Daily Writing

Coconut tree.

Friday, 23 August 2024

But when he heard that Archelaus was reigning over Judea instead of his father Herod, he was afraid to go there. And being warned by God in a dream, he turned aside into the region of Galilee. Matthew 2:22

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 heard that Archelaus reigns over Judea instead of Herod his father, he feared to go there. And having been admonished in a dream, he withdrew to the allotments of Galilee” (CG).

In the previous verse, it noted that Joseph took the Child and His mother and came into the land of Israel. Matthew next records, “And having heard that Archelaus reigns.”

Concerning what caliber of person Archelaus was, Albert Barnes notes –

“Archelaus possessed a cruel and tyrannical disposition similar to his father. At one of the Passovers he caused 3,000 of the people to be put to death in the temple and city. For his crimes, after he had reigned 9 years, he was banished by Augustus, the Roman emperor, to Gaul, where he died.”

With this Archelaus ruling in place of his father, Matthew next records that his reign was “over Judea instead of Herod his father.”

Charles Ellicott records this concerning Archelaus’ rule –

“Strictly speaking, this prince, who, under his father’s will (made just before his death), governed Judæa, Samaria, and Idumæa, was never recognised as a king by the Roman Emperor, but received the inferior title of Ethnarch. Antipas had Galilee and Peræa, Philip the region of Trachonitis. Popularly, however, the higher title was still used of him as we find it in 14:9 of the Tetrarch Antipas.”

Because this terrible successor to his father had begun to rule over the same place that Joseph had left from, “he feared to go there.”

This only makes sense. If his father had wanted to kill the children of Bethlehem, and if even a breath of the presence of Jesus, Joseph, and Mary had been made known to him, it is possible that the same knowledge was handed to Archelaus to be mindful of. If so, then if a report came back that they had returned to Bethlehem, it could only speak of further trouble for Joseph and his family.

Thus his fear was understandable in some ways. Therefore, another divine visitation is recorded, saying, “And having been admonished in a dream.”

This is now the fourth visitation in a dream received by Joseph. The Lord is directing his steps to ensure that Jesus will be properly tended to. God had spoken of the coming of the Messiah since the fall of man. His word is filled with information concerning His coming, and those prophetic utterances were being fulfilled with each new detail that is being recorded in the gospel, which includes the next movement of the family. Matthew records the words, saying, “he withdrew to the allotments of Galilee.”

The word translated as “allotments” is meros. It has a variety of possible translations based on the context. It is derived from a word signifying “to get as a section or allotment” (Strong’s). The idea is that there is an overall area known as Galilee. Within that area, the various portions of land are allotted to be under the authority of whoever leads this greater area known as Galilee. That is then explained in Luke 23 –

“When Pilate heard of Galilee, he asked if the Man were a Galilean. ⁷ And as soon as he knew that He belonged to Herod’s jurisdiction, he sent Him to Herod, who was also in Jerusalem at that time. ⁸ Now when Herod saw Jesus, he was exceedingly glad; for he had desired for a long time to see Him, because he had heard many things about Him, and he hoped to see some miracle done by Him.” Luke 23:6-8

As Jesus will grow up in Nazareth, and as Nazareth is an allotment of Galilee, more prophecy will be fulfilled in this move. That will be seen in the next verse and in more verses ahead as Matthew unfolds.

Life application: In this verse, it said that Joseph feared to go to Judea because of the new ruler of that area. Fear is not uncommon, and it affects us all to some degree and in a wide variety of ways. However, there are things to fear – such as a baseball coming directly at your head – that are to then be avoided. For the Christian, however, there are other things that we truly should not fear, such as death.

That may sound contradictory. A baseball about to hit our head can lead to death, and yet we fear it and avoid it. This is natural, and nobody in their right mind would stand there and say, “I have no fear of this baseball hitting me in the face.”

However, some people live their lives consumed with the thought of death, as if there is some way they can think to avoid it. This is not a good mental state for anyone, but how much more for the Christian who says he truly believes Jesus prevailed over death?

Joseph’s immediate fear may have been understandable, but for the sake of the whole unfolding scenario, there was no need for it at all. God had selected him to be the human father figure for Jesus, the Messiah. He had already directed them several times, and the word assured Joseph that the Messiah would accomplish so many things. Therefore, instead of fearing, he should have been talking to the Lord, asking for direction, and understanding that God’s plan could not be thwarted.

We, too, should have this attitude. Whether we like it or not, unless Jesus comes first, we are all going to die. And we have no idea at all when or how that will occur. But God has made promises concerning our eternal destiny and that plan cannot be thwarted. And so, we can (and should) try to avoid disasters like a baseball to the head while at the same time not fearing the inevitable death that we all must face.

Let us handle our days reasonably, live our lives well for the Lord, and submit ourselves to him through life and in death. Let us not be people of fear –

“Love has been perfected among us in this: that we may have boldness in the day of judgment; because as He is, so are we in this world. ¹⁸ There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves torment. But he who fears has not been made perfect in love. ¹⁹ We love Him because He first loved us.” 1 John 4:17-19

Lord God, we know that Your word has sure and reliable promises for Your people that extend beyond death itself. And so, we commit ourselves to You, knowing that our days are set and that when they end, You will bring us to Yourself. We stand unafraid of what lies ahead because Jesus has gone before us. Thank You for this reassurance. Amen.

Bromeliad.

Thursday, 22 August 2024

Then he arose, took the young Child and His mother, and came into the land of Israel. Matthew 2:21

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 arisen, he took the Child and His mother and came to the land of Israel” (CG).

In the previous verse, the messenger of the Lord spoke to Joseph in a dream. His words were, “Having arisen, take the Child and His mother, and go to the land of Israel.” Now, in exacting obedience to that word, it next says, “And having arisen, he took the Child and His mother.”

As in the previous verse, the verbs are in the singular. Joseph was given the instruction, and he followed through with it as spoken. Matthew continues to place the Child before His mother in the narrative as well.

From this point, Mary will not be mentioned again in Matthew until near the end of Chapter 12, when she is included in a general statement about “His mother and brothers.” She will not be mentioned by name until the end of Chapter 13 in another general statement, saying, “Is this not the carpenter’s son? Is not His mother called Mary?”

At the same time, Jesus will be mentioned by name over forty times by then. He will be indirectly or directly referred to many more times as well. Above all else, the entire biblical narrative, from Matthew 1:1 forward is completely focused on Jesus.

As for the minimal references to Mary, this is consistently the case throughout the four gospels. In Acts, she will be mentioned once along with other women. There is no additional importance placed on Mary. Rather the narrative is focused on Jesus. In fact, apart from the birth and infancy narratives, it may be that a comparable amount of detail is given concerning two women named Mary in the gospels other than Jesus’ mother.

With Joseph’s arising and gathering Jesus and His mother, it next says, “and came to the land of Israel.”

Just as he was instructed, so he accomplished. It can be inferred from the coming verses that he probably intended to go back to Bethlehem. However, that will not be where they will wind up.

Life application: Hebrews 12:2 has clear words for us. There, it says, “Let us fix our eyes on Jesus…” (BSB). There are many reasons for this that we could consider. Jesus is God incarnate. As such, He is our Creator (see Colossians 1:16, etc.). Jesus gave His life so that we could have restoration with God, forgiveness of sins, and so forth.

By looking to Jesus, we will not be looking elsewhere. Thus, we will avoid idolatry, immorality, etc. By looking to Jesus, we will be thinking about Jesus and all that He means to us. When actively looking, our mental attention is also actively directed at what we are looking at. Thus, we will be thinking about the Source of all goodness, righteousness, and so on.

When Scripture is rightly considered in its proper context, the admonition to keep our eyes on Jesus will keep us from theological error. For example, by considering Mary in relation to Jesus, right from Scripture, we can see the grossly exaggerated, unbiblical stand of the Roman Catholic Church, which places a high stress on Mary.

Because of this, their theology is flawed in relation to Jesus. The importance of the cross is diminished. The importance of prayer to and through Jesus is obliterated. The importance of the return of Christ is obfuscated. Even our understanding of Israel and its importance in the future is diminished.

Let us be wise and obedient to the word. Let us fix our eyes on Jesus!

Glorious Lord God, Your word has instructed us to fix our eyes on Jesus. How often has it been said that if our attention to Jesus is too great, we are not giving honor to You? And yet, if Jesus is God, how can we honor You if we do not fix our eyes on Him? Help us to think clearly and to understand that You are in the Son, and the Son is in You. There is no favoritism in the Godhead. But You are One. May we understand this and be obedient to Your word. Amen.

Big bromeliad.

Wednesday, 21 August 2024

saying, “Arise, take the young Child and His mother, and go to the land of Israel, for those who sought the young Child’s life are dead.” Matthew 2:20

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).

“saying, ‘Having arisen, take the Child and His mother, and go to the land of Israel, for they have died – those seeking the soul of the Child’” (CG).

In the previous verse, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream while he was in Egypt. This occurred after the death of Herod. In the appearance, he was “saying, ‘Having arisen, take the Child and His mother.’”

The words are addressed in the second person singular. Rather than, “All of you arise and go,” the angel is speaking to Joseph about what he is to do. Once he is up and about, he is to take the Child and His mother. As in verse 13, the focus is on the Child, while Mary is of secondary attention. Understanding this, the narrative continues with, “and go to the land of Israel.”

In verse 13, Joseph had been told to flee to Egypt. Now, he is told to go to the land of Israel. There is no rush or urgency in the words, something that must have been quite reassuring to Joseph. He bore a great responsibility, and he would have probably been quite happy in receiving these words. From there, the angel continues with, “for they have died – those seeking the soul of the Child.”

The words bring about a lot of curious speculation. First, note the differences between verse 13 and verse 20 –

“Having arisen, take the Child and His mother, and flee to Egypt. And you are there until if I should tell you. For Herod is about to seek the Child to destroy Him.”

“Having arisen, take the Child and His mother, and go to the land of Israel, for they have died – those seeking the soul of the Child.”

It was Herod who intended to kill the Child. But now, the angel speaks of “those” who sought to destroy Him. There are several views on what the words are saying –

“The plural is very often used where the conception of a species is to be expressed, and then denotes the subject, not according to number, but chiefly according to the category to which it belongs.” Meyers NT Commentary

That is supported by the words of Bengel, saying, “The plural concisely signifies, that Herod is dead, and that there are not any others who entertain evil designs.”

Cambridge says it is a euphemism, the reference being Herod alone. Barnes concurs and adds a second possibility. He says, “This either refers to Herod alone, as is not uncommon, using the plural number for the singular; or it may refer to Herod and his son Antipater. He was of the same cruel disposition as his father, and was put to death by his father about five days before his own death.”

Numerous others suggest it is given as a parallel to the words of the Lord to Moses in Exodus 4 –

“Now the Lord said to Moses in Midian, ‘Go, return to Egypt; for all the men who sought your life are dead.’” Exodus 4:19

Whichever option is correct, it is a notable statement that Joseph would have understood and accepted.

Life application: In Exodus 2:15, only Pharaoh was noted as seeking to kill Moses. However, the text says “all the men” later in Exodus 4:19. Only speculation can be made as to who any others may have been, and we can’t go inserting things into the Bible to form a conclusion. The same is true with this verse in Matthew.

The possibilities for what is meant have been set forth, and there may be others as well. But each of these is only a possibility and should be noted as such. As seen above, Joseph would have known what the intent was. Even if he didn’t at first, he could have asked, and that part of the conversation was simply not recorded.

The important point to remember is that the story bears all the marks of a literal historical account, and it is detailing to us information about the life of Jesus. Therefore, let us consider it as such and revel in what God has done. He is making marvelous parallels between the calling forth of Israel from the bondage of Egypt and the calling forth of Jesus as well.

Moses and those with him stopped and received the law on the way to Israel. Jesus is being drawn directly back to Israel to fulfill the law that Moses received. In doing so, He will usher in a New Covenant and a new plan and direction for the people of God. Great is the Lord who has done all these things!

Lord God, Your word is a glorious treasure trove of wonder and delight concerning the track of man back to You through the redemptive process that You have set forth. One step at a time, we are being instructed on what You have done and are doing to accomplish that. And it is all centered on Jesus. Thank You for our beautiful Savior, Jesus. Amen.

Staghorn fern.

Tuesday, 20 August 2024

Now when Herod was dead, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared in a dream to Joseph in Egypt, Matthew 2:19

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 Herod having died, behold, a messenger of the Lord in a dream appears to Joseph in Egypt” (CG).

In the previous verse, Matthew cited Jeremiah 31:15 concerning the prophecy about Rachel mourning for her children. With that now complete, he next records, “And Herod having died.”

Herod’s death was recorded by Flavius Josephus and others in antiquity. The Expositor’s Greek Testament, citing several sources, says –

“Herod died in 750 U. C. in his 70th year, at Jericho, of a horrible loathsome disease, rotten in body as in soul, altogether an unwholesome man.”

As for the timing, it is debated how long this period was, but most agree it was only a few months after the killing of the children in Bethlehem, though some argue as much as six or seven years. Regardless of the exact time spent there, eventually, Matthew next records, “behold, a messenger of the Lord in a dream appears to Joseph in Egypt.”

This is now the third time a messenger of the Lord has appeared to him. This time, however, it is outside of the land of Canaan. This should not be remarkable as the Lord can appear anywhere and at any time, but it demonstrates that the Lord does, in fact, speak to His people outside of Canaan. This is in contradistinction to some claims over the millennia that the Lord does not do so.

The Bible is filled with such instances, and such ridiculous claims should not ever be entertained. As for the departed Herod, Albert Barnes shares the following –

“Herod left three sons, and the kingdom was at his death divided between them. To Archelaus was given Judea, Idumea, and Samaria; to Philip, Batanea and Trachonitis; to Antipas, Galilee and Perea.

“Each of these was also called Herod, and these are the individuals who are so frequently referred to in the New Testament during the ministry of the Saviour and the labors of the apostles.”

Life application: Translation of Scripture involves more than just conveying words or expressions between languages. It takes careful consideration, consistency, and a watchful eye to ensure that each word or phrase is actually translated. Eyes can skip easily over words or phrases, something quite common when similar words are used within a single verse.

As for consistency, when the context is the same, words should be similarly translated. Otherwise, a false sense of what is being conveyed can come about. However, this is not something that is always possible. There are multiple words that can have similar meanings, and there are many possible meanings for some individual words.

Moreover, when there are translation committees that handle individual portions of Scripture, the biases and preferences of each committee will often show through. It may be that one committee may have a book to translate, but individuals within a committee may be responsible for one or two chapters.

This can lead to real inaccuracies slipping through the cracks. For example, the Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Commentary says –

“Our translators, somewhat capriciously, render the same expression ‘the angel of the Lord,’ Mt 1:20; 2:13; and ‘an angel of the Lord,’ as here.”

The exact term in Greek is aggelos kyriou, or “angel Lord.” Notice what JFB is referring to in the KJV –

1:20 – the angel of the Lord
2:13 – the angel of the Lord
2:19 – an angel of the Lord

The first two instances insert a presupposition, “the angel of the Lord.” In the Old Testament, that generally is referring to the Lord. In the third instance, an unnamed angel representing the Lord is signified.

The first two have inserted words without italicizing them to indicate they are not in the original and they are clearly wrong. The KJV is famous for this willy-nilly type of inconsistency in both testaments, and so the reader can be led down incorrect paths of thinking about what the text is saying.

Someone could come to the unfounded conclusion that “the angel of the Lord” appears to Joseph only in the land of Canaan, but then He directs one of His subordinates to appear outside of the land. That would be a ridiculous assumption, but this is what happens when faulty translation occurs.

Be sure to not get caught up in reading one translation and assume it is the only God-inspired translation. Be studious and diligent to check things out before making final conclusions about matters of theology.

Lord God, help us to be wise and studious concerning Your word. It is so very precious, and so may You be with us as we read it, contemplate it, and tell other people things that we have learned from it. Above all, thank You for Jesus our Lord who is the One Scripture is pointing us to. Yes, thank You for our precious Savior, Jesus. Amen.

Jade Plant.

Monday, 19 August 2024

“A voice was heard in Ramah,
Lamentation, weeping, and great mourning,
Rachel weeping for her children,
Refusing to be comforted,
Because they are no more.” Matthew 2:18

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).

“A voice – it was heard in Ramah,
Lamentation, and a wailing, and a mourning – great.
Rachel sobbing – her children.
And she would not be comforted,
For they are not” (CG).

The previous verse introduced the idea of the fulfillment of that which was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet. Now, Matthew cites that prophecy, beginning with, “A voice – it was heard in Ramah.”

The words of this prophecy come from Jeremiah 31:15, which says –

“Thus said Yehovah,
A voice in Ramah heard
Lamentation, a weeping – bitternesses
Rachel weeping upon her children
Refused to sigh upon her children
For he naught” (CG).

Of the entire verse, the Expositor’s New Testament rightly says, “It was poetry to begin with, and it is poetry here.” The voice is that of Rachel of the third clause. She is being used by Jeremiah as expressive of the woe that had come upon the people of Israel who were being deported to Babylon. The reason for this begins in Genesis 35:19 –

“So Rachel died and was buried on the way to Ephrath (that is, Bethlehem).”

Rached died on the way to Bethlehem. That is then explained in 1 Samuel 10:2 where it notes that Rachel’s tomb is in the territory of Benjamin. This is confirmed by Joshua 18:25 where Ramah is listed in the cities inherited by Benjamin. It is in this location that the captives of Jerusalem were taken before they were deported to Babylon –

“The word that came to Jeremiah from the Lord after Nebuzaradan the captain of the guard had let him go from Ramah, when he had taken him bound in chains among all who were carried away captive from Jerusalem and Judah, who were carried away captive to Babylon.” Jeremiah 40:1

Therefore, the voice is being expressed as being in Ramah which is “Lamentation, and a wailing, and a mourning – great.”

The first word, translated as lamentation, thrénos, is found only here in the New Testament, and it is found only in some manuscripts. It signifies a wailing or a lamentation. Each word used is descriptive of real mourning, one word being added to the next to convey the agony of the situation.

As for the final word “great,” it answers to the Hebrew plural noted above, “bitternesses.” There was a great mourning of the exiles (the children of Israel) as they were readied for their long trek to Babylon. Likewise, Matthew poetically takes the death of the children of Bethlehem in this same fashion. There is the voice of the people raised as one over their slaughter. This is then equated to the wailing of Israel in the land of Rachel (meaning Benjamin, her son), saying, “Rachel sobbing – her children.”

There is no “for” as inserted by translators. Rather, it is left out to highlight the situation. It is as if while she is sobbing, the writer gasps and calls out “her children.” It is a mournful expression. The parallel to the Babylonian exile is seen. Those who leave will not be returning. It is as if they are dead. Rachel mourns the loss of the people. Likewise, these children slaughtered by Herod are mourned over poetically by Rachel, who died “on the way to Ephrath (that is Bethlehem)” (Genesis 35:19).

It is as if Rachel is reaching forward in her place of burial toward Bethlehem, mourning for the loss of those as if they were her own children, “And she would not be comforted.”

The Hebrew uses the word nakham, to sigh. The context determines the exact meaning, but it is as if a person sighs in whatever way is being expressed. One can sigh over regret, one can sigh in a state of being comforted or not being comforted, one can sigh in pity, one can sigh in exasperation or sorrow, etc.

There is a strong, heavy breathing that conveys human emotion. In Rachel’s case, she would not sigh in comfort as if “I have come to accept the situation, and I will move on.” Rather, she would not be comforted because it next says while referring to her children, “For they are not.”

The children were slaughtered by Herod, and they would not return to their mothers. Rachel, emblematic of this situation, is poetically used to describe the matter. It is from Jeremiah’s prophecy that the Lord, through Matthew, makes this woeful connection, noting that it is fulfilled not only in the past, but it carried through to the time of Christ’s coming.

Life application: As noted in the previous commentary, we must be careful when taking verses out of their intended context and applying them to our own situations. The five main rules of biblical interpretation are:

Is this prescriptive (does it prescribe anything)?
Is this descriptive (does it merely describe a matter)?
What is the context?
Be sure of the context!
Don’t stray from the context!!

If a verse merely describes a matter, it means that we are being given information, but it is not instructing us to do something. If it is prescriptive, certain people are being told to do something. But who are those certain people? For example, it says this in Malachi 3:10 –

“‘Bring all the tithes into the storehouse,
That there may be food in My house,
And try Me now in this,’
Says the Lord of hosts,
‘If I will not open for you the windows of heaven
And pour out for you such blessing
That there will not be room enough to receive it.’”

Is this merely descriptive, or does it prescribe something? The answer is that it prescribes something. What is the context? It is the Lord speaking through the prophet Malachi to the people of Israel under the law of Moses. Are we sure of the context? Does it apply to the church? No. Tithes are never mandated to the church. There is no prescription for this. Therefore, do not apply the words of Malachi to the church.

Malachi 4:10 is for our understanding but not for our conduct. The law was a tutor to lead us to Christ. We are not under the law. The law is done away with in Christ. Therefore, when you hear Malachi 3:10 quoted by a televangelist or your local preacher – wrongly requiring tithes – and have evaluated it with the five basic rules, you can ignore their mishandling of Scripture.

Be wise and discerning. The Lord determined that Jeremiah’s prophecy would be used by Matthew, but we cannot use it ourselves if our own children die. That would be inappropriate. Let us endeavor to always maintain proper context when evaluating Scripture.

P.S. The tithes of Israel were only brought into the storehouse once every three years. The other two years, the people ate their own tithes. But you will never hear a televangelist (or most preachers) tell you that.

Lord God, help us to have a clear and proper understanding of what applies to us in Scripture and what is only there for our knowledge in particular matters, even if it doesn’t apply to us directly. May we stand approved by holding to the proper context of what is being conveyed. Amen.