Author: Charlie Garrett

Matthew 9:31

Charlie Garrett Daily Writing, Matthew (Written)

Wednesday, 30 April 2025

But when they had departed, they spread the news about Him in all that country. Matthew 9:31

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen).

You can also read this commentary, scrolling with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

“And they, having departed, they divulged Him in all that land” (CG).

In the previous verse, Jesus strictly charged the men whose eyes had been healed to see that none knew about what He had done. However, the account now says, “And they, having departed, they divulged Him in all that land.”

Charles Ellicott tells of a difference of perception about their actions, saying that the matter “curiously enough, has been answered by most patristic and Roman Catholic commentators in the affirmative, some even maintaining that the command was not meant seriously; and by most Protestant commentators in the negative.”

It is hard to see how what is plainly stated in black and white can be intended as anything other than disobedience to the word. There is no hint that Jesus wasn’t serious. That must be read into the text. One must wonder, then, why there is a striking divide.

A couple of possibilities come to mind. The first is that some noted Roman Catholic theologians may have decided their actions were ok and others fell in line with his analysis. This would not be uncommon. Reading commentaries that span hundreds of years, one can tell why a point is agreed on by various scholars by simply looking at unusual words that are used to make a point.

In other words, someone may comment on a verse using the word fructifying. Though this word may not be seen again in his writings, it is used in an analysis of the same verse by numerous later scholars. This tells us that later scholars read his analysis, liked the use of the unusual word, and used it in their own analysis, which mirrors in content that of the older scholar.

It is kind of a “follow-the-bandwagon” way of analyzing a verse. A second possibility is that the overall theology of the Roman Catholic Church finds this verse difficult to swallow as being a sign of disobedience because it would then conflict with their own theology in other areas.

What needs to be done is to consider why Jesus charged them in the first place and then why Matthew points out their reaction. It could be that there was an immediate reason for Him telling them not to tell others, such as noted in the previous commentary, which said Jesus may not yet have wanted it to be openly accepted that He was the Messiah.

By restoring sight to the blind, something Isaiah indicates is something the Messiah would do, it might then spur the masses in a direction not yet desired for Him to accomplish His work. However, there may be a reason for His charging them that would only be understood after He completed His work.

In other words, it has been seen that the healing of the woman with a flow of blood mirrored salvation in the church that Christ would establish. The raising of the child mirrors the restoration of Israel after the church age. Thus, it is logical to consider that this account may have something to do with future theology as well.

Here we have sight restored to two blind men. This was obviously something they thought Jesus could do, and when they called out to Him, they called Him the Son of David. They believed Him to be the Messiah and that He was capable of healing them. However, after He did so, He gave them a word to be obedient to. In the very next verse, they are shown to be disobedient to the word.

Despite their disobedience, there is no later note that they lost their eyesight, something Matthew would surely have recorded. But more, it goes on to say that they divulged Him in all that land. They didn’t just tell about Him to their family or in their city, but everywhere they went.

Though unstated, accompanying their words would have been praises to God and notes that this was surely the Messiah. It is unlikely they would hail Him as such, believe in Him, and then later say, “Some guy healed us.” Rather, they would say, “We were restored by the Messiah!”

So what is this account telling us? It is a note that when one is saved and has seen the light of Christ, that salvation is eternal. Despite their obvious disobedience to the spoken word, they retained their eyesight.

If we are honest with ourselves, each person who has been saved by Jesus will openly avow that he has been disobedient to the word we have been given, the word spoken by God, which is then recorded by His apostles. And yet, Jesus continues to save us and allow us to go out and tell others about who He is and what He has done for us.

Despite our failing Him, He is full of grace – enough to carry us for all of our days until He brings us to Himself. This must be the reason the words are recorded for us as they are.

Life application: Understanding the premise laid out concerning these men, it begs the question of why most Roman Catholic theologians see their actions as not being disobedient, while most Protestants take the opposite view.

It may partially be a follow-the-bandwagon thing, but more than that, it shows a vast gulf in the basic theology of the two approaches to the word. Protestants have accepted the five Solas since the Reformation: Sola Scriptura (Scripture alone), Sola Fide (faith alone), Sola Gratia (grace alone), Solus Christus (Christ alone), and Soli Deo Gloria (glory to God alone).

Roman Catholics reject all of these to some extent. They believe Scripture to some point, but add in authoritative edicts from the Vatican, along with the apocrypha. It is Scripture, plus. They believe in faith plus works. They believe in grace, but personal merit is included for “getting out of purgatory” and all kinds of other nonsense.

They believe in Christ but also exalt Mary to co-redemptrix. They pray to her, petition her, and build lots of idols of her to worship. They also believe in exalting God, but their theology exalts angels and even the pope within their worship. Everything about Roman Catholicism is “plus.”

Because of this, seeing the man’s actions as disobedient would return too much emphasis concerning disobedience upon their own corrupt theology, which rejects the word of God as our sole authority that must be adhered to.

Most Protestants, however, understand that ignoring or being disobedient to the word is not something that can be denied. Thus, there is an understanding that it is grace that heals us (like the eyes of the blind men), and it is grace that continues to carry us through until the day when Jesus will bring us to Himself (as displayed in their disobedience without being re-blinded for it).

We are seeing in these few verses the doctrines of 1) free will, and 2) eternal salvation. Our perception of what Jesus has done and the effectiveness of it in our lives will be understood and worked out in how we perceive what the word “grace” means. The more we understand it, the more willing we will be to adhere to His word. And yet, it will also comfort us when we realize we continue to fail Him from day to day.

Lord God, even before Jesus came, we have types, pictures, and prophecies that reveal to us the many things He would do. They literally permeate the Old Testament. And in Jesus’ coming, we have hints concerning what things would be like after the completion of His work. Thank You, O God, for giving us such insight to help us make proper decisions about our theology now that we are saved by You through Him. Amen.

 

Matthew 9:30

Charlie Garrett Daily Writing, Matthew (Written)

Tuesday, 29 April 2025

And their eyes were opened. And Jesus sternly warned them, saying, “See that no one knows it.” Matthew 9:30

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen).

You can also read this commentary, scrolling with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

“And their eyes, they opened. And Jesus, He in-snorted at them, saying, ‘You see none knows’” (CG).

In the previous verse, Jesus told the blind men that according to their faith, their sight would be restored to them. Now, that is realized in the words, “And their eyes, they opened.”

The power of the Lord to give sight to the blind is realized. Regardless of what type of blindness they suffered, He went to the cause, identified it, and corrected it with merely the word that it should be done. This is something prophesied would come to pass concerning the ability of the coming Messiah. For example –

“Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened,
And the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped.” Isaiah 35:5

However, the state of blindness referred to by Isaiah may be interpreted as simply dulled spiritual senses. This is seen, for example, in Isaiah 42 –

“Hear, you deaf;
And look, you blind, that you may see.
19 Who is blind but My servant,
Or deaf as My messenger whom I send?
Who is blind as he who is perfect,
And blind as the Lord’s servant?
20 Seeing many things, but you do not observe;
Opening the ears, but he does not hear.” Isaiah 42:18-20

Because of this, the verses concerning giving sight to the blind could be taken as a metaphor. However, this is not what the people expected. They took them to be literal. This is why the two men called out to Jesus, calling Him the Son of David. They knew the Messiah would come from the line of David, and they knew that He would be able to restore sight to the blind. Jesus even reminded John that this was a messianic promise –

“And when John had heard in prison about the works of Christ, he sent two of his disciples 3 and said to Him, ‘Are You the Coming One, or do we look for another?’
4 Jesus answered and said to them, ‘Go and tell John the things which you hear and see: 5 The blind see and the lame walk; the lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear; the dead are raised up and the poor have the gospel preached to them. 6 And blessed is he who is not offended because of Me.’” Matthew 11:2-6

Jesus’ healing of these men clearly pointed to Him being the Messiah. They understood Him to be such, and their appeal to Him was not in vain. Once healed, Matthew next says, “And Jesus, He in-snorted at them, saying, ‘You see none knows.’”

Here is a new word, embrimaomai. It is derived from en, in, and brimaomai, to snort with anger. Thus, it is a word that mimics an animal like a horse or pig. If one makes a piggy grunt with the nose by inhaling while properly forming the nostrils (gnugnugnugnu), it gives the sense of the intent of the word. But its meaning is that it is accompanied by a sense of anger more than anything else.

When someone is passionate about what he has to say, this in-snorting sound can occur suddenly. Therefore, the word is used to express a strong admonition or warning, such as here. It can be a mark of scolding, such as in Mark 14:5. It can also be used as being moved in the spirit and even groaning, as in John 11:33 and 11:38.

Jesus’ in-snorting here signifies His urgent desire for them not to reveal to others what occurred. Otherwise, there would be displeasure in Him for it. The exact reason for this isn’t stated, but He had waited until they were inside before attending to them. This means He wanted the matter done privately. And yet, He did other such miracles openly. But those instances were later (Matthew 12:22).

Therefore, because this was a sign that the Messiah would accomplish, it seems that He did not want this openly divulged at this time. It is not until Chapter 16 that Peter declares Jesus to be the promised Christ of God.

Life application: Today, two thousand years after Jesus’ miracle healing of these men, people in the world continue to struggle with blindness. Some are born blind, some develop blindness through age or sickness, and some receive trauma that causes blindness.

Think of all that had to go into Jesus’ “simple” miracle of giving sight to these blind men. He had to know if they had trauma, what sort it was. If they had an infection, tumor, nutrient deficiency, or stroke, how did it affect the eye? Did the men have diabetes, or was it caused by macular degeneration or glaucoma?

To determine what causes blindness today and then treat it takes many specialists being involved in the process, expensive machinery, an understanding of many variables, etc. From there, some types of blindness can be corrected. Others have no hope of it being so.

And yet, with the spoken word and nothing more, Jesus was able to heal these two men. The power of God was evident in Him and working through Him to effect the miracle. And Jesus, unlike the prophets of Old, did not appeal to the Lord (Yehovah). He merely spoke the word under His own authority.

This reveals the nature of the Man. He is the Lord God. He is great and He is glorious. He is Jesus!

Lord God, how exciting it is to see Jesus for who He is. He isn’t just a prophet in a long succession of prophets that came to reveal Your intent for His people. Rather, He is the fulfillment of all prophecy. He is the true and great Prophet. You have united with humanity in the Person of Jesus. Thank You for having so revealed Yourself to us. Amen.

 

Matthew 9:29

Charlie Garrett Daily Writing, Matthew (Written)

Monday, 28 April 2025

Then He touched their eyes, saying, “According to your faith let it be to you.” Matthew 9:29

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at “Bible in Ten” podcast. (Click Here to listen).

You can also read this commentary, scrolling with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

“Then He touched their eyes, saying, ‘According to your faith, it became to you’” (CG).

In the previous verse, Jesus asked the two blind men if they believed that He was able to have mercy on them. Their response was in the affirmative. With that remembered, it next says, “Then He touched their eyes.”

Jesus does this elsewhere, such as in Matthew 20:34. It would be an indication to them that there is no doubt where the power came from. However, this is not the only way that Jesus restores sight to the blind. In Mark 8, Jesus spat on a blind man’s eyes, partially restored his vision, and then placed His hands on the man’s eyes and brought him to full vision.

In John 9, Jesus spat on the ground, made clay with it, and then anointed the eyes of the blind man with the clay. From there, He instructed the man to go to the pool of Siloam and wash his eyes. When he did, he came back seeing.

Therefore, Jesus’ various methods of restoring sight are instructive as much as they are curative. In this case, it is instructive to the men being healed that the power to heal has come from Him and that it came about when He touched them with His hands and then spoke the word. This restoration of sight would leave no doubt about who Jesus is because He would be the first person they would see.

Their testimony in this case would be infallible proof to those who knew them when they were blind. As such, upon touching their eyes, Jesus was “saying, ‘According to your faith, it be to you.’”

It is not the physical touching that healed them, nor is it their faith that healed them. They have professed faith, and that is what Jesus is acknowledging to them. In other words, “according to” isn’t “If you have this much faith, you will be healed and if you don’t, you won’t be.” Rather, “according to” is in response to the faith they have already acknowledged.

The healing is then brought about by Jesus’ spoken word. It would be like saying, “Because you have professed faith in My ability, I will now heal you. And so it is.”

Life application: The healing of these blind men is not unlike the process of our salvation. The Bible says, “that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation” Romans 10:9, 10

Jesus doesn’t ask, “Just how much do you believe in your heart?” Every person’s faith is on its own level. If Jesus were looking for a certain amount of faith, there would be a faith exam attached to the promise. No such thing exists. We are not asked to stand on a rooftop in an Islamic city and shout out that we have believed the gospel.

Nor are we told we must eat a habanero chili pepper to prove our faith. God reads the heart, and salvation is granted. These men professed faith in Jesus’ ability to heal them. In turn, He healed them.

Understanding this should help us to understand the fallacy of “works as a demonstration of salvation.” This is a common teaching that says, “If you don’t have works to support your profession of salvation, you are probably not saved.” This begs the obvious question, “What works? Just what exactly do I have to do to prove I am saved?”

The Bible doesn’t specify any such thing. It does provide instructions on what we should do in our salvation, but it never makes them a proof test for our salvation. The blind men were healed, and there is no string attached to the healing, such as, “If you don’t do what I say, you will lose your sight.”

In fact, there will appear to be a mark of disobedience in those men in the verses to come. But there is nothing to indicate that they somehow were re-blinded for it. In fact, the words indicate otherwise. We must keep the salvation message simple. Complicating it with requests for proof of salvation will only produce weak believers who will struggle with the surety of what Christ has done for them for the rest of their days.

Keep the gospel simple. From there, tell people to learn the Bible and apply it to their lives. In doing so, their walk with the Lord will be sound and their time in His presence will be sweet.

Lord God, may we be confident in our salvation, not because of an arrogant, haughty attitude, but because we understand what the word says. Christ died for our sins according to Scripture, He was buried, and He rose again on the third day according to Scripture. This is what You have asked us to believe in order to be saved. We do! Thank You for the salvation You have granted us. Amen.

 

Song of Songs 5:1-8 (My Hands Dripped Myrrh)

Charlie Garrett Song of Songs (Written)

Song of Songs 5:1-8
My Hands Dripped Myrrh

 

(Typed 27 January 2025) In the Bible, the heart is mentioned over eight hundred times, and yet, it never refers to the literal, physical pump that pulses the blood through the body. Rather, it is used figuratively in Scripture.

P. Hughes defines it as “‘the affective center of our being’ and the capacity of moral preference.” G. Archer says it is the “desire-producer that makes us tick.” In essence, it is our seat of moral reasoning.

For example, Genesis 6:5 is the first mention of the heart. There it says of man that “every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.” The last use of the heart in the Old Testament says that the Lord, “will turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the hearts of the children to their fathers.”

In the New Testament, the first use happens to be the first verse I ever learned, because it was on a magnet on our refrigerator. Matthew 5:8 says, “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.”

The New Testament’s last use, referring to the Great Harlot of the end times, says “…for she says in her heart, ‘I sit as a queen, and am no widow, and will not see sorrow’” (Revelation 18:7).

Text Verse: “As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten. Therefore be zealous and repent. 20 Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and dine with him, and he with Me.” Revelation 3:19, 20

The understood meaning of the words of Jesus is based on 1) what the purpose of knocking is, 2) what a door signifies, and 3) what result Jesus is attempting to obtain.

Jesus is not standing at a literal door and knocking with his knuckles in an appeal for someone to open it and allow Him to come strolling in. Rather, the words are being used metaphorically.

The knocking is an appeal to the intellect of a person. He explained the problem that was found in the Laodicean church. He told them of their condition and warned them of the consequences of what would happen if they didn’t change. The appeal is expressed in the words “be zealous and repent.”

Understanding this, and based on what we reviewed, we know that the heart is consistently used as a metaphor to identify the seat of reason, intellect, and the inner person. Paul says in Romans 10 –

“But what does it say? ‘The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart’ (that is, the word of faith which we preach): 9 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.” Romans 10:8-10

Paul is using the heart, as the Bible does consistently, as the seat of reason and intellect. The seat of reason and intellect is where one acts zealously to repent. Therefore, the door that is being knocked on is to be taken metaphorically for the heart. It doesn’t need to say that. Rather, it is implied from even a minimal understanding of how the heart is presented in Scripture.

Understanding this will help us understand the symbolism presented in the passage today, and it is what is seen in the verses in Revelation. Don’t expect Jesus to come knocking on the door of a church and calling out for the people inside to repent. That ain’t gonna happen.

Rather, Jesus is knocking on the hearts of the people in the church, imploring them to reconsider their ways and return to Him. It’s something many who fall under the umbrella of what is known as “the church” need to pay heed to today.

Unfortunately, many churches don’t even refer to the Bible, but if they do, Revelation is the last place they would consider referring to. It’s sad, because without that, they don’t even know he is knocking.Such interesting things as properly applying metaphor are to be found in His superior word. And so, let us turn to that precious word once again, and… May God speak to us through His word today, and may His glorious name ever be praised.

I. My Dove, My Perfect (verses 1-3)

The words of this first verse are stated by Solomon, responding to the words of his beloved that closed out Chapter 4 –

The beloved:
Fountain gardens,
Well waters – living,
And gushings from Lebanon.
16 Awake, north!
And go, south!
Puff my garden,
Gushes its fragrances.
Come, my beloved, to his garden,
And eat fruit – his preciousnesses.

Solomon:
Came to my garden, my sister – completer.
Plucked my myrrh with my fragrance.
Eaten my forest with my honey.
Drank my wine with my milk.

Eat friends!
Drink and intoxicate, lovers!

Understanding this structure, let’s evaluate the words individually with that in mind…

I have come to my garden, my sister, my spouse;

bathi l’gani akhothi khalah – “Came to my garden, my sister – completer.” In the previous chapter, she had said, “Come, my beloved, to his garden.” She offered herself to him. He came to her as she implored, enjoyed what she provided, and is now recounting his experience.

As seen in Chapter 4, he called her his sister three times. This identifies her nature. She is a member of the same people, nation, etc.

Also, five times in Chapter 4, he called her his kalah, his completer. He uses that term for the sixth and last time in the book here. She is his completer, and she has made him complete. With that understood, he explains his time with her…

1 (con’t) I have gathered my myrrh with my spice;

Rather, he states more strongly: arithi mori im b’sami – “Plucked my myrrh with my fragrance.” His beloved’s fragrances were seen in Chapter 4. He only mentions myrrh by name here, maybe as a catchall for the whole list.

As for its meaning, mor, myrrh, signifies bitterness, but it symbolizes love. More especially, however, love in intimate union, but not necessarily sexual in nature.

As for the action of plucking, the word arah, to pluck, is found only here and in Psalm 80 –

“Why have You broken down her hedges,
So that all who pass by the way pluck [arah] her fruit?
13 The boar out of the woods uproots it,
And the wild beast of the field devours it.” Psalm 80:12, 13

He is describing his union with his beloved almost forcefully, as if he plucked the fragrances right off of her. As it is in the garden, it is as if he took the fragrant flowers and broke them off in a passion. The reason for the hungrily-stated words seems rightly reflected by Keil –

“The road by which Solomon reached this full and entire possession was not short, and especially for his longing it was a lengthened one. He now triumphs in the final enjoyment which his ardent desire had found.” Keil

He had longed for the union but had to wait for it to come about. When the time came, he could no longer restrain himself. Next…

1 (con’t) I have eaten my honeycomb with my honey;

akhalti yari im divshi – “Eaten my forest with my honey.” The word ya’ar means to thicken with verdure, as a forest, and this is how it is elsewhere translated. However, it doesn’t seem to make sense to say he ate his forest.

Because of this, the thought by scholars is that the honeycomb must be what is referred to as if the comb is hived in trees. That seems to stretch the intent. Rather, verse 4:11 said, “Honey and milk under your tongue.” Verse 4:13 noted the shoots of the garden, which included the pomegranates.

He is going back to those verses and equating her loving assets to a forest. Its fruit, which the forest stands as representative, is what he has hungrily eaten along with the honey. That would mean kissing her and receiving the transfer of honey through the kisses.

As for devash, honey, it is equated to the word of God several times in Scripture. He is describing their union as a trip through her garden, (meaning her) because she was a “garden locked” in verse 4:12. He has unlocked her for himself and is describing the experience. Next…

1 (con’t) I have drunk my wine with my milk.

shathithi yeni im khalavi – “Drank my wine with my milk.” The word yayin, wine, comes from an unused root meaning to effervesce. Thus it is fermented wine, an intoxicant. He is essentially saying he is love drunk.

The word khalav, milk, comes from khelev, fat. It is used to describe the richest or choicest part. As such, he is love drunk over partaking of her assets. The experience was that memorable to him.

The two, wine and milk, are found together again in Isaiah 55 –

“Ho! Everyone who thirsts,
Come to the waters;
And you who have no money,
Come, buy and eat.
Yes, come, buy wine and milk
Without money and without price.” Isaiah 55:1

After speaking of his memorable moment, he next addresses his hearers…

1 (con’t) Eat, O friends!
Drink, yes, drink deeply,
O beloved ones!

The verbs are imperative and plural: ikhlu reim shethu v’shikhru dodim –

“Eat friends!
Drink and intoxicate, lovers!”

Solomon is so overwhelmed with the experience that he wants everybody to feel the way he does. He essentially shouts out to them (Don’t miss the opportunity!) to experience what he has just gone through. He is telling them to make a meal and a banqueting feast out of their own lovers.

The verb shakhar signifies to become tipsy through satiating oneself via stimulating drink. He wants his hearers, called friends and lovers, to experience love so strongly and deeply that they become as intoxicated as if they each drank their own bottle of Old Rip Van Winkle.

The words now close the third major part of the song. The previous parts ended at 2:7 and 3:5. From here, a new direction takes place.

2 I sleep, but my heart is awake;

ani y’shenah v’libi er – “I asleep, and my heart awaking.” The words are like the words of 3:1-4. There, she was dreaming of going out to find her beloved. Here, she appears to describe dreaming once again, and is recounting the dream’s contents.

She is lying down and asleep, but her heart starts stirring. The verb is a participle, awaking. She is describing the stirring of her heart because of something. It is calling her to also wake up…

2 (con’t) It is the voice of my beloved!

qol dodi – “Voice my beloved!” This is what has stirred her from her slumber. She hears his voice as he calls to her…

2 (con’t) He knocks, saying,

Rather, it is an abrupt stand-alone thought, stated with a participle: Dopheq – “Knocking.” It is what you would expect from a poetically expressed dream. The word calls for the mind to join in the moment, “Do you hear it? Knocking…”

The act of knocking is an appeal to the heart, just as are his coming words. That is why she said her heart was awaking. In the Bible, the heart is used metaphorically when referring to the inner person, the mind, the intellect, the will, etc. He is making an appeal to her heart, her seat of reason, speaking while knocking.

Next, the hurriedness of her beloved is expressed. She hasn’t responded and yet he calls out, certainly while still knocking…

2 (con’t)  “Open for me, my sister, my love,
My dove, my perfect one;

pithkhi li akhothi rayathi yonathi thamathi –

“Open to me, my sister, my querida,
My dove, my perfect.”

His excitedly expressed words are as if he is in pain at not seeing her. He can’t wait to be with her, and so he practically bribes her to open up with his alluring words. To make his request even more urgent, he next says…

2 (con’t) For my head is covered with dew,
My locks with the drops of the night.”

sheroshi nimla tal q’vutsothay r’sisey lay’lah –

“That my head filled – dew,
My locks – drops, night.”

His words attempt to convince her to open up and let him in. The alluring words are mixed with words of distress accompanied by knocking. They form a hopefully irresistible appeal to her heart to mercifully let him in to dry off and see his querida.

As for his locks, the word is found only here and in verse 11, qevutstsoth, coming from quts, to spend the harvest season, but that is from a primitive root signifying to clip off. It is this root that defines them as locks. He is speaking in parallelism. His head is filled with dew, and his locks are soaked in the night drops.

These drops are also another new and rare word, rasiys, coming from rasas, to moisten. That, in turn, comes from another primitive root that signifies to comminute (crush, grind, mill, pound, pulverize, triturate, etc.). It is as if the moisture in the sky has broken down into small particles of dew. These have completely covered his head.

He might get a sniffle! Let him in! But she, certainly disappointing him, says…

3 I have taken off my robe;
How can I put it on again?

pashat’ti eth kutan’ti eikhakhah elbashenah –

“Stripped my robe.
How don it?”

In this dream, she is thinking about her life before becoming a princess. She has one robe that she has removed before getting into bed. The meaning is, then, that she is in bed. To don her robe would only lead to another problem…

3 (con’t) I have washed my feet;
How can I defile them?

rakhats’ti eth raglay eikhkhah atan’phem –

“Washed my feet.
How soil them?”

She uses the word found only this one time in the Bible, tanaph, to soil. To get to her robe, she would have to get out of bed. But before going to bed, she would have lifted her feet and washed them to keep the bed from being dirtied. She probably had one pair of sandals that she kept by the door for walking around outside. But inside, she didn’t have a second pair for walking around.

This is what necessitated washing her feet. The floor was probably nothing more than stamped dirt. Getting up would defile her feet, demanding her to redo the whole process before going to bed again.

The excuses are weak, but she is following the advice that she has, and will again, express to the daughters of Jerusalem about not rushing love.

In a curiosity of the Hebrew, the word feet is a feminine noun, but the word translated as “soil them” is masculine. It would be like she was saying of her feet, “I have washed my girls, how can I soil my boys?” Despite her protestations, he is determined to obtain his goal. Therefore, he will act further to convince her…

Seek the Lord while He may be found
Respond to the call that He makes
When you hear that knocking sound
Be sure to respond, whatever it takes

When it means setting aside your pride
That is what you must do
If you want to be on the Lord’s side
Then do what He expects of you.

He is knocking on the door of your heart
Asking you to begin a new way
Put away the old and make a new start
Don’t delay the decision another day.

II. My Soul Went Out (verses 4-8)

4 My beloved put his hand
By the latch of the door,

dodi shalakh yado min ha’khor – “My beloved sent his hand from the hole.” It is debated what the meaning of the hole is. It would not be a hole to unlatch the door, as that would defeat the purpose of latching it. It may have been something like our mail slot, where someone could drop something off or pass something through without the need to open the door.

Regardless, the intent of sending his hand from the hole seems to be urging her further. Not only has he knocked, wooed, and sought for sympathy, but he put his hand through this hole, either making a grasping motion, as in, “Come here, I need you,” or a waving motion, as in, “Come on, come on, come on,” imploring her to respond.

The poor guy is like a buck in rut, beside himself with love and yearning to be with her. But she also admits that of herself…

4 (con’t) And my heart yearned for him.

Rather: u-meai hamu alav – “And my innards clamored upon him.” The word meeh signifies the bowels, intestines, etc. It is plural here. Translating it as heart blows the symbolism. Likewise, the word hamah signifies to make a loud sound like our English word hum.

She is saying that she feels sorry for him because of his many, fervent appeals. It may go further, though, to the point that she is also churning inside for him, but she has more restraint than he does. At least for a moment or two.

However, she finally acquiesces to his appeals, not being able to bear the thought of him out there while she is inside. And so, she dirties her feet and (well, maybe) puts on her robe…

5 I arose to open for my beloved,

qamti ani liphtoakh l’dodi – “Arose, I, to open to my beloved.” Breaking down from the strain, she arises, gets her feet dirty, and heads to the door. She has decided to let him in…

5 (con’t) And my hands dripped with myrrh,

v’yadai nat’phu mor – “And my hands dripped myrrh.” She gets to the door and finds that her hands have myrrh all over them. It appears that when he put his hand through, he not only beckoned to her, but he also took a vial of myrrh and shook it all around through the hole, maybe attempting to lure her to come.

It may even be why she came to the door. The smell became irresistible. To accentuate and explain the matter, she next says…

5 (con’t) My fingers with liquid myrrh,

Rather: v’etsb’othay mor over – “And my fingers myrrh passing over.” The verb avar means to cross over or pass over. Here, it is a participle, passing over. It doesn’t mean liquid, flowing, choice, sweet smelling, or any of the innumerable attempts to explain what is being said.

It means that the myrrh was on the other side of the door, and then passed over to her side. The use of the participle tells us that it was his and was passing over to become hers, an anointing from her beloved. When he did this, it dripped…

5 (con’t) On the handles of the lock.

Rather: al kapoth ha’man’ul – “Upon palms the bolt.” Like door bolts today, this one would have flat protrusions, looking like palms, that you would grab and pull to unlock the door. His hand came in through the hole which was above the bolt. He knew this and shook out the myrrh all over it.

Even if she didn’t get up to open the door right away, eventually she would, and her hands would be anointed with the myrrh. The use of the word palms to describe the handles is a nice touch to assist in forming parallelism in all three clauses. The word myrrh, though not stated, is implied in the third clause –

And my hands dripped myrrh.
And my fingers myrrh crossing over.
(From myrrh) Upon palms the bolt.

Having grabbed the palms and unfastened the bolt…

6 I opened for my beloved,
But my beloved had turned away and was gone.

pathakhthi ani l’dodi v’dodi khamaq avar –

“Opened, I, to my beloved,
And my beloved wrapped – passed over.”

As is typical in a dream, in opening the door for him, her heart sank. Thus, she uses words appropriate to the situation. First, the word khamaq, is rare, being found only here and in Jeremiah 31:22.

It comes from a primitive root meaning to wrap. As such, it means to be gone from sight, just as when something is wrapped, it is no longer in sight. Thus, an understandable paraphrase might be “My beloved was gone from sight.”

That is supplemented with the word avar, passed over. His hands had passed over from the other side of the door to anoint her lock. Now he has passed over from her presence.

The moment when the two were close enough to touch had passed, and he was no longer there to join her. As such, she calls to mind what prompted her to get up and go to the door…

6 (con’t) My heart leaped up when he spoke.

Rather: naphshi yats’ah v’dab’ro – “My soul went out in his speaking.” The meaning is that his words cut her soul from her. First, it was as if she went through the hole in her door to be with him. When she could no longer stand it, she was then compelled to actually go to the door and be with him. However, she now returns to the reality of the situation in her dream…

6 (con’t) I sought him, but I could not find him;

biqashtihu v’lo m’tsatihu – “Sought him, and no found him.” The Hebrew is almost identical to the corresponding clause in verse 3:2, while the English translation is identical. In her dream world, she has failed in her endeavor.

She looked, but he elusively remained out of her sight. It is a common situation in such dreams or dreamlike states. In this case, her efforts are intensified by new words…

6 (con’t) I called him, but he gave me no answer.

q’rativ v’lo anani – “Called him, and no answered me.” I have a dog a lot like this. Pi Shnai is a little son of a gun at times. He will take off for the hills when you least expect it. And so out we go, calling. He doesn’t respond. I can sympathize with this lady. It is frustrating to seek and to not find. With her seeking and calling, she wound up running into a bit of trouble…

7 The watchmen who went about the city found me.

She uses verbs to explain to those she encountered: m’tsauni ha’shom’rim ha’shov’vim bair – “Found me, the guardings, the ‘compassings in the city.’” The words are letter for letter identical to the corresponding words of 3:3.

While going throughout the city, those who guard it, regularly compassing it while looking for miscreants, found her. She had done her search and come up with nothing. However, unlike the dream in Chapter 3 where she inquired of them without incident, this time, there is trouble…

7 (con’t) They struck me, they wounded me;

hikuni p’tsauni – “Struck me. Wounded me.” It doesn’t say why they did this to her. Maybe they just got sick of being repetitively stuck in her dreams… probably not. They may have thought she was out doing evil as a woman alone might. No matter what, they treated her shamefully and with contempt. That is highlighted in the next words…

7 (con’t) The keepers of the walls
Took my veil away from me.

The NKJV reverses the clauses, confusing the tempo and balance of her words: nas’u eth r’didi mealay shom’rei ha’kohm’oth – “Lifted my shawl from upon me, keepers the walls.” This is the first of two uses of the word radid. The other will be in Isaiah 3:23. It is derived from radad, to tread in pieces. As such, it is something that spreads out. It is most likely a shawl that can be spread out to cover the head when needed. The dew of the night is probably why she had it with her.

Due to the violence of the previous clause, it appears likely that they just grabbed it and tore it right off of her. That may have been her chance to escape, as often happens in dreams. Now, she has something to share with the women…

8 I charge you, O daughters of Jerusalem,

hishbati etkhem b’noth y’rushalim – “Adjured you, daughters Jerusalem.” The words are identical to the corresponding clauses in 2:7 and 3:5. However, the adjuration this time is a bit different than the previous two times. She is calling upon them to avow that…

8 (con’t) If you find my beloved,
That you tell him

Rather, it appears she is asking a question and then giving the answer: im timts’u eth dodi mah tagidu lo –

“If find my beloved,
What declare to him?”

The word mah, what, is an interrogative. Her adjuration is two-fold. The first part is if they find him, they are to do something. She then pauses and ponders how she should direct them, asking what she should say and, thus, in turn, what they should say. That is the second half of the adjuration. They are to tell him…

*8 (fin) I am lovesick!

shekholath ahavah ani – “That rubbing love, I.” It is the same word, khalah, to be rubbed or worn, that she used in verse 2:5 –

“Prop me in the pressed-cakes,
Spread me in the apples,
For rubbing love – I.”

The use of the participle signifies her state: she is being worn down by the love she feels. She has ongoing lovesickness that tears at her. She wants nothing more than for him to return so that she can have what she previously refused.

It appears that this verse transitions from the dream to reality. Whether this is a part of the dream, or whether it is expressed to the daughters after telling them the dream is hard to know. Either way, the verses ahead are similar to others that have already been seen as she describes her beloved to the daughters.

As for the contents of the verses today, verse 1 closed out the previous thought. Its words refer to the consummation of the love between them. All of the things he previously described, and which he was so attracted to, were offered to him. He accepted, and the union was realized.

This is how it is with the Lord and His church. The things that He sees of value in us are the things we have offered to Him. At some point, there will be a uniting of the two, the Lord and His completer.

As was seen in previous sermons, the times when others are spoken to in the plural may have a dual meaning. There is the single body represented by the many redeemed. As such, the citation of Isaiah 55:1 would make sense. It is an invitation to come and participate freely in what the Lord offers. Solomon implored his friends to eat, drink, and intoxicate in the love of God found in Christ.

After that, the words returned to Solomon’s beloved as she described her dream about his coming. The words are similar enough to Chapter 3 to tell us that a lesson concerning our relationship with the Lord is being spoken of.

It is certain this is a dream because she knows it is her beloved and yet she rejects him. She is relaying what it would be like if she actually rejected his advances.

The woman is sleeping but her heart is awakening at the voice of the Lord. There He is, knocking. This is to be taken with the same symbolism as Revelation 3:20. He is “knocking on her heart,” her intellect and seat of reasoning.

He implores her to open, speaks terms of endearment, and gives more reasons why she should let Him in. He has gone out of his way to be with her, and yet, she hesitates and gives weak excuses for why she is inconvenienced to respond.

The gender discord in verse 4 (where the feet are referred to in the feminine and then the masculine) can be explained by the fact that feet in Hebrew are feminine, but in Greek they are masculine. Peter at first refused to allow the Lord to wash his feet.

However, when he heard he had no part with Him if he didn’t, he yielded to the Lord, allowing Him to do so. It is the Lord who sanctifies His people. The woman has indicated in her dream that she has washed her feet, so she doesn’t desire to come to the door and let Him in.

After that, He put his hand through the hole and put myrrh on the bolt. As noted, the prominent idea of myrrh speaks of bitterness but symbolizes love. More especially, however, love in intimate union, but not necessarily sexual in nature.

The Lord continues to coax her and she finally goes to open the door. There comes a time, however, when the Lord will depart. He had gone away, she sought Him, but she did not find him. But the city guards found her, struck her, wounded her, and removed her shawl from her.

She understands the consequences of rejecting His advances. This forms a warning to those who have received the advances of the Lord. Maybe they heard the gospel on the radio, were invited to a church, or were handed a tract.

There is a smugness in humans. We believe we can do it on our own. We always want to add ourselves into the equation when it comes to being right with God. However, people will find out when it is too late that the Lord can no longer be found.

For her, this is only a dream, just as in Chapter 3. But it conveys truths concerning the “Song the songs.” When the Lord calls, we are under obligation to respond. Like the dream in Chapter 3, both accounts speak of free will. Let us use that will and respond to this call.

This is the greatest of all love songs because it speaks of the mutual love found between God and His people, made possible through the giving of His Son. The fact that people are given the choice to respond to the call makes this true love, not something forced apart from their will.

This is what God is looking for in His people: faith. God has extended Himself for us. Let us be faithful to accept His call.

Closing Verse: “Seek the Lord while He may be found,
Call upon Him while He is near.” Isaiah 55:6

Next Week: Song of Songs 5:9-16 Love cannot be forced or shoved, but to it, we must attend… (This My Beloved, This My Friend) (13th Song of Songs sermon)

The Lord has you exactly where He wants you. He has a good plan and purpose for you. He alone is the perfect example of love – untarnished, unblemished, and completely pure and holy. He offers this love to you. So, follow Him, live for Him, and trust Him, and He will do marvelous things for you and through you.

Song of Songs 5:1-8 (CG)

5 Came to my garden, my sister – completer.
Plucked my myrrh with my fragrance.
Eaten my forest with my honey.
Drank my wine with my milk.

Eat friends!
Drink and intoxicate, lovers!

2 I asleep, and my heart awaking,
Voice my beloved!

Knocking –

“Open to me, my sister, my querida,
My dove, my perfect –
That my head filled – dew,
My locks – drops, night.”

3 Stripped my robe.
How don it?
Washed my feet.
How soil them?

4 My beloved sent his hand from the hole,
And my innards clamored upon him.
5 Arose, I, to open to my beloved,
And my hands dripped myrrh.
And my fingers myrrh crossing over,
Upon palms the bolt.

6 Opened, I, to my beloved,
And my beloved wrapped – passed over.
My soul went out in his speaking.
Sought him, and no found him.
Called him, and no answered me.
7 Found me, the guardings, the ‘compassings in the city.’
Struck me. Wounded me.
Lifted my shawl from upon me, keepers the walls.

8 Adjured you, daughters Jerusalem,
If find my beloved,
What declare to him?
That rubbing love, I.

 

Song of Songs 5:1-8 (NKJV)

I have come to my garden, my sister, my spouse;
I have gathered my myrrh with my spice;
I have eaten my honeycomb with my honey;
I have drunk my wine with my milk.

Eat, O friends!
Drink, yes, drink deeply,
O beloved ones!

2 I sleep, but my heart is awake;
It is the voice of my beloved!
He knocks, saying,
“Open for me, my sister, my love,
My dove, my perfect one;
For my head is covered with dew,
My locks with the drops of the night.”

3 I have taken off my robe;
How can I put it on again?
I have washed my feet;
How can I defile them?
4 My beloved put his hand
By the latch of the door,
And my heart yearned for him.
5 I arose to open for my beloved,
And my hands dripped with myrrh,
My fingers with liquid myrrh,
On the handles of the lock.

6 I opened for my beloved,
But my beloved had turned away and was gone.
My heart leaped up when he spoke.
I sought him, but I could not find him;
I called him, but he gave me no answer.
7 The watchmen who went about the city found me.
They struck me, they wounded me;
The keepers of the walls
Took my veil away from me.
8 I charge you, O daughters of Jerusalem,
If you find my beloved,
That you tell him I am lovesick!

 

 

Matthew 9:28

Charlie Garrett Daily Writing, Matthew (Written)

Sunday, 27 April 2025

And when He had come into the house, the blind men came to Him. And Jesus said to them, “Do you believe that I am able to do this?”
They said to Him, “Yes, Lord.” Matthew 9:28

Note: You can listen to today’s commentary courtesy of our friends at “Bible in Ten” podcast. (click here to listen).

You can also read this commentary, scrolling with music, courtesy of our friends at “Discern the Bible” on YouTube. (Click Here to listen), or at Rumble (Click Here to listen).

“And having come into the house, they came to Him – the blind – and Jesus, He says to them, ‘You believe that I can do this?’ They say to Him, ‘Yes, Lord’” (CG).

In the previous verse, Jesus departed from the ruler’s house, and two blind men followed Him, crying out for mercy upon them. Now, the narrative continues with, “And having come into the house, they came to Him – the blind.”

It doesn’t say what house He went into, but the use of the definite article means it is a particular house. Verse 10 of this chapter mentions a house, but it doesn’t say which. But going back to the previous chapter, verse 8:14 specifically notes Peter’s house. So this may be the house being referred to.

Either way, it doesn’t say why He didn’t just stop and turn to them as they followed Him. But it may be that He wanted His next actions to be in a private setting. Therefore, now in the house with the two blind men there, it next says, “and Jesus, He says to them, ‘You believe that I can do this?’”

What seems apparent is that they did believe. Calling out to Jesus for Him to have mercy on them means they understood His capabilities. Continuing to follow Him in a blind state, even to the house He was staying in, demonstrated this as well. Therefore, the question is probably for faith-building.

Such questions span human history and innumerable circumstances. A question like this might be asked by a gym coach to spur on an already-capable student, “Are you really sure you can do this?” “Yes, I am confident I can.”

Jesus wants them mentally prepared for what He certainly already intends to do. Therefore, the question is asked. And as anticipated, “They say to Him, ‘Yes, Lord.’”

They already knew this, but their own words have testified to Him and also encouraged their own faith. They are prepared for what lies ahead…

Life application: Innumerable books have been written about confidence-building. Seminars are held on the subject. People living in clamshells are spurred on to break free and live an emboldened life.

These things are common to human nature, and different levels of confidence exist in all of us. Some of us may be fully confident in one matter and yet totally reluctant to act in another. There is nothing wrong with this. Those who are overconfident will often cause more trouble than their confidence supports.

For example, a person may be so sure of himself that he decides to tear out his wall and fix a leaky pipe by himself. In doing so, he forgets that he doesn’t know everything about the entire process of hydraulics or maybe structural engineering, or even the nuances of electrical wiring.

Without understanding the whole process, he may bust the pipe while under pressure and cause tens of thousands of dollars of water damage. Or he may cause a wall to collapse or otherwise be so damaged that he will need a crew of specialists to fix it. Or he may need a coffin because he didn’t think about live wiring while standing in a pool of water that had dripped on the floor.

After a short adventure of hair standing on its end, he collapses like a bunch of broccoli, never to rise again. Thus, it is good not to be overly confident. And yet, when things are lined up properly and the outcome appears certain, we shouldn’t hesitate to act.

It is true that there may be some small point that was overlooked that may end in a negative outcome, but this is what the clam dwellers fear to the point of complete inability to act. There needs to be a point where we will allow for error if the outcome has a high enough probability of success.

At the same time, we need to be willing to accept the results of defeat without becoming so stressed that we allow it to shape the rest of our lives. Where the balance in such situations is will be hard to determine at times, but that is where prayer comes in.

We have access to the Creator of all things. And so, if we have things set to the highest probability of success and are still reticent, we should have already prayed that the Lord will be with us through the process. If there is failure, we can accept that He allowed it for His purposes. This is true if we really believe in God’s unlimited wisdom and power and the power of prayer that He has allowed us, as explained in His word.

We have what no other people on the planet have, absolute and certain access to the throne of grace, where we can go in times of need. Let us use this most important tool as we move forward in life from decision to decision.

Lord God, help us to be people of prayer as we walk in Your presence. From moment to moment, may our existence be filled with communication with You to help us as we continue this path through life. We know that You are as close to us as the spoken breath we utter for our needs, thanks, and praises. Thank You for this knowledge. Amen.