and was ultimately hanged for his efforts. People who are afraid of being persecuted by family, friends, co-workers, think of Paul. He has endured so much more than any of us have. Nothing we go through is comparable. And if we still think we have it hard, look at Jesus. He was abused and murdered on the Cross for us. He died for us so that we can have the Good News to share with the world. He died so that our sins can be forgiven! With such inspirational examples like Paul and Jesus, we have absolutely no excuse to not stand strong in our faith in Jesus.

Hebrews 2

Dangers of drifting
There are many ways we can go astray in life and God has posted warning signs for us. We should give earnest heed to the Word of God so that we do not drift.


Hebrews 2:1-4
We can drift away from knowledge of God, knowledge of truth, knowledge of principles. We can drift away from a fruitful and dynamic relationship with Jesus.


Hebrews 2:2
The Old Covenant laws were given to the Israelites by angels. Those who didn't follow the laws were punished.


Hebrews 2:3
The New Covenant is better than the old, in that Jesus fulfilled the requirements of the Old Covenant, ushering in eternal salvation. If those who disobeyed the old were punished, so would those who disobey the new. When we forget what God has done for us, when we forget about our salvation, we start to drift.




Man is superior to all


Hebrews 1:14, 2:5-9
We, mankind, will rule the world. We are the prized jewel of God's creation. Why? Because we were created in the image and likeness of God (Genesis 1). We have dominion over all the earth.


Hebrews 2:9-11
God has sent Jesus to redeem us and our mistakes. Jesus was made below the angels, because he became man. This phrase speaks of Jesus' reincarnation. That is, Jesus, as God, willingly left His throne in Heaven, to become man, so that He could die for our sins on the cross, to redeem us. There is no greater love.




Jesus is our captain, our pioneer of our salvation


Hebrews 2:11, 14
These Scriptures highlight the humanity of Jesus. Jesus became man and embraced us as brothers/sisters.


Hebrews 2:10, 14-15
Through Jesus' death, He not only cleansed us, He also conquered death. Jesus was the only man who lived sinlessly. Therefore, only His blood can cleanse all sins for eternity. Therefore, only Jesus is the perfect savior. Therefore, Jesus is the only way to Father!


Hebrew 2:14
Jesus has defeated Satan.


Hebrews 2:15
Jesus defeated death. When we place our trust in Jesus, we have no fear for death.


Hebrews 2:16-17
Jesus made propitiation for our sins. Jesus did not come for the angels. He came for US. He did not come because we deserved it. We have shown that time after time, we fall away to sin and have a hard time staying loyal to Jesus. Yet, Jesus still came for us, because He loved us.


Hebrews 2:18
Jesus walks with us to give us aid. Jesus isn't a God who sits up high on His throne and has no idea what it means to suffer. He has lived as one of us and has tasted temptation, poverty, betrayal, inequality, injustice, etc. He has been tried in every possible way, and He didn't even get to die a peaceful death. He was beaten until He was unrecognizable before brutally crucified on the cross! And because Jesus knows first hand what it means to live our lives, we should be confident in approaching Him with our problems, because He would know EXACTLY what we are going through.

Ephesians 4:26

http://pastormark.tv/2012/01/26/tough-text-thursday


Scripture Study with Pastor Mark Driscoll
January 26, 2012


Ephesians 4:26
Be angry and do not sin; do not let the sun go down on your anger.


I’ve seen a lot of anger and violence in my life. The reality, however, is that not all anger is sinful. There’s a difference between righteous and unrighteous anger. Although this is the case, all anger, whether righteous or unrighteous, is caused by some kind of sin in the world. Since this is the case, we need to be careful with the anger that is in our lives—and this is exactly what Ephesians 4:26 deals with.


Context of Ephesians 4:26
At the beginning of Ephesians 4, Paul urges his readers to “walk in a manner worthy of the calling to which you have been called.” He goes on to tell them to “put off your old self, which belongs to your former manner of life” (v. 22) and to “put on the new self, created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness” (v. 24). The next verse begins with the word “therefore,” showing us that Paul is going to say something about what it means to put on the new self, and especially about how we treat each other.
He begins by saying to “put away falsehood” and be truthful with each other. We are all members of the same church body (v. 4), which is Christ’s, and in order to function we have to live in the reality of what is true with one another or the church will be dysfunctional.


Paul then tells us in verse 26 that we also should control our anger. He writes, “Be angry and do not sin; do not let the sun go down on your anger,” and he continues in the next verse, “and give no opportunity to the devil.” The general point here is not hard: runaway anger is an instrument of the devil to stir up trouble in the church. But the question is whether Paul is actually commanding a certain kind of anger (“Be angry!”) or whether something else is going on.


“Be Angry” and Psalm 4:4
The NIV translates “Be angry” as, “In your anger do not sin.” While this may be a legitimate translation, the actual Greek word is imperative, which is the usual form used for commands. We really have two imperatives in a row here: (1) “Be angry” (orgizesthe); and (2) “Do not sin” (hamartanete).


A lot of ink has been spilled over the wording and what Paul means, but before we ask if Paul is commanding anger, we must understand that Paul is alluding to Psalm 4:4. So we need to answer this important question, “What does the Psalm mean?”


In Psalm 4, David begins with a prayer: “Answer me when I call, O God of my righteousness!” This is followed in 4:2–3 with David telling those who “love vain words and seek after lies” that God will surely hear him. Then in 4:4 David says, “Be angry and do not sin; ponder in your own hearts on your beds, and be silent.”


Either David is addressing the godly who are being slandered or the ungodly mentioned in the previous verses.[1] In either case, the idea is that when anger arises, we should not sin, but remain silent and wait for the deliverance of the Lord. The verse “speaks against personal revenge that circumvents the law and consumes the lives of the vengeful” and encourages patience, silence, and reflection “on how the Lord has shown himself trustworthy.”[2]


Paul picks up David’s words and uses them in Ephesians 4:26. This, again, has been the subject of much discussion. Daniel Wallace has observed from scholarly literature seven possible ways of understanding and interpreting the grammar of this verse, but he believes there are only two good options supported by the text:
- “be angry” as a command, or
- “be angry” as a condition or concession (“if you are angry” or “although you are angry”)


“Be Angry” As a Command
Those who interpret Paul as saying “be angry” as a command say we should understand the word in its simplest sense: as a Greek imperative, typically considered a command.


According to this view, Paul says to be angry over things that are worth our anger, such as injustice and unrepentant sin. As Wallace puts it, Paul has in mind “righteous indignation which culminates in church discipline,” whether formal or informal.[3] He calls this “the most explicitly positive statement of human anger in the NT.” In support of this view is the word kai (“and”) between “be angry” and “do not sin,” which on the surface makes the verse look like two commands in a row. This view would make the most logical sense from a strictly grammatical point of view, but there are other factors to consider.


First, the grammatical form that Paul uses comes from Psalm 4:4 and is not his personal creation. So, a thorough grammatical interpretation can only take us so far. We have to consider what the psalmist is doing as well. Is the psalmist commanding anger? Maybe he is, and maybe he isn’t. But the fact is that we cannot say that Paul is commanding anger only because of the grammar in the verse.


Second, the context both here and in Psalm 4:4 does not seem to be one where it would be natural for Paul to prescribe anger over injustice or sin. This is not to say Paul would never do this, only that in this verse the burden seems to be on what to do with anger that already exists. As one commentator writes, “Whether the anger is justified seems to be outside the purview of the admonition.” These factors must be considered before assuming Paul’s point is to prescribe anger here.


At the same time, it is possible to see the phrase as a command with an emphasis less on prescribing righteous anger and more on providing parameters for anger that is already present.


“Be Angry” As a Condition
Still, others prefer not to see it as a command but rather as a condition (“if you are angry”). Whatever we accept as the exact translation of this, i.e., “if,” “although,” or “in your anger” (as with the NIV), the idea is that anger exists. It just is.


On this view, Paul simply assumes there will be anger sometimes. This is a fact of life and a symptom of the fallen order of things. Not that all anger is sin—Jesus was without sin but not without anger (see Matthew 21:12–13)—but all anger, whether righteous or unrighteous, is caused by some kind of sin in the world. So the idea here is that the Greek imperative is used as a condition, which is a grammatical possibility.


Within this view there is a spectrum of thought on exactly how anger is permitted. Is it a begrudging permission (“be angry if you absolutely must”) or a more liberal permission (“of course anger is common, just don’t sin in it”)?[4] This question really can’t be answered by the text alone. Other Scripture, as well as our approach to human emotion in general, will influence our interpretation.


Sometimes, in support of the conditional view, Ephesians 4:31, “Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you,” is brought into the discussion to say that Paul would never command anger. But this is tricky, because no matter what view one takes on 4:26, it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that at some level anger is being allowed for. Otherwise, Paul would simply tell his readers not to be angry in 4:26.


Conclusion
In the end, we should not exclude the possibility that Paul is commanding righteous anger on some level, but it is unlikely that the point of the passage is to prescribe it. The point of the passage has to do with behavior in the household of God, on how to live in harmony with one another as the body of Christ.


The idea, “Yes, you will be angry, but don’t let it lead you into sin,” seems to fit better than, “Get angry over sin and injustice, but be careful when you do it.” The bottom line is we cannot avoid anger in a fallen world, nor are we called to do so. In both Psalm 4:4 and Ephesians 4:26, the emphasis is not on anger, but on what to do with anger that is present.
If there is anger in our lives, we’re to deal with it promptly. Paul provides us with a time limit in doing so by encouraging us to handle it before the “sun goes down” (4:26). Our motivation for handling anger so quickly is provided by Paul’s exhortation in 4:27, “do not give the devil a foothold.” The Greek word translated in the NIV as “foothold” (topos) is rendered in the ESV and NASB as an “opportunity.”


Even though Paul doesn’t tell us exactly what kind of foothold the devil can obtain in the life of a believer, we are left with the idea that we’re to resist his schemes (6:11) by not allowing him an opportunity to exploit the anger in our lives by dealing with it quickly.


And dealing with our anger can take many forms. For instance, if we have righteous anger over sin committed against us or against someone else, we are within our rights to speak our mind graciously and directly to that person to seek reconciliation. In more extreme cases, such as abuse, we also have the right and duty to seek justice through the institutions God has ordained such as the police force.
If our anger is not righteous, we must search our hearts, pray that the Holy Spirit would convict us, repent, and seek reconciliation with those whom we are angry.


In closing, perhaps a very practical example of a good use of anger would be helpful.


On May 3, 1980, a repeat drunk driver climbed into his car after a three-day drinking binge and ran over 14-year-old twin Cari Lightner as she was walking to church. The impact threw her one 125 feet, and once the drunk driver awoke from his passed-out state, he sped away. He was later caught and Cari’s mother, Candace, said she felt “rage” that the murderer of her daughter would likely not even get jail time despite the fact he was already out on bail for one of the four drunk driving arrests he had in the previous five years. Channeling that anger toward justice and good works,Candace then began MADD, or Mothers Against Drunk Driving.


Indeed, anger can be a great force for good if our anger is caused by injustice and compels us toward justice. As Ephesians 4:26 indicates, what we can never do is allow anger simply to be in our lives without any resolution—that will only lead to bitterness and sin.


References:
[1] For the view that the godly are being addressed, see the entry of C. John Collins in the ESV Study Bible, 945; for a view that the ungodly are in view, see Thielman,Ephesians, 313.
[2] Collins, 945.
[3] Ibid., 372. Harold W. Hoehner, Ephesians: An Exegetical Commentary (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2002), 620, takes a similar view.
[4] For example, both Lincoln (Ephesians, Word Biblical Commentary, vol. 42 [Dallas: Word, 1990], 301) and Best (Ephesians, 449-50) opt for this view but are
hesitant to see too much permission for anger, while others are more comfortable with Paul allowing for anger.

Solar Flares, Radioactive Decay, and The Age of the Earth

From the May 01, 2012 eNews issue
(Visit Koinonia House for a FREE subscription)


From their first books on dinosaurs, our children are told that life was evolving "millions of years ago." The majority of geologists today tell us that radioisotope dating has narrowed the age of Earth to about 4.5 billion years, give or take 330 million. Recently, two dating methods have
been updated, and scientists say the earth might not be as old as they thought it was, but they may not recognize how "off" the dating methods truly are.


How accurate is radiometric dating? Should we accept the "millions of years" scenario that easily, or are there alternate possibilities that get rejected because they don't fit an evolutionary model of origins?


The Grand Canyon:
The age of the earth is not a purely academic matter. The deepest held values and beliefs of many people are tied into whether the earth has been around billions - or only thousands - of years. The Bible says God created the physical universe in seven days. That doesn't leave a lot
of time for life to evolve from primordial amino acids.


Where does the evidence honestly lead? On one hand, Hadrian's Wall has survived the erosional forces of wind and rain and ice for nearly 1900 years. With that in mind, it is obvious the Colorado River would have required a great deal more than 6,000 years to scratch out the Grand Canyon. On the other hand, perhaps the mighty Colorado River did not carve the Grand Canyon at all. Consider, mud flows after the eruption of Mount St. Helens gouged sizeable canyons through solid rock in just a few days…


Radioisotopes:
The measurable breakdown of radioactive isotopes, like the Grand Canyon, appear to give an ancient age for the Earth. Measuring the amount of uranium-238 parent material as well as the lead-206 daughter material in a zircon theoretically allows geochronologists to date the zircon in which these "before" and "after" materials are found. By comparing the derived date to that produced by U-235 and Pb-207 in the same sample, geochronologists believe they can get fairly close results.


The age-dating methods are not perfect, however. There is far less U-235 than U-238 in natural uranium, and by consensus, geochronologists have long used a U-238/U-235 ratio of 137.88 to simply calculate the amount of U-235 in a zircon rather than try to measure it. The original consensus ratio was determined to have some flaws, however, and researchers from the British Geological Survey and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology recently did do some careful measuring. They found the average ratio to be a more accurate 137.818 ± 0.045.


"Firstly, the consensus value of 137.88 couldn't be traced back to international standard units like the kilogram. Secondly, the old consensus ratio had no uncertainty assigned to it, [and] thirdly, the previous measurements were made on materials like uranium ores — and not on
naturally occurring minerals that are routinely used for U-Pb dating studies," wrote Joe Hiess, a Marie Curie ITN Experienced Researcher.


This ratio adjustment would take a few hundred thousand years off the widely accepted view of the planet's age. That's not much, but it does raise a question: how many other dating method particulars have been accepted by consensus while including glaring flaws?


Decay Rate Changes:
Last year, researchers at Purdue and Stanford published evidence that radio decay rates are not as constant as geochronologists have thought. Dating the earth through radiometric methods may therefore be even less simple than previously believed.


Dec 13, 2006, a magnificent solar flare flung radiation and solar particles toward Earth. Purdue nuclear engineer Jere Jenkins had been measuring the decay rate of manganese-54, and he noticed that a day and a half before the flare, the decay rate of Mn-54 started to drop a little. That was interesting.


Ephraim Fischbach, a physics professor at Purdue, had already found a variety of disagreements on decay rates in the literature. Fischbach had been looking for a good way to generate truly random numbers and had turned to radioactive isotopes. Chunks of radioactive elements might decay at steady rates, but the individual atoms within them decay unpredictably. Fischbach could therefore use the randomly timed ticks of a Geiger counter to generate lists of numbers.



As he did more research, though, Fischbach found variations in the published decay rates of certain isotopes. He also found that the decay rates of silicon-32 and radium-226 showed seasonal variation, according to data collected at Brookhaven National Laboratory on Long Island and the Federal Physical and Technical Institute in Germany. When the decay rate of Jenkins' Mn-54 dropped during the solar flare, Jenkins and Fischbach stood up straighter and paid attention.


"Everyone thought it must be due to experimental mistakes, because we're all brought up to believe that decay rates are constant," Peter Sturrock, Stanford professor emeritus of applied physics, commented on the issue.


There was more to the issue than instrumental error. Jenkins, Fischbach and their colleagues proceeded to publish papers on the variations in radiometric decay rates in journals like Astroparticle Physics, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research. They argued that the
variations were not caused by weaknesses in their detection systems, but were actual variations in the decay rates themselves.


Radioisotope Dating 101:
While radiometric dating sounds like a jazzy way to find a mate, it's actually about unruly isotopes.


The world around us is made up of atoms, each with a specific number of positively charged protons, negatively charged electrons, and neutral proton-sized neutrons in their nuclei. Neutrons and electrons are important, but it is the proton number that defines an element. All carbon atoms have six protons, iron atoms have 26, and platinum atoms have 78. If a sodium atom loses an electron, it's still sodium, it's just a positively-charged sodium ion, ready to ionically bond with a negatively charged chlorine ion to make table salt for mashed potatoes. If iron loses electrons, it starts to rust, but it's still iron.


If carbon gains an extra neutron, it still behaves like carbon. Carbon generally has six neutrons with its six protons, giving an atomic weight of 12. Adding one neutron makes carbon-13, a stable isotope that makes up about 1.1% of the carbon on Earth.


Not all isotopes are stable, though. In a crowd of one trillion carbon atoms, one can always find a single unstable carbon-14 isotope sipping on the punch. Over the course of about 5730 years, half of a sample of C-14 will decay into nitrogen-14. A scientist can take a carbon sample, measure the amount of C-14 among its trillions of C-12 atoms, measure the N-14 in the mix, and put together a ratio of the two isotopes. C-14 has a half-life of 5730 years – the amount of time it takes half a sample to decay. Theoretically, if the scientist measures a sample and finds an equal amount of C-14, the parent material, and N-14, the daughter material, then 5730 years should have passed since that hunk of carbon formed. Theoretically. This is the idea behind radioisotope dating.


Chemists have been able to measure the half-lives of most isotopes and, for the most part, have found their decay rates consistent. The accuracy of the dating methods hangs on a few assumptions, though. First, we have to assume that no extra daughter material contaminated the sample from an outside source. We have to assume that only parent material and no daughter material was in there at the start. We have to assume than no parent material leached out of the sample during its lifetime. Ultimately, we have to assume that the decay rates for various isotopes are the same now as they always have been, without variation. To deal with these obvious problems, geochronologists work to correlate dates through the use of several different dating methods – as in the U-238/U-235 method.


Not all half lives have been precisely determined. The half-life of samarium-146 has been measured at between 50 million and 103 million years, and the older age was accepted. Only recently, using better instrumentation, have researchers dropped the half life of Sm-146 to 68 million years. While Sm-146 dating is not used often, it raises the question of how precisely certain well-accepted half lives have been measured.


Meteors:
In Brent G. Dalrymple's book The Age Of The Earth (1991), he includes lists of meteorites that have been dated between 4.23-4.88 billion years old. These lists are often cited as evidence for the age of the earth, because meteorites are believed (by most parties) to be from material that formed at the same time as Earth. Earth has a dynamic crust that is constantly changing; it wears away and gets torn up in
earthquakes; it gets cooked and crushed and covered with volcanic ash and ocean sediments. Earth's surface has taken a lot of abuse through the years. On the other hand, meteorites have been floating around in space untouched, and the trace elements in them are fairly evenly mixed. They are therefore considered good subjects to determine Earth's age.


Dalrymple includes the specific radiometric dating methods that were used to date the meteorites. Argon-argon dating was used most frequently in dating the meteorites, but rubidium-strontium and samarium-neodymium dating methods were also used. Dalrymple makes the case that three different dating methods, measuring three different mother-daughter pairs, all gave basically the same age dates. This has been seen as solid well-correlated evidence that the given chondrite age-dates are reliable.


Dalrymple's lists do raise some issues, however. It is worth noting that all three of the methods used to date those meteorites involved parent isotopes with massively large half lives. The half life for rubidium-87 is approximately 50 billion years. The alpha-decay of Sm-147 to Nd-143 has a half life of 1.06×10^11 years. That's 100 billion years! The argon-argon method depends on the 1.25 billion year half life of potassium-40 decaying to argon-40, which is still high.


Geochronologists using these dating methods have to detect trace amounts of elements that would hardly have had time to decay, even with billions of years at their disposal. The dates of these specific meteorites may correlate, but it is difficult to determine whether there was just so little of each element in the first place that there was not much room for variation. It is also difficult to know whether the chondrites did not have relatively homogenous amounts of parent and daughter materials from the start.


Were there outliers that Dalrymple didn't list? Were there other meteorites that gave significantly higher or lower ages? Did Dalrymple only include the meteorites that fit his position, or did all the meteorites truly date between 4.29 +/- .06 and 4.55 +/- .33 billion years? Also, should we consider the age-date span of 650 million years – more than half a billion years - as significant?


Discordant Dating:
There is reason for skepticism. Age dating methods do not always produce correlating results. [See links below.] Wood buried in igneous rock in Queensland Australia has been dated to 40,000 years, while the basalt around it dated to 45 million years. Both dating subjects should have given the same date, since the igneous rock was formed at the same time the wood was buried (and the wood still had plenty of
carbon-14 in it). Dalrymple himself reported "excess argon-36" in three out of 26 lava flows in his article, "40Ar/36Ar Analyses Of Historic Lava Flows". The excess argon gives negative age-dates because of too much daughter product. Since it is impossible to date a rock that hasn't formed yet, there was a good indication that the Ar-36 wasn't coming from just the parent material.


Geologist Steve Austin describes discordant age dates in his article "Excessively Old 'Ages' For Grand Canyon Lava Flows." He tested different layers of the Grand Canyon and got age dates for older layers that tested younger than the layers above them. The science of geochronology has a lot of room for error.


Ultimately, the researchers who age-dated the meteorites on Dalrymple's lists assumed the rocks were billions of years old, they used methods that fit their presuppositions, and they got results that fit their presuppositions. Would they have gotten younger chondrite ages if they had used different dating methods?


It is always dangerous to come to science with assumptions, regardless of one's position. Scientists have long assumed that radioisotope decay rates are constants, but the evidence now indicates that decay rates vary over time. If, as Jenkins and Fischbach have argued, solar neutrinos zipped through space, effecting Mn-54's decay rates in a Purdue laboratory, then those tiny energetic particles certainly have had the capacity to affect the decay rates of trace nuclides in chunks of rock floating out in space.


Are the observations of Jenkins and Fischbach minor fluctuations, or have decay rates actually slowed down over time? Has the very speed of light slowed through the years, and how might that have affected decay rates? Are there truly any physical constants in the universe?


These are the questions that astrophysicists and geochronologists can have a fun time trying to answer. In the meanwhile, we'll keep on watch for further developments. The variability of decay rates has massive implications - for medicine, for technology, and for mankind's longing to produce a birth certificate for the Earth.


Related Articles:
• The Strange Case Of Solar Flares And Radioactive Elements - Stanford.edu
• Radiometric Time Scale - USGS
• The Age of the Earth - Talk Origins
• 40Ar/36Ar Analyses Of Historic Lava Flows - NASA
• Radioactive Dating Explained - Science Against Evolution
• Excessively Old "Ages" For Grand Canyon Lava Flows - ICR
• Discordant Radiometric Dates Present Recurring Problem - The Examiner
• Earth May Be Younger Than We Think - The Johns Hopkins News-Letter
• A Pair of Geologic Clocks Get Updates - Ars Technica