Song of Songs 2:1-7 (His Banner Upon Me – Love)

Artwork by Douglas Kallerson

Song of Songs 2:1-7
His Banner Upon Me – Love

(Typed 9 December 2024) In 2019, I got to go on quite an adventure with two friends, Sergio and Yosi. They were both living in Israel at the time and were planning to hike from Jericho to Jerusalem, filming the adventure as they went.

When I heard what they were planning, I asked if I could join them. Sergio didn’t believe I was serious, knowing I am not one to take time off, especially for traveling. When I convinced him I was serious, he figured out the timing of the walk, let me know, and got things in order.

I had to prepare as well. First, my passport needed to be updated. Then I had to complete and schedule work in advance so that it would be posted while I was gone, and I decided to do so without letting anyone know that I was going. I would be gone for three days. For those who asked, I said I was going to Boston. It was true, just not the whole truth as it was my port of departure from the US.

My son and his girlfriend (now wife) drove me to Miami to get a passport. They never asked why I needed a passport. When I arrived in Israel, we got things together and left early in the morning from Nazareth to get to our starting point for the walk.

Though we prepared for the walk, we were actually unprepared for it…

Text Verse: “The Lord is your keeper;
The Lord is your shade [tsel] at your right hand.
The sun shall not strike you by day,
Nor the moon by night.” Psalm 121:5, 6

That walk is one of the highlights of my life. There were so many things along the way that we could tie into our understanding of Scripture, both in the physical landscape as it is described in the Bible as well as in the metaphors that the Bible uses concerning various things we interacted with.

For example, because of an error in planning, we ran short of water. Dangerously short. Despite the difficulties we faced, this led to a much greater appreciation for what the Bible tells about water, such as Jesus’ words concerning “living water.”

Another metaphor that was applicable is derived from the word tsel, shadow or shade. As in the text verse, it is used to describe a protection, a defense, etc.

At one point in our walk, we were so utterly exhausted we needed to stop. Fortunately, one of us was smart enough to bring an Arab keffiyeh, the large cloth headdress that is worn by the various desert tribes with colors or patterns that reflect their tribal identity.

That fortunate soul was able to sit in the open sun and not be overheated while he rested. The other two, however, only had broad hats that covered their heads to some extent but not much else. The spot we had to stop was completely exposed to the sun, with the exception of one 6-8-inch outcropping in the side of a cliff.

And so, while I sat on a post in the open sun, almost unaffected by the heat, the other two stood under this tiny slice of shade, resting and being protected by its defense. But they were standing while I sat

We learned what the Bible meant about shade in a very real and personal way along that walk. But that moment is etched in my mind as the prime example of it ever since. The Lord is our Shade. And He is so much more to those who have placed themselves under His protective care.

Such great truths as this 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. Sweet to My Palate (verses 1-3)

As Chapter 1 ended, the lovers were on a green field with trees above and around them. Whether that scene has ended or not isn’t stated. They may still be in that field, or this may be a new encounter between them. Either way, in verse 1:15, the beloved had said to her –

“Behold you! Beautiful, my querida,
Behold you! Beautiful!
Your eyes – doves.”

What appears to be a tacit denial of that, or at least a humble moderating of it, she next says…

am the rose of Sharon,

ani khavatseleth ha’sharon – “I wildflower the Sharon.” This location, the Sharon, is probably the area known as Sharon, which is along the Mediterranean coast between Joppa and Mount Carmel. There is another area known as the Sharon in 1 Chronicles 5:16 where the Gadites dwelt. Thus, it is an area across the Jordan.

Rather than Sharon, however, some translations say “the field” or “the plain.” This is because Sharon comes from yashar, to be straight, level, even, etc. As such it may simply be she is saying, “I am just an ordinary flower in the open plain,” or “I am like a wildflower in the open plain.”

As for the flower itself, it is a word seen only here and in Isaiah 35:1, khavatstseleth, a word of uncertain origin. Some translations say rose, crocus, etc.

Some translations simply punt and say flower. However, other words in the Bible translate as a flower, so that isn’t preferred. As the identity isn’t known, saying “wildflower” provides a sort of catchall. That would be suitable to Isaiah 35:1 as well –

(Certainly) rejoices, wilderness and desert,
And shall twirl Aravah and blossom according to the wildflower. (CG)

As such, she may be saying she is merely a wildflower among many wildflowers. She may have loveliness, but it doesn’t stand above any other. She continues with…

1 (con’t) And the lily of the valleys.

Rather: shoshanath ha’amaqim – “Lily the vales.” She uses no article before lily. She is simply a lily among the lilies that are found in the many vales of Israel. She may be beautiful, but not more than any of the others.

As for the flower, lilies are mentioned eight times in this book. They are also noted in 1 Kings and 2 Chronicles when describing the flowery decorations in the temple and the shape of the Bronze Sea there as well. They are also noted in the headings of some of the Psalms. Last, they are mentioned once in Hosea.

In Song of Songs 5:13, she will equate his lips with lilies, thus identifying them as red. Some, therefore, identify this as the anemone coronaria, a type of flower with various colors, including red. Though it’s not a true lily, this is a possible description of it. With her statement made, her lover accepts but elevates the description…

Like a lily among thorns,

k’shoshanah ben ha’khokhim – “According to lily between the thorns.” He is essentially saying, “Yes, you may be a lily, but you stand alone among thorns.” Her radiant beauty is thus highlighted and set in complete contrast to those around her. The metaphor is next explained…

2 (con’t) So is my love among the daughters.

ken rayati ben ha’banoth – “Thus, my querida between the daughters.” All of the other women among whom she dwells are nothing but lowly, irksome, and painful compared to her. She is beautiful and filled with grace in comparison to them.

Her attempts at humble modesty have been overridden by his expressive words of compliment and exaltation. Next, she speaks in what Delitzsch says is a “contest of mutually eulogistic love”…

Like an apple tree among the trees of the woods,

k’tapuakh baatse ha’yaar – “According to apple in trees the forest.” She makes a similar type of metaphor just used of her and applies it to him. In a forest are many trees, but the apple will stand out when it is in blossom. All the other trees will go out of focus when one encounters a blooming apple tree.

Likewise, when it has fruit, it stands out from all the others. They are merely shades of green among the green. But the apple will be highlighted with its colorful fruit.

As for the tappuakh, apple, what type is unknown. It could actually be a quince, an orange, or some other tree. And even if not native to Israel, they go all the way back to at least the time of Joshua. In Joshua 12:17, it notes the king of Tappuakh. The location was named for the apple, and so he may have been the first to grow it domestically, or it was a place known for cultivating them.

The word comes from naphakh, to puff, breathe, blow, etc. Therefore, the tree is named for its fragrance. It is not only because of its flower and fruit, but its wonderful fragrance is another way that it stands out from the other trees. Like his words to her, this high compliment is next given as a comparison…

3 (con’t) So is my beloved among the sons.

ken dodi ben ha’banim – “Thus, my beloved between the sons.” As she is like a lily among thorns, meaning daughters, he is like an apple tree among the other trees, meaning sons.

Without trying to insert too much into the symbolism, for example, Israel or the church, but rather keeping things simple concerning the “Song the songs,” an apt comparison would be the relationship between the Lord and His redeemed at any given time.

God looks at His redeemed with delight and as people noticeable above all others. Likewise, His people understand Him in a similar fashion. Moses’ words of Exodus 15 are a clear match to the thought presented here –

“Who is like You, O Lord, among the gods?
Who is like You, glorious in holiness,
Fearful in praises, doing wonders?” Exodus 15:11

Even if there are so-called “gods” among the nations, the Lord stands out above them all because He is the one true God, the one loved by His people. As for the words of the woman, she continues with…

3 (con’t) I sat down in his shade with great delight,

The words are simpler: b’tsilo khimadti v’yashavti – “In his shade delighted and dwelt.” The metaphor of him being an apple tree continues here. Of all the trees, she has chosen him to sit under.

The word yashav means to sit, but that is more often than not a metaphor for dwelling. As such, she is saying that she delightedly accepts his protection and places herself under it as her covering. As noted in the introduction, this is quite often how the tsel, or shade, is portrayed in Scripture, such as –

“He who dwells in the secret place of the Most High
Shall abide under the shadow [tsel] of the Almighty.” Psalm 91:1

&

“For wisdom is a defense [tselas money is a defense [tsel],
But the excellence of knowledge is that wisdom gives life to those who have it.” Ecclesiastes 7:12

These and other references give a sense of what she is saying. He is her beloved, and she is utterly delighted to reside with him as he provides protection and safety for her. She next says…

3 (con’t) And his fruit was sweet to my taste.

uphiryo matoq l’khiki – “And his fruit sweet to my palate.” The fruit from the apple tree delights her palate, and thus, she has come to dwell under it in his protection. As for fruit, besides the literal meaning of that which is produced by fruit-bearing plants, it has numerous metaphorical meanings.

It speaks of offspring, such as the fruit of the womb. It refers to a reward, such as the fruit of the righteous. It speaks of works, good or bad, such as the fruit of one’s labors. It also refers to the words of a person, as in the fruit of one’s mouth.

Each of these gives the sense of that which is produced by someone or something, but it identifies the nature of the source. The nature of a parent (for example, a human) can be deduced by looking at a human child. The nature of a workman can be determined by the quality of the work he puts forth.

One does not need to see the source to know what it is. One can look at an apple and say, “That came from an apple tree.” In this case, she knows both the tree and its fruit, but she intimately knows the nature of the tree because of its fruit.

To look upon the cross of Christ
And consider what God has done
What a cost for which my soul was priced
The life of my Savior, God’s own Son

To redeem me back from the devil’s power
To set me on high where angels trod
His final cry, that terrible hour
The life of my Savior, the Son of God

 What is the value you see in us?
How can it be that this You have done?
That You would send for us the Lord Jesus
To die on the cross, Your precious Son?

II. His Right Hand Embraces Me (verses 4-7)

He brought me to the banqueting house,

heviani el beith ha’yayin – “Brought me unto house the wine.” There are various suggestions as to what “house the wine” is referring to. Some think it is a place known for its wine. Others, as seen in this translation, say it is a banqueting house.

However, she has been speaking in metaphor, and so it seems that continues here. Wine in Scripture represents our reasoning and that which can change our minds. A perfect example of this is found in Jesus’ words of Matthew 9 –

“Nor do they put new wine into old wineskins, or else the wineskins break, the wine is spilled, and the wineskins are ruined. But they put new wine into new wineskins, and both are preserved.” Matthew 9:17

Jesus was speaking of the law and grace. The new wine is the new dispensation of grace to come. The old wine was the dispensation of the law. If one introduced the new concept into the old, it would not work because the two are incompatible.

Only if the new wine is put into the new wineskin (the new dispensation) is the mind able to be changed. Therefore, her metaphor likely means that he has brought her to a place where her reasoning will be matched with his. She will be overcome, as if intoxicated, with the intentions for him that he has for her.

The daughters of Lot used wine to effect their intentions upon their father. They essentially brought him into “house the wine.” In Deuteronomy, Moses refers to Israel with the wine metaphor –

“Their wine is the poison of serpents,
And the cruel venom of cobras.” Deuteronomy 32:33

The reasoning of the people was poisonous venom, leading to their destruction. Their “house the wine” was a storage of wickedness and corruption. In the case of her lover’s reasoning, symbolized by the storage of wine from which he draws, the result towards her is…

4 (con’t) And his banner over me was love.

v’diglo alay ahavah – “And his banner upon me – love.” The word degel is used fourteen times in Scripture. The first thirteen are in Numbers when referring to the standards of the tribes of Israel. It is derived from dagal, a verb signifying being conspicuous. That word is used four times, three of which are in this book.

She is saying that what is conspicuous upon her, his banner, is love. It is on full display for all to see. Thinking of the wineskin metaphor makes this more understandable. Those who reason from the law are bannered in old wineskins. Those who reason from grace are bannered in new wineskins. His banner upon her, based on his reasoning, is love.

Next, she speaks about this state…

Sustain me with cakes of raisins,

The verbs are plural. She is not speaking to her lover but to those who hear, calling out for them to come and help her: samkhuni baashiyshoth – “Prop me (pl. you all) in the pressed-cakes.” It is as if she is swooning and will go down for the count if she isn’t propped up. With her strength gone, she needs sustenance because she is completely overcome by his love.

As for the ashiyshah, or raisin cakes, the word is derived from ashiysh, a foundation. Thus, it is something pressed down. Raisin cakes is a good guess, but it could be dates or some other treat that is pressed. It is not a flagon, as older translations state, based on an unsupportable rabbinic interpretation.

Like a diabetic who needs to get the sugar level up, she is fading fast. And so she calls out in an almost antithetical parallel thought for another possible remedy…

5 (con’t) Refresh me with apples,

rapduni batapukhim – “Spread me (pl. you all) in the apples.” The word raphad means to spread. In this case, it is used figuratively. Just as a bed is spread for one who is tired to provide relief, “Spread me in the apples” is a petition to be relieved by giving her apples.

One can see the antithesis in a direct translation. Both clauses give the sense of providing refreshment or comfort, but one is a propping up, the other is a spreading out –

Prop me in the pressed-cakes
Spread me in the apples.

The interesting imagery is lost in a normal translation. With her stimulating words of petition stated, she next explains why she needs this…

5 (con’t) For I am lovesick.

Although the translation gets the sense across, her words are more descriptive, using a verbal participle: ki kholath ahavah ani – “For rubbing love – I.” The meaning is that she is being rubbed out or worn down through her love. Without the food, there will be nothing left, as if someone took an eraser and rubbed her away.

She next explains the reason for her state of near swoon…

His left hand is under my head,

s’molo takhath l’roshi – “His left under ‘to my head.’” One can almost sense the position. He is holding her, and she, in the process of swooning, has her head back as he supports it with his left hand. She’s probably gasping in the process. Along with this tender gesture from him, she says…

6 (con’t) And his right hand embraces me.

vimiyno t’khab’qeni – “And his right embraces me.” The picture becomes even more vivid. It is as if she is standing there, fainting from the overwhelming state of being with him, and she starts falling backward.

So, he rushes his left hand up behind her to support her head while pulling her in closer with his right arm embracing her from behind. It is a scene exactingly repeated numerous times on Hollywood’s memorable celluloid presentations.

She is without strength, completely supported by his, and desperately in need of pressed-cakes and apples. The poor dear!

Some scholars and translations turn these words into a desire rather than an actual event –

“I wish that his left hand were under my head, and that his right hand were embracing me!” (ISV)

This seems contrary to the entire tone of what is being presented. And more, there is only one verb in this verse, and it is imperfect –

His left under ‘to my head,’
And his right embraces me.

She is stating things as they are, presenting facts, not as a desire. They are words of experiential knowledge, and so with this knowledge of the wonderment of his love, she calls for other women to pay heed…

I charge you, O daughters of Jerusalem,

hishbati etkhem b’noth y’rushalim – “Adjured you, daughters Jerusalem.” This is the first of four times in the book that she will call out in this manner. There is no reason to assume, as some scholars do, that these words are spoken by anyone other than the woman.

She has experienced love and wants to express her feelings about it to the other young women of Jerusalem. So she presents her words as an adjuration. It is advice to pay heed. She wants them to avoid such a sad fate.

Understanding this, she adjures them…

7 (con’t) By the gazelles or by the does of the field,

bitsvaoth o b’ayloth ha’sadeh – “In gazelles or in does the field.” The tsviy, gazelle, comes from tsavah, to amass or swell, and thus prominent. That leads also to the idea of beauty or splendor which is a prominent trait. As such, the word is used to describe the gazelle because of its graceful beauty.

The ayyalah, doe, is the feminine form of ayal, a stag. That, in turn, ultimately comes from a root signifying strength.

These are what she adjures them by. However, the difficulty of these words is not to be underestimated. In Deuteronomy 6:13 and 10:20 it says that those of Israel were to swear, shava, by the name of the Lord, implying not swearing in any other way –

“You shall fear the Lord your God and serve Him, and shall take oaths in His name.” Deuteronomy 6:13

Keil, without any biblical support, says –

“It is permitted to the Israelites to swear, נשׁבּע, only by God (Genesis 21:23); but to adjure, השׁבּיע, by that which is not God, is also admissible, although this example before us is perhaps the only direct one in Scripture.”

The lack of biblical support is probably why the Greek translation of this verse says –

“I have charged you, ye daughters of Jerusalem, by the powers and by the virtues of the field, that ye do not rouse or wake my love, until he please.”

It appears the Greek translation takes the root meanings of the animal’s names from the Hebrew, prominence and strength, and uses them as if she is applying them to the Lord. This seems to be the case, even though they have the two reversed from the Hebrew.

This is probably not the intent here because the words “of the field” still call out for something earthly. But it seems they were trying to avoid getting stuck in a theological quagmire.

What seems likely is that rather than adjuring the ladies by the gazelles and the does, as if they are the subjects, she adjures them without using any article – “in gazelles and does the field.” They are not the subject of the adjuration but an explanation of it. In essence, “You daughters of Jerusalem, I adjure you to be like gazelles or does in the field.”

Therefore, the meaning would be, “Ladies, I adjure you to be timid and wary like gazelles or does in the field in this matter.” If it was an adjuration with the animals as the subject, one would think she would say, “in the gazelles and in the does of the field.” However, this cannot be.

1) The articles are omitted, and 2) rather than and, it says or. The two clauses are not for one adjuration but are a repetitive explanation to highlight the matter.

With that, she tells them what they should be timid about…

7 (con’t) Do not stir up nor awaken love

The words are repetitive, both verbs are imperative, and the first is causative: im tairu v’im t’or’ru eth ha’ahavah – “If wakens, and if awakens the love.” Saying “stir up” gets the causative point across, but the sense of the repetition found in the Hebrew is lost. She is imploring them to be shy and timid about rushing things.

Instead, they are to be wary that they might otherwise blow something that could be memorable or miss something that could be far better than they settled for. Instead, they are not to awaken love…

*7 (fin) Until it pleases.

The words bear personification: ad shetekhpats – “Until she inclines.” It is as if love is a person that can be manipulated in a way that could be disastrous. Instead of rousing her from her sleep, imploring her to get up and get active, they should let her sleep blissfully until she decides to arouse herself and get about the business she is truly meant to accomplish.

These verses complete the first major break in the song. Three more breaks are yet ahead at 3:5, 5:1, and 8:4. In today’s verses, there lies a unique connection between the Lord and His redeemed –

I wildflower the Sharon.
Lily the vales.

The redeemed, understanding their position in the presence of the Lord, naturally feel insignificant. “I am nothing special, just another person among the billions on the planet, and yet I am here with the King.” Despite this, the Lord calls out…

According to lily between the thorns,
Thus, my querida between the daughters.

Among all of the people on the planet, your beauty is surpassing. While they are as painful thorns, you are more beautiful than all of those around you. Hence, I have focused my attention on you.

One must remember that such a statement by the Lord is not based on physical beauty but on the beauty of a soul demonstrating faith in Him and in the word that tells of Him.

According to apple in trees the forest,
Thus, my beloved between the sons,
In his shade delighted and sat,
And his fruit sweet to my palate [l’khiki].

The One who breathed [naphakh, the basis of tappuakh, apple] life into man (Genesis 2:7) is the true God. He is my Beloved among all of the “gods” of the nations.

I will rest in His shadow and dwell there all my days. His fruit, meaning the work of the Lord as displayed in the Person of Jesus Christ, which has been detailed in His word, is what I delight in –

“How sweet are Your words to my taste [l’khiki – to my palate],
Sweeter than honey to my mouth!” Psalm 119:103

Brought me unto house the wine,
And his banner upon me – love.

The Lord has brought me into His house of wine, His place of reasoning –

“‘Come now, and let us reason together,’
Says the Lord,
‘Though your sins are like scarlet,
They shall be as white as snow;
Though they are red like crimson,
They shall be as wool.’” Isaiah 1:18

In this state of mutual agreement, the banner of the Lord, His love, as evidenced in the cross of Jesus Christ and all it signifies, is made manifest.

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

The ashiyish, the foundation, is the root of the ashiyshah, the pressed-cakes. It is a poetic way of saying that we are sustained, propped up, by Christ, the Foundation of our faith (1 Corinthians 3:11).

Likewise, the breath [naphakh, the basis of tappuakh, apple], anticipating the Spirit of God, our Comforter, Helper, etc., is the confirmation that Jesus is God, that He has given us rebirth, the breath of God once again.

In the Greek translation, the word in Genesis 2:7 for when God breathed the breath of life into man is ἐνεφύσησεν/enephusesen, the same word in the same form used only once in the New Testament –

So Jesus said to them again, “Peace to you! As the Father has sent Me, I also send you.” 22 And when He had said this, He breathed [ἐνεφύσησεν: enephusesen] on them, and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. 23 If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.” John 20:21-23

This is what makes us love-sick, rubbed with love. It is the hope-filled, eager, and constant anticipation of being with Christ Jesus –

“For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men, 12 teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly in the present age, 13 looking for the blessed hope and glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ14 who gave Himself for us, that He might redeem us from every lawless deed and purify for Himself His own special people, zealous for good works.” Titus 2:11-14

His left under ‘to my head,’
And his right embraces me.

The symbolism is to be taken as the total welcoming care and protection of the Lord for His redeemed.

Adjured you, daughters Jerusalem,
In gazelles or in does the field –
If wakens and if awakens the love,
Until she inclines.

The idea here is to have one’s priorities right. We are not to fall in love with any god. The people of the world are to be on alert, wary of anything that could awaken inappropriate love in us.

Rather, we are to allow the love (agapē, noun, fem.) of God, embodied in the Person of Jesus Christ, to awaken ‘the love’ that is truly love, as John says, “for God is love [agapē, noun, fem.]” (1 John 4:8).

They are the same words as found in the Greek translation of this verse, “if you should arise and awaken the love [ten agapen: the love].” God is love. God in Christ is the embodiment of God’s love. We are being given insights into the very heart of God as He poured out His heart in the “Song the songs.”

It is all centered on what He has done through Jesus Christ. This is the reason this poem is read each year at the Passover. The time and event of the crucifixion of Christ is the pinnacle of what God has done in the stream of human existence.

The “Song the songs” tells us to look to the cross of Jesus to find our true source of love and fellowship with God once again. Nothing could be clearer than this truth as it is revealed in the pages of His Superior Word.

Closing Verse: “When I remember You on my bed,
I meditate on You in the night watches.
Because You have been my help,
Therefore in the shadow [tsel] of Your wings I will rejoice.
My soul follows close behind You;
Your right hand upholds me.” Psalm 63:6-8

Next Week: Song of Songs 2:8-17 In it, I will surely rejoice… (Cause Me to Hear Your Voice) (6th 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 2:1-7 (CG)

I wildflower the Sharon.
Lily the vales.

2 According to lily between the thorns,
Thus, my querida between the daughters.

3 According to apple in trees the forest,
Thus, my beloved between the sons,
In his shade delighted and sat,
And his fruit sweet to my palate.

4 Brought me unto house the wine,
And his banner upon me – love.
5 Prop me in the pressed cakes,
Spread me in the apples,
For rubbing love – I.
6 His left under ‘to my head,’
And his right embraces me.

7 Adjured you, daughters Jerusalem,
In gazelles or in does the field –
If wakens and if awakens the love,
Until she inclines.

 

Song of Songs 2:1-7 (NKJV)

am the rose of Sharon,
And the lily of the valleys.

Like a lily among thorns,
So is my love among the daughters.

Like an apple tree among the trees of the woods,
So is my beloved among the sons.
I sat down in his shade with great delight,
And his fruit was sweet to my taste.

He brought me to the banqueting house,
And his banner over me was love.
Sustain me with cakes of raisins,
Refresh me with apples,
For I am lovesick.

His left hand is under my head,
And his right hand embraces me.
I charge you, O daughters of Jerusalem,
By the gazelles or by the does of the field,
Do not stir up nor awaken love
Until it pleases.

Matthew 8:6

Sunday, 2 March 2025

saying, “Lord, my servant is lying at home paralyzed, dreadfully tormented.” Matthew 8:6

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 saying, ‘Lord, my servant, he has been cast in the house, paralyzed, tormenting terribly” (CG).

In the previous verse, Jesus entered Capernaum, at that time, Matthew records that a centurion came to him, pleading. Now, his reason for coming to the Lord is given, beginning with the words, “And saying, ‘Lord, my servant, he has been cast in the house.”

The word balló, to throw or cast, is used. It is a way of saying that a sickness took hold of him and cast him so that he is unable to stand against it. Further, it is a perfect participle, it was something that occurred at some point previously and continues until the present. The idea here is reflected in the words of Revelation 2 when referring to the false prophetess called Jezebel –

“And I gave her time to repent of her sexual immorality, and she did not repent. 22 Indeed I will cast her into a sickbed, and those who commit adultery with her into great tribulation, unless they repent of their deeds.” Revelation 2:21, 22

Understanding this, that which had cast the servant is next stated, he is “paralyzed, tormenting terribly.”

The word translated as tormenting basanizó signifies to torment or torture. In this case, it is a physical affliction which is a tormenting trial targeting his human physique. That is then supplemented by the word deinós, terribly. It is found only here and in Luke 11:53.

It gives the sense of being grievously or vehemently strong. The NKJV “dreadfully tormented” gets the thought across quite well. The centurion is looking for relief for one of his servants who is in agony and unable to recover.

He has turned to Jesus as a hope-filled opportunity, knowing that such an affliction would be beyond the ability of doctors to correct.

Life application: This is a fallen world where, as often as not, things don’t operate well. Sickness is a part of the human condition, and some have greater afflictions than others. In not knowing God personally through His word, people will use this fallen state to deny the existence of God, speak ill of Him (as if they are owed perfection), or claim that He is incompetent.

In John 9, we read these words –

“Now as Jesus passed by, He saw a man who was blind from birth. And His disciples asked Him, saying, ‘Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?’
Jesus answered, ‘Neither this man nor his parents sinned, but that the works of God should be revealed in him. I must work the works of Him who sent Me while it is day; the night is coming when no one can work. As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world.’” John 9:1-4

This person was born blind. That was simply his state. Whatever he thought about God and his condition, Jesus was able to cure him and reveal to the world what He is capable of doing.

It is not God who is incompetent or uncaring. The Bible tells us that God gave man idyllic perfection. However, he wanted something he was told he could not have. Even if God knew he would do this, it is not God’s fault that he did.

Humanity continues to suffer the consequences of that bad decision, but God did not leave it at that and say, “Well, this is how it will be henceforth.” Rather, He promised He would deal with the issue. The Bible shows us how He has been doing so and it even tells us what it will be like when everything we messed up is finally corrected.

Instead of blaming God for our trials, and instead of thinking God is uncaring about the difficulties and sadnesses in our lives, we have a responsibility to fix our eyes on Jesus, the One who has come to restore all things.

Do we want to live our lives in a miserable state, seeking our own happiness in order to use up our time as best we can? Or do we want to live in the joy of the Lord, thanking Him for what we have and what is to come?

The difference in one’s attitude will reflect where his priorities are. The more you can mentally overcome the trials you are faced with, the greater the testimony you will be to those around you who need the same confidence that you display.

Jesus healed the blind. Jesus promised to bring us into His light and goodness for all eternity. If we believe the first, we should also believe the latter. And if we do, why allow the trials of this life to hold us down?

We are so grateful to You, O God for the knowledge that this present world is not all You have in store for us. Rather, we have a heavenly hope of life that is truly life. Help us to focus on that and to be reassured always in the promises You have made. Amen.

 

Matthew 8:5

Saturday, 1 March 2025

Now when Jesus had entered Capernaum, a centurion came to Him, pleading with Him, Matthew 8:5

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 Jesus, having entered into Capernaum, a centurion, he came to Him, invoking Him” (CG).

In the previous verse, Jesus, having cleansed the leper, instructed him to go directly to the priest and offer the gift commanded by Moses. Now, the narrative changes direction, saying, “And Jesus, having entered into Capernaum.”

It should be noted that some manuscripts omit the name of Jesus. For example –

“When He entered Capernaum, a centurion came to Him, pleading with Him.” Holman

If the inclusion of the name is not original, someone may have inserted it to clarify that it was Jesus, not the leper who entered Capernaum. That seems a bit obvious, however. If the name is original and now missing in those manuscripts, it may be a copyist’s error that came about for one reason or another.

Either way, the surrounding context leaves no doubt about who the verse is referring to. Jesus had come down from the mount, met a leper on the way to where He was going, and then continued on to His destination, which was Capernaum. Once inside the city, it next says, “a centurion, he came to Him, invoking Him.”

The hekatontarchos, centurion, is introduced here. The word is derived from hekatón, a hundred, and archó, to rule or reign. Thus, he is a Roman soldier who rules over a cohort of one hundred men.

It is highly unusual that a man with such authority would actively seek out a Jew, much less plead with him over a matter. In such a position, it would be expected that he might send one of his underlings to Jesus and direct him to do whatever it is he has on his mind. But the man’s approach is an exception.

If it is the same account being referred to, which seems likely, the same narrative in Luke 7 gives a bit more background, saying –

“So when he heard about Jesus, he sent elders of the Jews to Him, pleading with Him to come and heal his servant. And when they came to Jesus, they begged Him earnestly, saying that the one for whom He should do this was deserving, ‘for he loves our nation, and has built us a synagogue.’” Luke 7:3-5

However, no discrepancy between the two should be considered. By sending elders of the Jews instead of one of his underlings, he is making a personal appeal through the elders rather than an authoritative demand through a soldier. The reason for sending the elders is more fully explained in Luke as well.

For now, this man has made a personal appeal to Jesus, invoking Him to come for a personal reason. As for translating the word parakaleó as invoke here, the reason is that one of its meanings is to call earnestly for. But there is associated with it the sense of a capability of the one being invoked that is beyond that of the one invoking.

For example, one might invoke a spirit, god, lawful edict, etc. This centurion is making a particular appeal to Jesus as an authoritative figure, able to do something that is beyond himself or those whom he is sending. As these are elders, it shows an immense trust in Jesus that extends beyond what one would normally expect of another, including leadership figures in Israel.

Life application: The words of Matthew in this account are already setting the stage for what is to become a normal theme from this point on. It is something that was seen, however, early in Matthew when Magi came to the land of Israel to worship the Child.

The Gentiles are taking on a position within the narrative that is contrasted to that of the Jews. This might seem out of place, but it is precisely what was prophesied by the Lord through Isaiah –

“And in that day there shall be a Root of Jesse,
Who shall stand as a banner to the people;
For the Gentiles shall seek Him,
And His resting place shall be glorious.” Isaiah 11:10

As the story of the interaction between Jesus and this centurion continues, ask yourself why the Lord included this account in His word. Then consider the world around you and how it continues to be relevant today. As you read through the book of Acts, consider what it is saying from this same perspective.

What is God looking for? The answer is faith. Pay attention to this key point. Both testaments of Scripture ultimately reveal this truth.

Lord God, may we be people of faith who live faithfully in Your presence. Give us the willpower and focus to not get distracted by our own supposed goodness or our own good deeds. Rather, may we understand that who we are, what we have, and what we can offer are all given by You and belong to You. May we align our lives to show that we believe this is true. Amen.

 

Matthew 8:4

Friday, 28 February 2025

And Jesus said to him, “See that you tell no one; but go your way, show yourself to the priest, and offer the gift that Moses commanded, as a testimony to them.” Matthew 8:4

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 Jesus, He says to him, ‘You see you tell none, but you go, you show yourself to the priest, and you present the gift that Moses, he commanded, for a testimony to them’” (CG).

In the previous verse, Jesus reached out His hand and willingly touched the leper. In this act, the leper was immediately cleansed. Next, it says, “And Jesus, He says to him, ‘You see you tell none.”

The reason for this injunction is debated. The Pulpit Commentary refers to several different views to consider –

(1) to save the man from temptation to self-importance; or

(2) to prevent any rumour of the miracle coming to the ears of the recognized authorities, and thus prejudicing them in their verdict upon his case; or, and more probably,

(3) for the Lord’s sake, for this seems to be the reason for the command in all the other occasions when it is given (Matthew 9:30; Matthew 12:16; Matthew 17:9; Mark 5:43; Mark 7:36; Mark 8:26; cf. Mark 1:34; Mark 3:12). The Lord did not desire to be thronged with multitudes who came only to see his miracles; he would work in quiet (cf. the quotation from Isaiah in Matthew 12:18-21).

Although the Pulpit Commentary’s third point receives their note of it being the likely explanation, it actually seems unlikely. The reason for this is what it just said as the chapter opened –

“When He had come down from the mountain, great multitudes followed Him. And behold, a leper came and worshiped Him, saying, ‘Lord, if You are willing, You can make me clean.’” Matthew 8:1, 2

The note that “great multitudes followed Him” is a part of the surrounding context and was stated purposefully. His miracle was, in fact, viewed by many people. This is attested to again in Matthew 8:10 where it notes that Jesus spoke to those who followed, implying the crowd was still there.

So why would Jesus instruct this man to tell no one then? The answer is found in the rest of the verse, beginning with, “but you go, you show yourself to the priest.”

This is the first mention of the hiereus, priest, in the New Testament. The word is derived from hierós, meaning sacred, holy, set apart, etc. This is a person set apart, belonging to the temple, thus, a priest. Jesus told the man to go to the priest because, as is recorded in Leviticus 14, it says –

“Then the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, ‘This shall be the law of the leper for the day of his cleansing: He shall be brought to the priest.’” Leviticus 14:1, 2

From there, the ritual required for the cleansed leper is recorded all the way through Leviticus 14:32. The reason why Jesus instructed the man to tell no one is that if he ran home and started telling his family and friends he was back, cleansed from his uncleanness, he would be in violation of the law.

First and foremost, his responsibility was to receive the rites of the law. As it says in Leviticus 14:20, “So the priest shall make atonement for him, and he shall be clean.” The validation of his cleansing was necessary for him to be deemed clean. If he was at home celebrating without this validation, then there would be a person not yet deemed clean among the people.

Jesus purposefully spoke to the man in this way in front of the thronging crowd to show that the man was instructed to be fully obedient to the Law of Moses. Thus, Jesus was not promoting disobedience but full obedience. That continues to be seen with the next words, “and you present the gift that Moses, he commanded, for a testimony to them.”

Here is another new word, marturion, a witness or testimony. It speaks of something evidential. It is where our modern word martyr is derived from. A martyr’s life is something evidential concerning the witness he bears.

As for the gift Moses commanded, that is what is recorded in Leviticus 14 as noted above. It was a requirement set forth in the law. To not offer this would be a violation of the law.

Life application: The proverb says –

“The first one to plead his cause seems right,
Until his neighbor comes and examines him.” Proverb 18:17

Several views concerning Jesus’ words about telling no one were presented above. Any of them might seem correct when someone presents his case concerning the meaning. You might say, “Yeah, that makes sense.” But then someone else will say, “No, the reason must be this…” From there you might say, “Yeah, that makes more sense.”

When someone adds in their thoughts with the word probably attached to them, then you might say, “Well, he is an authority, and he has checked out the possibilities. Therefore, he is probably right. That makes the most sense of all.” However, words like probably are subjective and need to still be considered carefully.

By checking the context, it is seen that their “probably” is completely incorrect. Many people saw and heard. They would have gone and told what they saw. Jesus was purposefully doing what He was doing in front of many so that they would bear witness that He was doing everything in accord with the law.

Be sure to not get caught up in the first opinion you read. Check many views, reread the passage along with the surrounding context, and then come to your conclusion. You may find what seemed right at first is actually incorrect.

Lord God, help us to carefully consider Your word as we read it. May we not be sent down wrong paths of understanding, but give us the wisdom to check what we are told and to verify if it is right. Help us to be responsible in our understanding of Your word through right doctrine. Amen.

 

Matthew 8:3

Thursday, 27 February 2025

Then Jesus put out His hand and touched him, saying, “I am willing; be cleansed.” Immediately his leprosy was cleansed. Matthew 8:3

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 outstretched the hand, Jesus – He touched him, saying, ‘I desire. You be cleansed.’ And immediately his leprosy, it was cleansed” (CG).

In the previous verse, Jesus was approached by a leper who prostrated himself before Him and noted that the Lord could cleanse him if He desired. Now, in response to that, it next says, “And having outstretched the hand.”

There is a new word, ekteinó, to stretch out. It is found only in the gospels and Acts. It is derived from ek, out of or from, and teinó, to stretch. Thus, it signifies to outstretch, extend, or even cast out as in the casting out of anchors on a ship. In putting His hand forward, it is an indication that He was unafraid of catching the leprosy from the man. And so, it next says, “Jesus – He touched him.”

Here is another new word, haptomai. The meaning behind the word is to attach oneself, but the context gives the broader sense of what is being conveyed. HELPS Word Studies says, “(‘to modify or change by touching’) – properly, ‘touching that influences’ (modifies); touching someone (something) in a way that alters (changesmodifies) them, i.e. ‘impact-touching.’”

Jesus’ response through outstretching His hand and touching him is to effect a change in the leper in some manner. Along with His touching him, He was “saying, ‘I desire. You be cleansed.’”

Although the instructions for dealing with leprosy in Leviticus 13 do not explicitly say a person is made unclean by touching a leper, it can be inferred from elsewhere, such as –

“Or if a person touches any unclean thing, whether it is the carcass of an unclean beast, or the carcass of unclean livestock, or the carcass of unclean creeping things, and he is unaware of it, he also shall be unclean and guilty.” Leviticus 5:2

Leprosy caused a state of uncleanness. That is explicit in Leviticus 13:3 and elsewhere. Therefore, verses such as Leviticus 5:2, along with many others in Leviticus, reveal that in touching something or someone unclean, the uncleanness transfers to the individual. Depending on the situation, it required a minimum of washing oneself and being in a state of uncleanliness until evening.

Despite this, Jesus touched the man. With that done, and with a note that He was willing to cleanse him, it next says, “And immediately his leprosy, it was cleansed.”

The change was instantaneous, having gone from one state to the next. As the man is clean, how could Jesus be accused of being unclean? Did a state of uncleanliness transfer to Him, or did a state of cleanliness exist that overshadowed the man’s state of uncleanliness?

The debate among the crowd, especially among the scribes and Pharisees probably went on and on. But the fact is that the man was cleansed. As this was so, how could they prove a state of uncleanliness in Jesus? Indeed, they could not. The man was standing there without leprosy.

Life application: Human beings are born in a state of uncleanliness. This is due to being born with a state of inherited sin. No human is acceptable to God in this state. This is a truth fully and explicitly stated in Scripture. And yet, in coming to Christ, that state is changed.

The wages of sin is death. However, eternal life is promised to those who believe in Jesus and His completed work. If this is so, then there can no longer be sin associated with that person. This is also explicit in Scripture –

“Now all things are of God, who has reconciled us to Himself through Jesus Christ, and has given us the ministry of reconciliation, 19 that is, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not imputing their trespasses to them, and has committed to us the word of reconciliation.” 2 Corinthians 5:18, 19

Not only are past sins forgiven, but the person – because he is in Christ and no longer under law – no longer has sin imputed to him. The problem is law. It is the problem that must be worked through in order to no longer be imputed sin.

Jesus fulfilled the law. His fulfillment of the law is credited to anyone who believes in Him. As this is so, law is annulled in that person. Without law, sin is no longer imputed. Jesus is demonstrating this to Israel, teaching them a truth that they completely missed.

If God never said, “A person with leprosy is unclean,” then there would be no imputation of uncleanliness in another person who touched him. But by giving the law, uncleanliness is transferred. The Bible uses tangible states of being to convey to us spiritual truths. There is nothing in the Christian faith today that says a person is unclean if he touches something forbidden by the law.

So why on earth do people keep going back and putting themselves under the law? We must consider what Christ has done, accept it as fully capable of bringing us near to God, and then rest in His completion of everything necessary to accomplish that. Trust in this! It is what God expects of you.

Glorious God, thank You for cleansing us from all of our impurity through the precious blood of Christ. We praise You for what You have done. Hallelujah and amen.