Again with the first born, but much better news – Exodus 13

From the King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.) Exodus 13:2

"Sanctify unto me all the firstborn, whatsoever openeth the womb among the children of Israel, both of man and of beast: it is mine."

Once again God is stating the first born were his, and which he reserved to himself, to his own use and service; and the people of Israel were under great obligation to devote them to him, since he had spared all their firstborn, when all the firstborn of the Egyptians, both man and beast, were destroyed. The command is addressed to Moses. It was to declare the will of God that all firstborn were to be consecrated to Him, set apart from all other creatures. The command is expressly based upon the Passover. The firstborn exempt from the destruction became in a new and special sense the exclusive property of the Lord: the firstborn of man as His ministers, the firstborn of cattle as victims. In lieu of the firstborn of men the Levites were devoted to the temple services.

Here is an interesting analysis from Presbyterian minister Matthew Henry's (18 October 1662 – 22 June 1714) Concise Commentary on the Bible

In remembrance of the destruction of the first-born of Egypt, both of man and of beast, and the deliverance of the Israelites out of bondage, the first-born males of the Israelites were set apart to the Lord. By this was set before them, that their lives were preserved through the ransom of the atonement, which in due time was to be made for sin. They were also to consider their lives, thus ransomed from death, as now to be consecrated to the service of God. The parents were not to look upon themselves as having any right in their first-born, till they solemnly presented them to God, and allowed his title to them. That which is, by special mercy, spared to us, should be applied to God's honour; at least, some grateful acknowledgment, in works of piety and charity, should be made. The remembrance of their coming out of Egypt must be kept up every year. The day of Christ's resurrection is to be remembered, for in it we were raised up with Christ out of death's house of bondage. The Scripture tells us not expressly what day of the year Christ rose, but it states particularly what day of the week it was; as the more valuable deliverance, it should be remembered weekly. The Israelites must keep the feast of unleavened bread. Under the gospel, we must not only remember Christ, but observe his holy supper. Do this in remembrance of him. Also care must be taken to teach children the knowledge of God. Here is an old law for catechising. It is of great use to acquaint children betimes with the histories of the Bible. And those who have God's law in their heart should have it in their mouth, and often speak of it, to affect themselves, and to teach others.

Bach's interpretation of Matthew 22

Throughout his life as a musician, Bach composed cantatas for both secular and sacred use. In Weimar, he was from 1714 to 1717 commissioned to compose one church cantata a month. In the course of almost four years there he thus covered most occasions of the liturgical year. As cantor in Leipzig Bach was responsible for the Thomasschule (Thomas School) and for the church music at the main churches, where a cantata was required for the service on Sundays and additional church holidays of the liturgical year. When Bach took up his office in 1723, he started to compose new cantatas for most occasions - from Advent, through Easter, Pentacost and on through the year. The full list of cantatas can be seen here

This piece was written to complement Matthew 22 known as the The Great Commandment: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind." Enjoy Bach's Cantata No. 169 "Gott Soll Allein Mein Herze Haben" roughly translated to "God alone should have my heart".

Killing a fig tree is one thing, but killing all first-born children?!

Sometimes it is very hard for me to understand God's actions. After hardening Pharaoh's heart to literally make him not acquiesce and allow the Israelites to leave Egypt, He continuously rains down plagues seemingly to simply demonstrate His power. God says in Exodus 3:9-10, "Pharaoh will not heed you, so that My wonders may be multiplied in the land of Egypt." He appears to have convinced the Egyptian people of his power over their own gods, and I suppose that was His point. But killing babies?! I am struggling with that.

I guess that it is only fair to point out that Pharaoh undertook a smilar but failed program earlier in Exodus. He said (paraphrasing), “Look, the Israelites have become far too numerous for us. We must deal shrewdly with them or they will become even more numerous and, if war breaks out, will join our enemies, fight against us and leave the country.” He said to the Hebrew midwives, whose names were Shiphrah and Puah, “When you are helping the Hebrew women during childbirth on the delivery stool, if you see that the baby is a boy, kill him; but if it is a girl, let her live.” The midwives balked and Pharaoh said to the general populace, “Every Hebrew boy that is born you must throw into the Nile, but let every girl live.” And this of course leads to the story of Moses in the bullrushes.

But back to God and the killing of the newborns. Perhaps Pharaoh demonstrating his disregard for human life mitigates the immorality such an act. I still have a hard time with this, but I did find and interesting analysis at Vista Church of Christ.

It is easy to blame the leader and forget he wasn't the only one involved. He was by far the most prominent, but he wasn't working alone.

God told Abraham, "Know certainly that your descendants will be strangers in a land that is not theirs, and will serve them, and they will afflict them four hundred years" (Genesis 15:13). This came about simply because the Israelites became numerous while living in the Egypt. "Now there arose a new king over Egypt, who did not know Joseph. And he said to his people, "Look, the people of the children of Israel are more and mightier than we; come, let us deal shrewdly with them, lest they multiply, and it happen, in the event of war, that they also join our enemies and fight against us, and so go up out of the land" (Exodus 1:8-10). Notice that this Pharaoh feared that the Israelites might join an enemy nation. There was no evidence of that, but his ideas were adopted by the Egyptians. "And they made their lives bitter with hard bondage-in mortar, in brick, and in all manner of service in the field. All their service in which they made them serve was with rigor" (Exodus 1:14). Worse, they turned their attacks on babies. "This man dealt treacherously with our people, and oppressed our forefathers, making them expose their babies, so that they might not live" (Acts 7:19).

After 400 years of this, God stepped in. "And the LORD said: "I have surely seen the oppression of My people who are in Egypt, and have heard their cry because of their taskmasters, for I know their sorrows"" (Exodus 3:7). Remember that Pharaoh was leading his people, but it was the Egyptians who were carrying out Pharaoh's plans.

Egypt was a country of idolatry. Each of the plagues showed God to be greater than the Egyptian gods. "For I will pass through the land of Egypt on that night, and will strike all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both man and beast; and against all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgment: I am the LORD" (Exodus 12:12). David Padfield wrote, "This plague was directed against "all of the gods of Egypt" (Exodus 12:12) and would show the total inability of the gods of Egypt to protect their subjects. In the face of unparalleled tragedy, "all of the gods of Egypt" were silent. Where was Meskhenet, the goddess who presided at the birth of children? Where was Hathor, one of the seven deities who attended the birth of children? Where was Min, the god of procreation? Where was Isis, the goddess of fertility? Where was Selket, the guardian of life? Where was Renenutet, the cobra-goddess and guardian of Pharaoh?" [Against All The Gods Of Egypt]. You need to also know that the title "Pharaoh" means "the sun." All the kings of Egypt believed they were deity on earth. Pharaoh was powerless to do anything to stop God. This was proven not to just Pharaoh, but to every Egyptian and to everyone in the world.

Thus God took a cruel, arrogant, corrupt people and brought them to their knees. He also punished them by bringing upon them what they did to others -- killing babies -- though, with God all children would be brought to Him in heaven because of their innocence.

Why did Jesus curse the fig tree?

This has always puzzled me - it seemed shortsighted and even spiteful. I had never thought of Jesus' cursing of the fig tree as a parable, but today I found this explanation in The Holy Bible, Writings of Ellen White:

"The cursing of the fig tree was an acted parable. That barren tree, flaunting its pretentious foliage in the very face of Christ, was a symbol of the Jewish nation. The Saviour desired to make plain to His disciples the cause and the certainty of Israel's doom. For this purpose He invested the tree with moral qualities, and made it the expositor of divine truth. The Jews stood forth distinct from all other nations, professing allegiance to God. They had been specially favored by Him, and they laid claim to righteousness above every other people. But they were corrupted by the love of the world and the greed of gain. They boasted of their knowledge, but they were ignorant of the requirements of God, and were full of hypocrisy. Like the barren tree, they spread their pretentious branches aloft, luxuriant in appearance, and beautiful to the eye, but they yielded "nothing but leaves." The Jewish religion, with its magnificent temple, its sacred altars, its mitered priests and impressive ceremonies, was indeed fair in outward appearance, but humility, love, and benevolence were lacking."

God Did What to Pharaoh?

I don't like today's OT reading.  I saw in it for the first time something that particularly disturbs me.  In all the times I have read and heard and been taught the story of the plagues of Egypt, it goes like this:  Moses reasons with Pharaoh to let the people go.  Pharaoh is a pagan, greedy, mean dictator who realizes that a large portion of his economy will collapse if he lets the Hebrew slaves leave, so he refuses.  Moses threatens the plague of the day.  Pharaoh scoffs.  God does His stuff.  Pharaoh relents.  God removes the plague.  Pharaoh hardens his heart, laughs maniacally, says "gotcha," hardens his heart some more, and once again refuses to let the people go.  The pattern repeats 10 times until the day of Passover.  All along the way, it is the fault of the power-hungry Pharaoh that such misery is visited on the land., and we feel that the divine smack downs are sort of cool and certainly well deserved.  But what I saw today in Exodus 9 and 10 were these words:  "But the Lord hardened Pharaoh's heart" . . . "so that I can perform these miracles and you can tell your children and grandchildren that I treated the Egyptians harshly . . . "

I could see the first part of that possibly being a translation error, but the second part makes the message pretty darn clear.  I don't like it.

ARE WE BLOG-A-PHOBIC?

No posts?  Do we not like blogs?  Does no one have an insight, a verse, a question, a frustration, a Holy Ghost moment to share?  Or  . . . . like me . . . .is everyone having a wee bit of trouble figuring out how to get in and out of this blog?  I think I've got it now, but for a while I had to make like Abraham and set out for unknown territory.  If you're reading this, let us know how we can make the blog a useful tool in our study.

Grace to all,

LB

How Goes the Launch?

My friends, herein lies the beauty of the blog . . . .my first time ever, maiden voyage into bloggery is being undertaken at midnight, in my flannel pjs, feet  on the desk, snacks at the ready.  All of a sudden, I'm thinking that this blog just might be a fantastic way to do some Bible study! If we can't make it (prefer not to make it?) to small groups or Sunday School classes or other "in person" opportunities, the Year of the Bible Blog will be available 24/7.  Please weigh in early and often.  The more conversation, questions, debate, and insight we get, the more enriching this experience will be.

First big question:  are you finding it difficult to maintain the daily discipline of reading the assigned chapters?  First big confession:  YES, I AM!  I think the better and more realistic practice for me is going to be setting aside a couple of hours each weekend and doing a week's worth of reading at a time.  I know this isn't ideal and that the concept of the program is to "give us our daily bread," but I think I'm going to have to take the python approach and eat big /digest at length.  Let us know what's working for you.

What has touched you in these first couple of weeks?  Have you gained a fresh perspective or insight on a passage that you have perhaps read many times before?  If so, why?  If not, has reading the "old familiars" of Genesis and Matthew been comfortable? refreshing? tedious?

One verse from the very first day of reading caught my attention and has been nagging at me ever since:  Genesis 1:4: "God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness."  There is something there for me that I can't quite put my finger on.  Yes, clearly, light is good.  99.9% of us would prefer to sit outside in beautiful afternoon sunshine than in the darkness of midnight.  And yes, it was obviously necessary to "separate" the light from the darkness so that we can maintain the natural rhythms of morning and evening. But what about the edge, the fringe, the twilight -- equally God-breathed but neither day nor night  . . . . and both at the same time?  And if "the light was good," does that necessarily mean that the darkness was not?  I began thinking about this a couple of years ago when I was trying to make a sermon out of John 1:4-5: " In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind.  The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it. "  We so often equate darkness with evil or ignorance or loss, and that is clearly how John intended the metaphor to be understood in these early words of his gospel.  But are there not times when we can (should?) embrace the darkness?

That's what is rolling around in my head after these first days of the program.  How about you and yours?

Grace to all ~

LB