Language is fascinating, and among its many properties is mood. Verbs especially, and entire sentence construction in English will reveal mood as indicative, (simple statement usually of fact); imperative mood, (command), or subjunctive mood (expression of doubt, or condition).
Wise expositors of the Word pay attention to mood as well as other aspects of context.
Accordingly, sounding forth the Word is not as simple as reading a sentence, and attempting to explain it without some research. Failure at this point has led many “would be”
expositors of the word into eisegesis rather than exegesis. The latter is a correct explanation or exposition of a text based on careful research, and objective analysis. The former is the opposite. It is reading INTO a passage the reader’s interpretation or what he wants it to mean based on unstudied, subjective, and largely non-analytical conclusions. Obviously, this is the fodder hurled forth from many pulpits on a regular basis, but it is far afield of the command of exegetical methodology embodied in 2 Timothy 2:15.
A couple of cases in point, of so many examples that could be cited, are the common misinterpretations of Proverbs 29:18, and Acts 1:8. In Proverbs 29:18, it is not unusual for only the first part of the verse to be used. It is usually used to hammer away at the need for a congregation to build a new sanctuary or some similar project. However, only the slightest study will show that an understanding of covenantal terms is under consideration: in the Old Testament time: the Law, and in the New Testament: the faith once delivered to the saints. Those terms being “seen” “envisioned” “understood” in a faithful heart will solidify one to the preservation and reward of a well-lived life.
In Acts 1:8, Jesus said, “. . . and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.” In these last instructions to His church, Jesus made simple declarative statements of what will be. It is an error to interpret this as a command. Accordingly, down through the centuries of time, in good times and in bad times, the church, which is the pillar and ground of the truth, has continued to employ the terms of the Great Commission to evangelize, baptize, and teach. This statement is singular but spoken to a congregation; hence, church. It is noted by the KJV discrimination of second person singular and plural (ye, and you). Moreover, every member of that body of Christ fulfills the statement. Truly, we are witnesses, but the question remains, what kind of witness are we?
FOR THOUGHT: What kind of disciple (witness) do you see mostly in folks who claim to be Christian? Is it great, poor, or lukewarm? Do you see what Jesus meant by His statement in Acts 1:8? Does this underscore the need of detailed study of the Word in each disciple? How much study are you giving to the Word in addition to simply reading it?
RACIAL CHARACTERISTICS PRE-DETERMINED
In spite of their exalted stature as great men of God, some have made sinful errors that were, and are, far-reaching. Consider the sin of Adam and Eve. Think about the sin of Abraham and Sarah. Now some will surely think me a self-righteous bigot for what I write, but I stand on the plain truth of the Word of the Lord. Some things are predestined, and what is predestined will be, and that without deviation. Think with me!
God has pronounced blessings on His people of covenant. Those specifically are Israel of the Old Testament and the true church of the Lord Jesus Christ in the New Covenant. He has also pronounced characteristics on some folks that are not desirable, but they are just as true.
Today, the focus of the world is on the middle-east. The problem makers are specific people, from different national boundaries. The Arab people are the offspring of Abraham through his ill-gotten son, Ishmael. The character of Ishmael that he would pass on to his offspring is as certain as the sinful nature that is passed on to all from Adam. That characteristic is noted specifically in Genesis 16:12, “And the angel of the LORD said to her, Behold,art with child,shaltbearson,shalt call name Ishmael; because the LORD heard affliction.he will be a wild man;his hand will be against every man, and every man's hand against him; and he shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren.” The Old Testament word that is translated “wild man” is
“Para” and means “wild donkey.” It is so translated in the KJV of the Bible some 8-10 times.
As a wild donkey he will not be dependable for policies and treaties over long periods of time. In fact his predestined nature that has held true, and continues to hold true, is that “his hand is against every man, and every man’s hand against him.” That underscores the difficulties involved by the fact that “he shal dwell in the presence of all his brethren.” So, it is fixed! The nations of earth must do whatever is necessary to co-exist with them until the Prince of Peace returns to earth and sets things exactly right. Like the Gibeonites of old who became a thorn and constant challenge to Israel, so modern Arabs are more than a little challenge to the nations.
Perhaps God is using this to goad men in the right direction. The appropriate question might be: is anyone listening!
FOR THOUGHT: Do you believe the divine pronouncement of specific human characters continues to hold true in their offspring? What about Adam and Eve and the sin they brought upon themselves? Is that still true for every human being? Why?