September 30th, 2012
II Chronicles 8 (1 Kngs 9:10-28; Neh 13:23-27; Mt 5:27-30; 16:5-12; 1 Cor 5:1-13; Gal 2:11-16; 5:1-10; 1 Jn 2:15-17)
“A Chink in the Armor”
Background Information:
- Remember that when Solomon became king, he was just 14 years old and dependent upon the Lord to guide him and give him wisdom to lead his people. Now 20 years have passed, and Solomon has become more self-reliant. He has placed his faith in himself instead of the Lord (8:1-8). (Dr. Tremper Longman, Quicknotes, 1 Chr Thru Job, 71)
- Although this portion of Solomon’s reign deals with Solomon’s international trade, it was vital to the Chronicler’s ideal portrait of Solomon to establish that the king gave himself fully to developing international trade only after he had first accomplished his most important task, the building of the temple. The implications for the Chronicler’s readers are evident. Their priorities must be the same: the temple and its services first, then international trade and national prosperity. (Richard L. Pratt, 1 & 2 Chr, A Mentor Commentary, 255)
- (v. 1) The deal came about, according to 1 Kings, because of what Solomon owed Hiram for all the building supplies he had received. The writer of Kings also informs us that Hiram was none too pleased with what he received in the bargain, calling the area “Cabul” (1 Kgs 9:13), a word that we might freely translate as “like smoke.” Hiram’s hoped-for profits had vanished into thin air! The most plausible explanation for this “contradiction” is the one offered long ago by the Jewish historian Josephus. In 2 Chronicles we see how the bargain initiated in 1 Kings came around in a full circle: Hiram gave the cities he deemed worthless back to Solomon: Solomon then turned smoke into substance by colonizing the cities with Israelites. (Paul O. Wendland, The People’s Bible, 2 Chr, 111)
- The reference to “villages that Hiram had given” (KJV, “restored”) to the king assumes without further comment the unhappy record preserved in 1 Kgs 9:11-13, about how Solomon had previously had to surrender 20 non-Israelite towns in Galilee to the Tyrian, apparently because of unpaid building debts (cf. 2 Chr 2:10, 15). Hiram, moreover, found this collateral so poor that Solomon seems to have had to take back the territory. He did then alleviate the poverty of the towns by “settling Israelites in them” and thus succeeded in expanding his borders. (Frank E. G belein, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Vol. 4, 467)
- (vss. 3-5) In this one passage in which he does record Solomon’s conquests and fortifications, he presents Israel at its maximum borders in the north (8:3-4) and in the south (8:17-18). For his post-exilic audience in the tiny province of Judah, this probably reflected more than simply the idealization of the “good old days,” but rather the glowing embers of unextinguished national hopes embodied in God’s promises to the fathers.
Similarly, for his post-exilic audience in subservience to the Persians, reminders of gentile servitude (8:7-10) to Israel’s God, cult, and king were probably not simply fond memories of the past, but expressed hopes for the future also embodied in the prophets (Isa 60; 55:5; 56:6-8; Mic 4:1-5; Zeph 3:9-11; Zech 8:20-23; 9:9-10; 14:10-19; cf. Ps 72:8-11). (Raymond B. Dillard, Word Biblical Commentary, Vol. 15, 66-67)
- (vss. 3-5) The writer seems to be calling attention to the extent of the ideal borders of Israel achieved under David and Solomon (“from Lebo Hamath to the Wadi of Egypt,” 2 Chr 7:8; cf. 1 Chr 13:5). Possession of Hamath and Tadmor means Solomon controls the major overland trade routes with Mesopotamia, another reason for his vast wealth. (Andrew E. Hill, The NIV Application Commentary: 1 & 2 Chr, 402)
- (v. 6) The general impression conveyed throughout is that Solomon was the kind of king who built whatever he wanted, whenever he wanted (v. 6). (Paul O. Wendland, The People’s Bible, 2 Chr, 111-12)
- (v. 11) In the ancient world of power in politics, nations made alliances with each other through marriage. While it is true that a ruler like Pharaoh must have had many daughters, the fact that he gave one in marriage to Solomon still speaks volumes about his regard for the Israelite king and his desire to maintain friendly relations with Solomon. (Paul O. Wendland, The People’s Bible, 2 Chr, 115)
- (v. 11) Note, however, that in Chronicles the objection is not to Pharaoh’s daughter living in the city of David–women, after all, did live in Jerusalem–but to her living in “the house of King David of Israel” (8:11). Apparently, in the days of the monarchy, the palace and the temple were part of a single complex (note that the building of temple and palace are consistently linked in Chronicles as a single project). The Chronicler understands the separate quarters built for Pharaoh’s daughter as a way of maintaining the ritual purity of this complex. (Steven S. Tuell, Interpretation: 1 & 2 Chr, 149)
- (v. 11) Solomon’s alliance with Egypt is first noted in 1 Kgs 3:1 and is connected with Solomon’s marriage to the daughter of the Egyptian pharaoh, a scenario that implies a combination of Israelite strength and Egyptian weakness. The pharaoh in view is probably Siamun, one of the last pharaohs of the Twenty-First Dynasty. Around this time, the Egyptian pharaoh conquered the Canaanite-held Shephelad city of Gezer and gave the city to Solomon as a dowry for his daughter, an invasion supported by archaeological data. (John H. Walton, Zondervan Ill. Bible Backgrounds Commentary, Vol. 3, 318)
- (v. 11) One of Solomon’s first treaties was with Egypt. It was not altogether to his advantage, for he was required to take an Egyptian princess as a queen and to lose control of Philistia. The gain of Gezer was hardly full compensation, but future trade relations with Egypt proved valuable. (Merrill C. Tenney, Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible, Vol. 5, 475)
- (v. 11) The Chronicler also does not mention that Pharaoh captured and depopulated Gezer before giving it to Solomon as part of his daughter’s dowry (1 Kgs 9:16) . . . Such an Egyptian incursion through Philistine territory would have been of considerable mutual advantage for Israel and Egypt. This omission was no doubt deliberate: the Chronicler may have considered it depreciating to Solomon to have a foreigner conquer a city for him; the Chronicler is uniformly opposed to foreign alliances in the remainder of his history. The giving of a Pharaoh’s daughter in marriage to a foreigner was all but unthinkable in the earlier centuries of Egyptian daughters and sisters of foreigners as wives in diplomatic marriages. Though it is not without parallel, this marriage and the attendant dowry were at least remarkable, as attested by the frequency with which Pharaoh’s daughter is mentioned in 1 Kings (3:1; 7:8; 9:16, 24; 11:1). (Raymond B. Dillard, Word Biblical Commentary, Vol. 15, 63)
- (v. 11) Again we see here how closely connected the king’s palace was to the place of God’s worship. Under his father David, the ark had been placed very near David’s house in the old city–in a spot David had prepared for it (1 Chr 15:1). But the two dwellings were not just part of one physical complex, they were also considered to be part of one spiritual context. If one was holy, the other was holy too; anything defiling one would defile the other. (Paul O. Wendland, The People’s Bible, 2 Chr, 115)
The question to be answered is . . . Why would the Chronicler interrupt the glory of Solomon’s successes here in 2 Chronicles 8 to mention Solomon’s wife, which appears to be a totally unrelated issue?
Answer: I believe the Chronicler desires to remind his original post-exilic audience (as well as us) of the dangers of an ungodly influence in your life or being unequally yoked with unbelievers. Solomon’s pagan wives were the “chink” in his otherwise impenetrable armor.
Chink = (Webster’s) narrow slit or crack
The Word for the Day is . . . acquiesce
Acquiesce = (Webster’s) to accept, agree or comply silently or passively.
What does the Chronicler desire for us to see here in 2 Chronicles 8?:
I. Because God was pleased with Solomon, God provided him with wisdom, riches, and honor (2 Chr 1:7-13; 8:1-10; 12-18)
When Israel’s king and temple are in proper order, there are hardly any limits on the prosperity that may come to the nation through lucrative international trade. (Richard L. Pratt, 1 & 2 Chr, A Mentor Commentary, 256)
II. Solomon knew better and yet acquiesced to receive to himself pagan wives (2 Chr 8:11; Ex 34:16; Nm 25:1-13; ; Dt 7:1-4; 17:17; 23:3-8; Josh 23:12-13; 1 Kgs 11:1-5)
Solomon recognizes that his marriage to Pharaoh’s daughter is not pleasing to God. Although he is moving away from God and is aware of it, he continues going through the motions (offering sacrifices) without truly turning from his ways (8:11-15; see also 1 Sm 15:22-23). (Dr. Tremper Longman, Quicknotes, 1 Chr Thru Job, 72)
Verse 11 presents his concern for the holiness of the temple, even while proudly parading his association with the world power of Egypt. In reminiscence of Israel’s territorial frontiers in 7:8, Solomon’s sphere of political influence is noted as expanding to include Hamath in the north and Egypt in the south. The religious concern to move his Egyptian wife from proximity to the temple at first sight runs counter to the openheartedness of 6:32, 33 to foreign worship. The Chronicler has at the back of his mind the sinister narrative of 1 Kgs 11:1-8: she did not fall into the category of a foreign proselyte but maintained her national faith. (Leslie Allen, Mastering the OT, 1, 2 Chr, 247)
The most obvious adaptation that has been made of the older history is that practically the whole of 1 Kings 11 has been left out. We know by now the sort of portrait which the Chronicler wants to paint of the first two great kings of Israel; he was not so selective with Saul, nor will he be with the later kings, but this confirms the view that for him David and Solomon are intended as a kind of double ideal, the original twofold picture of God’s true kingship. It is not surprising then that just as the unhappinesses of David’s last days did not figure at the end of 1 Chronicles, so the follies of Solomon’s do not figure here. That he “loved many foreign women” who in the latter part of his reign made lasting enemies–Hadad, Rezon, Jeroboam–from quite an early stage in his reign (1 Kgs 11:14-40), are facts which the reader is aware of. (Michael Wilcock, The Message of Chr, 153)
1 Kgs 11:1 loved many foreign women. Whereas in the first part of his reign, “Solomon loved the LORD, walking in the statutes of his father David” (3:3), he later “loved many foreign women.” Diplomatic marriages between the dynasties of various kingdoms were common in the ancient Near East as a means of ratifying treaties, but the multiplication of royal wives is forbidden in Dt 17:17. Moreover, there were prohibitions against marrying foreign wives in the land Israel was to possess (Ex 34:16; Dt 7:1-4; Josh 23:12, 13). (Luder Whitlock, Jr., New Geneva Study Bible, NKJV, 491)
1 Kgs 11:2 Although Solomon had clear instructions from God not to marry women from foreign nations, he chose to disregard God’s commands. He married not one, but many foreign women, who subsequently led him away from God. God knows our strengths and weaknesses, and his commands are always for our good. When people ignore God’s commands, negative consequences inevitably result. It is not enough to know God’s Word or even to believe it; we must follow it and apply it to our daily activities and decisions. Take God’s commands seriously. Like Solomon, the wisest man who ever lived, we are not as strong as we may think. (Tyndale House Publishers, Life Application Study Bible, 566)
2 Chr 8:11 the places…are holy. Solomon moved his Egyptian wife out of regard for the holiness of the ark and the places associated with it. Unlike the books of Kings (1 Kgs 11:1-13) and Nehemiah (Neh 13:26, 27), Chronicles reserves negative comment on Solomon’s international marriages. These sad facts were well known. (Luder Whitlock, Jr., New Geneva Study Bible, NKJV, 612)
Solomon began his reign faithful to Yahweh (1 Kgs 3:3), but he gradually lapsed. His huge harem was the main reason (11:1-8). No doubt Solomon himself worshiped no god but Yahweh; but he tolerated the idolatrous cults of his foreign wives and even had shrines built for them (vv. 4-8). This, naturally enough, led may Israelites astray before long; the biblical writer found such conduct reprehensible and stated that Solomon’s actions were the direct cause of the political unrest at the end of his reign. It was punishment from Yahweh for his apostasy (vv. 9-14, 23).
So Solomon died, his empire intact but fast disintegrating. (Geoffrey W. Bromiley, International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Vol. 4, 568)
It was bad enough to marry them and bring them into the heart of a holy nation. It was much worse to allow them to practice the heathen rites of their idolatrous religions with his consent. It was intolerable when he went so far as to erect costly temples for them for their abominable rites on the very brow of Olivet and overlooking the temple itself, for we are expressly told that he built a high place for Chemosh, the abomination of Moab, in the hill that is before Jerusalem, and the other of Moloch, the abomination of the children of Ammon. (A.B. Simpson, The Christ in the Bible Commentary, Vol. 2, 399-400)
The Scripture seems quite clear that in his latter years Solomon began to move away from the strong ardor of his younger years. The reason is said to be centered in his oversized harem. Solomon had accumulated a total of 700 wives and 300 concubines (1 Kgs 11:3), many through political alliances. This procedure was in accord with the common customs of the day, but was in conflict with the law of God as noted in 1 Kgs 11:2. The presence of the harem highlighted a general pagan view that the king was the prime sire of the nation and had an obligation to contribute as many children as possible. Implicitly, Solomon accepted this concept with the result that sex played a too dominant role in his life and more and more blurred his perspective.
He allowed many of these women to worship their pagan gods, in fact built pagan temples for them. Ironically, Solomon was not diligent in giving witness to the reality of his own God, but his pagan wives were evangelistic in their zeal and turned his heart form the true God (1 Kgs 11:4, 6). So serious was this breach of loyalty that God appeared to him the third time and rebuked him, saying that in his son’s day the kingdom would be torn apart (1 Kgs 11:9-13).(Merrill C. Tenney, Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible, Vol. 5, 479)
The Chronicler frequently assumes the audience’s knowledge of the parallel account; in this context he relies on the reader’s prior familiarity with the earlier history in connection with Solomon’s otherwise unmentioned marriage to Pharaoh’s daughter (8:11; 1 Kgs 3:1; 7:8; 9:16, 24; 11:1). It does not seem likely that such a blatant reversal of the earlier record would be acceptable to his audience or escape notice without undermining the author’s own credibility. (Raymond B. Dillard, Word Biblical Commentary, Vol. 15, 62-63)
III. The current hardships that Israel/Judah faces now are partially due to a direct result of Solomon’s sin over 500 years before. (1 Kgs 11:6-13; Ezra 10:3-14; Neh 13:23-37)
Dt 17:16, 17 Israel’s kings did not heed this warning, and their behavior led to their downfall. Solomon had everything going for him, but when he became rich, built up a large army, and married many wives, his heart turned from God (1 Kgs 11). Out of Solomon’s sin came Israel’s disobedience, division, and captivity. (Tyndale House Publishers, Life Application Study Bible, 305)
The pagan temples remained a snare to Israel until destroyed by Josiah (2 Kgs 23:13, 14). Solomon’s sin remained an example of evil in the days of Ezra’s reforms (Neh 13:26), and the place where they were erected has continued to be called the “hill of offense” to the present day. (Merrill C. Tenney, Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible, Vol. 5, 479)
Later in the Chronicler’s History, intermarriage with foreigners will become an important issue. Ezra will order a wholesale divorce of all foreign wives (Ezra 10:3-14), while Nehemiah will deal with intermarriage more leniently, taking no action against existing marriages but forbidding the practice in the future (Neh 13:23-27). This attitude finds its roots in texts such as Dt 7:3-4, where the Lord says of the original inhabitants of Canaan, “Do not intermarry with them, giving your daughters to their sons or taking their daughters for your sons, for that would turn away your children from following me, to serve other gods.” Similarly, Dt 23:3-6 details who may and who may not participate in the assembly of the Lord. Ammonites and Moabites” (even to the tenth generation” are barred from the congregation (Dt 23:3). Edomites and Egyptians are permitted to be counted in the assembly after living for three generations among the people Israel (Dt 23:8). The intent behind these regulations, as Dt 7:4 makes clear, was not to preserve racial purity, but to maintain right worship. Intermarriage with the foreign nations, and swift acceptance of foreigners into the worshiping congregation, could lead to the corruption of Israel’s worship by alien practices and ideas. (On this concern, see also Nm 25:1-15; 1 Kgs 11:1-13). Under no circumstances can these biblical prohibitions be understood as a warrant for racism! (Steven S. Tuell, Interpretation: 1 & 2 Chr, 147-48)
The idea, therefore, is, that it is the nature of evil to diffuse itself. This is true with regard to individuals and communities. A single sin, however secret, when indulged, diffuses its corrupting influence over the whole soul; it depraves the conscience; it alienates from God; it strengthens all other principles of evil, while it destroys the efficacy of the means of grace and the disposition to use them. It is no less true of any community, that any one tolerated evil deteriorates its whole moral sense. (Charles Hodge; Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians, 86)
There is a certain irony in this report of Solomon’s fastidious concern for ritual purity (at least during the first 20 years of his reign) because he later profanes Jerusalem by building places of worship for the gods of all his foreign wives (1 Kgs 11:5-8). Then, as now, ritual purity was not a one-time event (e.g., the ark entering Jerusalem) but an ongoing process of applying the biblical teaching about God’s holiness to daily living (cf. Lv 11:44; Mt 5:48). (Andrew E. Hill, The NIV Application Commentary: 1 & 2 Chr, 404)
CONCLUSION/APPLICATION: What does this message have to do with Christ and me?:
A- As much as possible we need to avoid the contagious pagan influence of the world, our flesh and the Devil. (Nm 25:1-15; Mt 16:5-12; 18:7; Lk 12:1; Jn 15:18-19; 1 Cor 5:4-11; 2 Cor 6:17; Col 2:8, 20; 2 Thes 3:14-15; Jas 4:4; 1 Jn 2:15-17)
The unfortunate thing about this world is that good habits are so much easier to give up than bad ones. — W. Somerset Maugham
1 Cor 5:6 Paul was writing to those who wanted to ignore this church problem. They didn’t realize that allowing public sin to exist in the church affects all its members. Paul does not expect anyone to be sinless–all believers struggle with sin daily. Instead, he is speaking against those who deliberately sin, feel no guilt, and refuse to repent. This kind of sin cannot be tolerated in the church because it affects others. We have a responsibility to other believers. Yeast makes bread dough rise. A little bit affects the whole batch. Blatant sins, left uncorrected, confuse and divide the congregation. While believers should encourage, pray for, and build up one another, they must also be intolerant of sin that jeopardizes the spiritual health of the church. (Tyndale House Publishers, Life Application Study Bible, 2068)
1 Cor 5:10, 11 Paul makes it clear that we should not disassociate ourselves from unbelievers–otherwise, we could not carry out Christ’s command to tell them about salvation (Mt 28:18-20). But we are to distance ourselves from the person who claims to be a Christian, yet indulges in sins explicitly forbidden in Scripture and then rationalizes his or her actions. By rationalizing sin, a person harms others for whom Christ died and dims the image of God in himself or herself. A church that includes such people is hardly fit to be the light of the world. To do so would distort the picture of Christ it presents to the world. Church leaders must be ready to correct, in love, for the sake of spiritual unity. (Tyndale House Publishers, Life Application Study Bible, 2068)
Perhaps the most blatant example of this perverse bias toward compromise was the World Council of Churches’ dictum in 1966, “The world must set the agenda for the Church.” (Os Guinness; No God But God, 167)
“A continual desire for worldly pleasure often signifies that all is not well. Some of this world’s pleasures, even in moderation, will undermine a Christian’s spiritual life. If a married man wants to flirt with other girls, even in moderation, one assumes that there is something wrong with his marriage—or if not, that there soon will be! So it is when a Christian flirts with worldliness. The command is clear and uncompromising: Come out from them, and be separate from them, says the Lord, and touch nothing unclean then I will welcome you.” (2 Cor. 6:17). We are to abstain from every form of evil. (1 Thes 5:22). (Kenneth Prior; The Way of Holiness, 144)
Satan is also described as “the ruler of this world” (Jn 12:31). The “world” which he rules is the present world system organized according to his own principles, methods, and aims (2 Cor 4:3, 4; Eph 2:2; Col 1:13; 1 Jn 2:15-17). The greed and self-centered ambitions of the nations, the deceptive diplomacy of the political world, the bitter hatred and rivalry in the sphere of commerce, the godless ideologies of the masses of humanity, all spring out of and are fostered by satanic influence. Satan exercises his domination over “the sons of disobedience” (Eph 2:2). The statement that “the whole world lieth in the evil one” (1 Jn 5:19 ASV) indicates that the world of unregenerated humanity lies in the grip of Satan and supinely yields to his power. Satan has gained his power over mankind by trickery and usurpation. As the instigator of human sin, whose punishment is death, Satan gained “the power of death” and uses the fear of death as a means to keep men under his domination (Heb 2:14, 15). (The Zondervan Pictoral Encyclopedia of the Bible Q-Z, 283)
If advertisers thought that human beings were rational actors, self-consistent and centered, they would attempt to prove the superiority of their product in rational, perhaps functional terms. Advertisers don’t, and this shows that they believe human beings are clusters of desires, particularly desires for novelty, for membership in a “cool” group, for envious looks from neighbors and friends, for a taste of the American dream. Advertisers also clearly believe that human beings are susceptible to the influence of images, jingles, and slogans. Selves are not fixed, and their desires can be manipulated. Human beings can be brainwashed. So not only does advertising shape desire, but every time an ad goes out that assumes human beings are decentered, changeable selves, it reinforces the postmodern view of the self. (Peter J. Leithart, Solomon Among the Postmoderns, 145)
You may be tempted to surrender just a token sin or some minor fault, while allowing your most serious iniquity to remain entrenched and well-hidden. Let us realize, therefore, that the energies we expend in keeping our sins secret are the actual “materials” of which a stronghold is made. The demon you are fighting is actually using your thoughts to protect his access to your life. (Francis Frangipane, The Three Battlegrounds, 32)
Scripture warns Christians against being defiled by hypocrisy and false doctrine (Mt 16:12; Lk 12:1). Since we are holy people, God wants us to keep ourselves pure from giving our approval to evil deeds or from giving into wicked thoughts. These corrupt our worship of him and render meaningless our professions of love for each other (1 Cor 5:5-7). (Paul O. Wendland, The People’s Bible, 2 Chr, 117)
Disobedience to God’s law respecting marriage with the heathen and separation from the world had much to do with Solomon’s fall. God had strictly forbidden ancient Israel to mingle with the surrounding nations in social life, and especially marriage; and He has forbidden us to be “yoked together with unbelievers” (2 Cor 6:14). Any man or woman who dares to disobey this divine command must take the consequences–an unhappy life and perhaps a lost eternity. (A.B. Simpson, The Christ in the Bible Commentary, Vol. 2, 399)
Let us fear lest we too should become, like Solomon, beacons, useful only in the awful warning which our lives will hold forth to others. Let us shun the dangers which led him into sin and folly. Let us especially make sure to claim that which he missed, the utter surrender of our life from the world and self and sin and the indwelling life of God who is, through the Holy Spirit, within us. (A.B. Simpson, The Christ in the Bible Commentary, Vol. 2, 400)
The Spirit may be quenched by someone else’s influence in your life. You’ve probably come to realize that certain folks tend to be spiritual fire extinguishers. Critical people quench the Spirit of God. Their words, like sharp icicles, freeze out the fire of revival in a heart. (Ron M. Phillips, Awakened by the Spirit, 177)
I hear addicts talk about the shakes and panic attacks and the highs and lows of resisting their habit, and to some degree I understand them because I have had habits of my own, but no drug is so powerful as the drug of self. No rut in the mind is so deep as the one that says I am the world, the world belongs to me, all people are characters in my play. There is no addiction so powerful as self-addiction. (Donald Miller; Blue Like Jazz, 182)
The church has been compromised because it has been guilty of elevating human expediency over divine principle — Alister Begg
Dr. David Persing is a molecular genetics researcher and a Christian. He says the biblical teaching that all of nature is fallen includes our genetic heritage. As a result, we all have inborn tendencies toward various forms of sinful behavior–whether it’s addiction, a sexual disorder, or a tendency to ruthlessness or cowardice.
Yet our genes give no excuse for sin, Persing says. We still have room for making real moral choices. Everyone is dealt a different genetic hand in life, but we’re each responsible for how we play it. The life-giving message of the gospel is that we are not pawns of our genes. Despite our fallen nature, we can still be governed by God, not by our genes. (Charles Colson, A Dangerous Grace, 175)
B- When we recognize the foothold those evil influences already possess in our hearts and minds, we need to do all we can to eradicate them. Look to Jesus. (Mt chps 5-7; 5:27-30; 11:12; Mk 9:42-47; 1 Cor 1:20-26; 2:12; 3:19a; 2 Cor 6:14-15; Eph 1:4; 4:17-32; 5:10-14; Col 3:1-17; 1 Thes 4:3, 7, 8; Ti 2:13, 14; Heb 12:1-2 )
Never give in, never give in, never, never, never, never—in nothing, great or small, large or petty—never give in except to convictions of honor and good sense. (Sir Winston Spencer Churchill; Address at Harrow School, October 29, 1941)
A man may lie still and be cured of a malady. But he must not lie still if he wants to be cured of a sin; on the contrary, he must get up and jump about violently. The whole point indeed is perfectly expressed in the very word which we use for a man in a hospital; “patient” is in the passive mood; “sinner” is in the active. If a man is to be saved from influenza, he may be a patient. But if he is to be saved from forging, he must be not a patient but an impatient. He must be personally impatient with forgery. All moral reform must start in the active not the passive will. (G. K. Chesterton; Orthodoxy, The Romance of Faith, 137)
Until you can confidently state your values, every philosophy, every behavior and every desire known to humankind is a potential substitute. Your values become the filter through which you determine right from wrong, value from worthlessness and importance from insignificance. If you do not specifically identify your values, they will be defined for you by the whims and influences of the world. (George Barna; Turning Vision, 91)
Eph 5:10-14 It is important to avoid the “fruitless deeds of darkness” (any pleasure or activity that results in sin), but we must go even further. Paul instructs us to expose these deeds, because our silence may be interpreted as approval. God needs people who will take a stand for what is right. Christians must lovingly speak out for what is true and right. (Tyndale House Publishers, Life Application Study Bible, 2139)
You don’t think TV has a powerful influence on your life? Then why did advertisers pay $2.4 million for 30 seconds to advertise on the 2006 Super Bowl?
But unlike the cables or wires that connect your home computer to the Internet, synapses are not permanent, fixed objects. They are organic connections that rely on use for their very existence. In this manner, they are somewhat like your muscles or some other kinds of organic tissue–in other words, use them or lose them. (Joe S. McIlhaney, Jr., MD & Freda McKissic Bush, MD, Hooked, 28)
When a new activity or experience occurs, it can result in a strengthening of the connection between neurons, or even in a new connection altogether. These connections are critical for memory, behavior, emotions, desires, and any number of other outcomes that activity or experience brings. If that experience or activity occurs again, the connection is used and strengthened in the process. If that connection is not used, the synapse eventually breaks down and dies. This process refers to either a continued connection between neurons or to a loss of connection–not the life or death of the neurons themselves, although that can and does occur as well. (Joe S. McIlhaney, Jr., MD & Freda McKissic Bush, MD, Hooked, 28)
The primary things that change in the brain structure, that mold it, are its synapses. Synapses either are sustained or they are allowed to deteriorate based on behavior and experience. It may seem incredible, but the things we see, do, and experience actually cause part of our brains to flourish, i.e., synapses that survive and strengthen; and part of our brain to weaken, i.e., synapses that disintegrate or die. (Joe S. McIlhaney, Jr., MD & Freda McKissic Bush, MD, Hooked, 29)
We’ve seen how the brain is composed of multiple neurons, all of which are connected by synapses. These synapses can be created, grow, or deteriorate based on our thoughts and actions. In this manner, each person actually changes the very structure of the brain with the choices he or she makes and the behavior he or she is involved in. (Joe S. McIlhaney, Jr., MD & Freda McKissic Bush, MD, Hooked, 45)
To Keep – To Toss
God wants to keep
Some parts of me and to toss
Out the other parts.
Why would He do this?
Because it’s necessary,
If I am to grow.
Like pruning a plant,
So it can produce fine fruit,
The plant’s less burdened.
A sharp knife cuts through
To remove the un-needed
Dead wood, that sucks strength.
Likewise, we’re refined
Of the un-necessary,
So we may produce.
Sometimes, refining
Is most uncomfortable,
Can hurt, in and out…
All kinds of stuff
Whether things, emotional,
Or habits, are weights.
They keep us tied down
From truly serving our God.
LIVE! Just toss “stuff” out.
— Molly A. Marsh
“We do not keep ourselves virtuous by our own power,” Pascal wrote, “but by the counterbalance of two opposing vices, just as we stay upright between two contrary winds. Take one of these vices away and we fall into the other.”
What did Pascal mean by this? A man or woman who works very hard may simply be avoiding the sin of laziness by being filled with selfish ambition or greed. Remove his or her hunger for more money, and this person will immediately become as lazy as any of us.
Others might be very disciplined around food. They would be the last persons on earth you would label as gluttons. Yet they are disciplined around food because they want to have a physique that will draw attention to themselves, not because they don’t want food to have a hold on their hearts and steal their affection for God. They may be free from gluttony only because they are slaves to vanity.
Do you see how we play vice against vice–using vanity to destroy gluttony, for instance–and are upheld by the struggle of two sins? This is a much different holiness than the ancients’ view of a transforming passion that gives birth to virtue. On and on we could go, showing how 90 percent of our virtue is a sham, a vice wearing a coat and tie. That’s why Jesus constantly pointed us to the heart, the one battlefield that really matters. The state of our heart is the true state of our virtue. (Gary L. Thomas, Seeking the Face of God, 68-69)
Our pleasure and our duty, though opposite before,
Since we have seen His beauty, are joined to part no more
To see the Law by Christ fulfilled, and hear His pardon voice,
Transforms a slave into a child and duty into choice
— John Newton
Every time you refuse to forgive or fail to overlook a weakness in another, your heart not only hardens toward them, it hardens toward God. You cannot form a negative opinion of someone (even though you think they may deserve it!) And allow that opinion to crystalize into an attitude; for every time you do, an aspect of your heart will cool toward God. You may still think you are open to God, but the Scriptures are clear: “The one who does not love his brother whom he has seen, cannot love God whom he has not seen” (1 Jn 4:20). You may not like what someone has done, but you do not have an option to stop loving them. Love is your only choice. (Francis Frangipane, The Three Battlegrounds, 70)
I can be immature and reach heaven. I’m not sure, however, that I can remain immature and see hell break apart at my feet. If I am steeped in habitual sin, if I remain a spiritual adolescent, I cannot threaten hell, not while kissing its feet or lusting after its trinkets. (Gary L. Thomas, Seeking the Face of God, 31)
While Moses had been listening to God, his brother Aaron, high priest of all the people, had been listening to the people. The input the two received was decidedly different. When Moses listened, he received God’s revelation of the law of righteousness. When Aaron listened, he heard complaints, wishes, and demands. Moses brought with him uncompromised standards of heaven; Aaron caved in to the whims of men. It was all in the listening. (Gordon MacDonald; Ordering Your Private World, 130)
Compromise is simply changing the question to fit the answer. (Merrit Malloy, Things I Meant to Say to You When We Were Old)
C- We need to continually and constantly choose to repent of our past and present and look to Jesus to make us a new creation with a new heart and mind in the future. (Jer 31:31-34; Ezek 11:17-21; 36:22-31; Rom 12:1-2; 2 Cor 3:18; 5:17: Phil 3:21; Heb 8:8-12)
One of the deep truths of sanctification is that it gets “better” and “worse” at the same time!
You truly shine more brightly as you move towards the light. You hold onto God more steadily. You’re more loving and joyful. You’re more trustworthy. More teachable. You give to people rather than use them. But brighter light can also expose more dark corners, pockets of unconscionable and once unimaginable iniquity. (David Powlison in Sex and the Supremacy of Christ, 101)
Don’t want anything TOO much as you will make bad choices trying to get it. — Don Helton (Hillsdale realtor)
Most of us do not WANT to believe in Christ. We do not want to give up allegiance to ourselves. — Sally Monroe at Bible study 3-29-06
I think the trouble with me is lack of faith. I have no rational ground for going back on the arguments that convinced me of God’s existence: but the irrational deadweight of my old skeptical habits, and the spirit of this age, and the cares of the day, steal away all my lively feeling of the truth, and often when I pray I wonder if I am not posting letters to a non-existent address. Mind you I don’t think so—the whole of my reasonable mind is convinced: but I often feel so. However, there is nothing to do but to peg away. One falls so often that it hardly seems worth while picking oneself up and going through the farce of starting over again as if you could ever hope to walk. Still, this seeming absurdity is the only sensible thing I do, so I must continue it. (The Letters of C. S. Lewis to Arthur Greeves, 398-99)
Greater sins do sooner startle the soul, and awaken and rouse up the soul to repentance, than lesser sins do. Little sins often slide into the soul, and breed, and work secretly and undiscernibly in the soul, till they come to be so strong, as to trample upon the soul, and to cut the throat of the soul. There is oftentimes greatest danger to our bodies in the least diseases that hang upon us, because we are apt to make light of them, and to neglect the timely use of means for removing of them, till they are grown so strong that they prove mortal to us. So there is most danger often in the least of sins. (Thomas Brooks, Precious Remedies Against Satan’s Devices, 42)
Most of the time when people call me with a decision to make, they say, “I don’t know what the best thing to do is.” Rarely will someone say, “I don’t know what the right thing to do is.” I think that is very telling. Perhaps it’s thought that if you inquire about the “best” solution rather than the “right” solution, your personal concerns will more likely be given due consideration. The “right way” promises sacrifice and nobility, rarely self-serving enough to be of immediate gratification of comfort. The “best way,” on the other hand, dangles the prospect of some compromise of principles to give room for immediate gratification or comfort. (Dr. Laura Schlessinger, Good People…and Where You Fit In )
F.W. Boreham, the great Australian preacher, said, “We make our decisions, and then our decisions turn around and make us.” (Lloyd J. Ogilvie; The Communicator’s Commentary Acts, 327-28)
Decision making is easy if there are no contradictions in your value system. (Robert H. Schuller; Tough Times Never Last, But Tough People Do, 148)
We think, “it doesn’t matter. My decisions, my attitudes and thoughts and feelings–do they really make that much difference?” But God is saying, “Every moment of your life matters to me. Your choices have lasting repercussions. That’s why I am confronting you with the truth.” (Raymond C. Ortlund, Jr., Preaching the Word: Isaiah, God Saves Sinners, 47)
“Christians knew that their faith was absolutely true, that it could brook no rivals, and so they sought no compromises.” (David Wells; No Place for Truth, 104)
The Choice by Max Lucado
IT’S QUIET. It’s early. My coffee is hot. The sky is still black. The world is still asleep. The day is coming.
In a few moments the day will arrive. It will roar down the track with the rising of the sun. The stillness of the dawn will be exchanged for the noise of the day. The calm of solitude will be replaced by the pounding pace of the human race. The refuge of the early morning will be invaded by decisions to be made and deadlines to be met.
For the next twelve hours I will be exposed to the day’s demands. It is now that I must make a choice. Because of Calvary, I’m free to choose. And so I choose.
I choose love . . .
No occasion justifies hatred; no injustice warrants bitterness. I choose love. Today I will love God and what God loves.
I choose joy . . .
I will invite my God to be the God of circumstance. I will refuse the temptation to be cynical . . . the tool of the lazy thinker. I will refuse to see people as anything less than human beings, created by God. I will refuse to see any problem as anything less than an opportunity to see God.
I choose peace . . .
I will live forgiven. I will forgive so that I may live.
I choose patience . . .
I will overlook the inconveniences of the world. Instead of cursing the one who takes my place, I’ll invite him to do so. Rather than complain that the wait is too long, I will thank God for a moment to pray. Instead of clinching my fist at new assignments, I will face them with joy and courage.
I choose kindness . . .
I will be kind to the poor, for they are alone. Kind to the rich, for they are afraid. And kind to the unkind, for such is how God has treated me.
I choose goodness . . .
I will go without a dollar before I take a dishonest one. I will be overlooked before I will boast. I will confess before I will accuse. I choose goodness.
I choose faithfulness . . .
Today I will keep my promises. My debtors will not regret their trust. My associates will not question my word. My wife will not question my love. And my children will never fear that their father will not come home.
I choose gentleness . . .
Nothing is won by force. I choose to be gentle. If I raise my voice may it be only in praise. If I clench my fist, may it be only in prayer. If I make a demand, may it be only of myself.
I choose self-control . . .
I am a spiritual being. After this body is dead, my spirit will soar. I refuse to let what will rot rule the eternal. I choose self-control. I will be drunk only by joy. I will be impassioned only by my faith. I will be influenced only by God. I will be taught only by Christ. I choose self-control.
Love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. To these I commit my day. If I succeed, I will give thanks. If I fail, I will seek his grace. And then, when this day is done, I will place my head on my pillow and rest.
We are what we repeatedly do; excellence then is not an act, but a habit. -Aristotle
Dawson Trotman, founder of The Navigators, used to say, “you are going to be what you are now becoming.” And what you are now becoming is dependent on the choices you make. So commit yourself to making the right choices, and then look to the Holy Spirit to work in you “to will and to act” (Philippians 2:13) in carrying out that commitment. (Jerry Bridges, The Discipline of Grace, 188)
What if you are a believer and already find yourself in a covenant relationship with an unbeliever?
First, I do not think that your immediate reaction should be to dissolve the relationship. Paul in Corinthians and also Peter in his letter both talk about how a believer can be a great influence on the unbelieving partner. Just be careful of who is influencing who.
Second, recognize that you face a difficult road. There will be conflicts between your values and your unbelieving partner’s values.
Thirdly, pray that God will not only protect you and allow you to deal righteously with your unbelieving partner, but pray that God might touch their heart and mind and they might see the urgent necessity of believing in Christ.
Finally, if you are a believer and are contemplating a business or any other close relationship with an unbeliever . .. stop now. Listen to the Lord’s counsel through the Apostle Paul and do not be unequally yoked with an unbeliever. It is more work and hassle than God desires for you to endure. But, once you have entered into this relationship, righteousness demands that you honor your word and commitments to that person. — Pastor Keith
Worship point: When one discovers just how sinful we really are and how much the world has influenced our thinking, our actions and our words, it is not hard to worship. Especially when one considers the perfections of Jesus and His unfailing love, grace, mercy, forgiveness and patience with us in spite of our sinful repugnance before Him, that is when we can truly “Cheer up”.
Spiritual Challenge: Take inventory of the kinds of influences that infiltrate your heart and mind. What are their origins? What is their world-view? What is their agenda? Do they honor Christ our Master and Savior? Do not acquiesce to the world, the flesh and the Devil. Fight the good fight!
Quotes to Note:
“To glorify God by being a faithful steward of all that is entrusted to us. To have a positive influence on all who come in contact with Chick-fil-A.” It’s hardly a purpose statement you would expect to see in Corporate America, but that’s what you see displayed prominently in front of the Chick-fil-A headquarters in Atlanta, GA. It’s the philosophy by which the founder, Truett Cathy, lives. No wonder they are closed on Sunday but still outsell their competitors who stay open 7 days a week.
“In Christ” —
No Chinks
Leave a Reply