What is the meaning of the text, “Thou has magnified Thy word above all Thy name” (Psalm 138:2)" TARGET="_blank">Psalm 138:2)?

Perhaps this statement will be more easily understood if we use an illustration. The Churches of Macedonia (i.e. the Philippians, etc.) had a good “name” with the Apostle Paul, as liberal givers from their very beginning (Philippians 4:10-16). Yet on an occasion when he sought their help for the supply of the need of poor saints in Juda, they did far beyond his highest expectation, as he tells us in 1 Corinthians 8:1-5." TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 8:1-5. In effect, he says of them: “They have magnified their liberality above all their name for it.”
Now, God’s “Name” represents the sum of His manifestations of Himself. As has been said by others, it is the product of His deeds, and is according to His historically manifested glory. In plainer words, it is His reputation for lovingkindness to His people, faithfulness to His promise, etc., as may be seen by its use in such passages as Exodus 16" TARGET="_blank">Exodus 16 and Joshua 7:9." TARGET="_blank">Joshua 7:9. David, who according to its title is the author of Psalm 138," TARGET="_blank">Psalm 138, has already known much of the name and fame of the Lord, both from the history of His people, and from His previous dealings with himself. But on the occasion for which he gives praise so fervently in this psalm, he feels that God has shown His faithfulness in keeping His word, even beyond all that past experience would have led him to expect, and so he says, “I will . . . praise Thy name for Thy loving- kindness and Thy truth; for Thou has magnified Thy word above all Thy name.”
Possibly the occasion may be that which is referred to in 2 Samuel 7," TARGET="_blank">2 Samuel 7, where at least he is found speaking in a strain very similar. He says there, “Thou hast brought me hitherto; and this was yet a small thing in Thy sight, O Lord God; but Thou hast spoken of Thy servant’s house for a great while to come; . . . for Thy word’s sake . . . hast Thou done all these great things . . . to make Thee a name; . . . and let Thy name be magnified for ever” (2 Samuel 7:18-26)." TARGET="_blank">2 Samuel 7:18-26).
W.R.

Other pages in this section

About this site

How much intimacy is appropriate for couples who are dating?

What activities and how much intimacy are appropriate for couples who are dating?

Christians should seek God's will for a life's partner during courtship. Dating is the time for learning to know each other and planning for the future. It is not (as in society) simply for a good time, or experimentation, or conquest.

Two words help answer our question: purity and modesty Paul instructed Timothy in 1 Timothy 5:2" TARGET="_blank">1 Timothy 5:2 to encourage "the younger (women) as sisters, with all purity." In Genesis 24:65," TARGET="_blank">Genesis 24:65, Rebecca, when about to meet her husband-to-be, "took a vail, and covered herself."

A young man should regard his intended as his "sister" during courtship. He should have genuine respect for her that will preserve from violating her purity. An embrace and kiss when greeting or parting is appropriate with his sister and is equally so with his intended. Their greetings may be more than a quick peck on the cheek but they should avoid any activity leading to greater physical intimacy. Both should dress and behave so as not to stir up strong desire in the other. Strong desire may lead to disaster and loss of purity. Couples should avoid circumstances or activities where they would be ashamed to be found. A good testimony is vital.

Couples need time together. Eating out, drives through the country and visiting points of interest afford suitable opportunities. Visiting older Christians will encourage them. The young may also gain insights of great value for their future together.

They need to learn each other's values, expectations and goals. They should recognize and make needed adjustments. These are easier to make during courtship than after marriage. Reading and praying together will promote spiritual bonding and growth and begin a good habit for a lifetime together.

J. Slabaugh

Other pages in this section

About this site

How does an assembly recognize its elders?

How does an assembly recognize its elders?

Paul gives the qualifications for men who will join an existing oversight in Ephesus (1 Timothy 3:1-7;" TARGET="_blank">1 Timothy 3:1-7; Acts 20:17)." TARGET="_blank">Acts 20:17). These still guide an assembly in recognizing its elders. In God’s design, an assembly operates on theocratic, not democratic, principles; it is subject to God’s will, not the people’s. The Lord, the Chief Shepherd, is supreme in each assembly. To produce this subjection to God, He supplies the assembly with a plurality of shepherds. By their own example and by divine enablement, these shepherds lead (1 Timothy 5:17," TARGET="_blank">1 Timothy 5:17, "rule," lead, attend to, WEV) the flock in recognizing elders the Lord provides for them. Elders affirm the Spirit’s work in making men overseers (Acts 20:28);" TARGET="_blank">Acts 20:28); they do not authoritatively make overseers. Unitedly dependent on the Spirit of wisdom (Isaiah 11:2)," TARGET="_blank">Isaiah 11:2), they communicate to the assembly their perception of God’s choice. In this way, the assembly recognizes its elders.

Overseers encourage the spiritual development of every young believer, perceive when a shepherd’s heart develops in some, and discern when that work has reached appropriate maturity in individuals. The Lord doesn’t "graduate" a class of new overseers. God’s work in each soul reaches maturity in its own time.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Is Hobab in Numbers 10:29 the same person as in Judges 4:11?

Is Hobab in Numbers 10:29" TARGET="_blank">Numbers 10:29 the same person as in Judges 4:11" TARGET="_blank">Judges 4:11?

Two problems underlie this question: both Raguel and Hobab are called Moses’ father-in-law; one is a Midianite, the other a Kenite. Reuel (Exodus 2:18)" TARGET="_blank">Exodus 2:18) is the same word as Raguel (Numbers 10:29)" TARGET="_blank">Numbers 10:29) the Midianite, which makes it clear that he was Moses’ father-in-law. Jethro (Exodus 18:1, 27)" TARGET="_blank">Exodus 18:1, 27) is another of his names. In Numbers 10:29," TARGET="_blank">Numbers 10:29, Raguel is Hobob’s father, but Hobab is also called Moses’ father-in-law in Judges 4:11." TARGET="_blank">Judges 4:11. The word translated "father-in-law" in both these cases is also translated "son-in-law" (1 Samuel 18:21," TARGET="_blank">1 Samuel 18:21, etc.) and "mother-in-law" (Deuteronomy 27:23)." TARGET="_blank">Deuteronomy 27:23). It signifies anyone related by marriage. In Judges 4:11," TARGET="_blank">Judges 4:11, the relationship is brother-in-law. Moses’ father-in-law is both a Kenite (Judges 1:16)" TARGET="_blank">Judges 1:16) and a Midianite (Numbers 10:29)," TARGET="_blank">Numbers 10:29), so his son Hobab is the same man in these 2 passages.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Were there other people born to Adam and Eve who never sinned?

Were there other people born to Adam and Eve who never sinned?

No.

Adam and Eve had their first child, Cain, after being expelled from the Garden of Eden. The promise to Eve in Genesis 3:15" TARGET="_blank">Genesis 3:15 indicates that the Seed (offspring) of the woman was yet to come and give a mortal wound Satan, the serpent.

Genesis 3:15" TARGET="_blank">Genesis 3:15 I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel."

Eve named her firstborn son Cain whose name means "acquisition" saying "I have gotten a man with the help of the LORD." Eve may have thought that she had just given birth to the Promised Seed that would lead to the downfall of Satan the redemption of mankind. Cain was obviously not the chosen line of descent that would lead to the Messiah. That honor would go to Seth, the third-born child.
Genesis 4:1-10" TARGET="_blank">Genesis 4:1-10 gives us the story of the birth of both Cain and Abel and the following argument between God and Cain about the nature of their sacrifices. Cain brought a bloodless sacrifice from the fruit of the ground and was rejected. Abel brought the lamb which was received, establishing for us the model of the shedding of blood for forgiveness (see Hebrews 11:4)." TARGET="_blank">Hebrews 11:4).

Although the details are not give for how long Adam and Eve were in the garden, Genesis 4:3" TARGET="_blank">Genesis 4:3 is the first time that the Bible mentions a significant passing of time.

Genesis 4:3" TARGET="_blank">Genesis 4:3 In the course of time Cain brought to the LORD an offering of the fruit of the ground.

There must have been other children born to Eve, notably girls, but their names are not mentioned in the Scriptures. Cain and Seth both took wives in marriage, presumably their sisters.

Shad Sluiter

Other pages in this section

About this site

Why was it a sin for David to count the people but not for Moses?

Why in 2 Samuel 24" TARGET="_blank">2 Samuel 24 was it counted a sin in David to number the children of Israel, whereas Moses was commanded by God to do so? (Exodus 30:12)." TARGET="_blank">Exodus 30:12).

Perhaps the very point our questioner notes as to Moses having been commanded to take the census of the people goes some way toward solving this difficulty. A thing may be commanded at one time, and not at another. For instance, the Feast of Tabernacles was commanded to be observed on the I 5th day of the seventh month, but to keep the feast in the 8th month, as Jeroboam did “out of his own heart,” was a flagrant offence (1 Kings 12:32)." TARGET="_blank">1 Kings 12:32). So, spurious imitations of God’s ordinances to-day become positive acts of disobedience; for instance, baptising infants, or making of the breaking of bread an idolatrous act, the “eucharist” or the mass. Moses was commanded in Exodus 17:6" TARGET="_blank">Exodus 17:6 to smite the rock, but when he did this in Numbers 20:11-12," TARGET="_blank">Numbers 20:11-12, it was counted a sin unto him. In Exodus 30." TARGET="_blank">Exodus 30. 12 the Lord gives a direction to be followed when an occasion arose for numbering the people—each one was to give a half shekel as a ransom for his soul unto the Lord. It was, so to speak, a recognition before the Lord that the life numbered was in reality forfeited and needed to be ransomed. There is no mention of this being observed in David’s case, though that was a command to the people in general. In Numbers 1:2, 3," TARGET="_blank">Numbers 1:2, 3, Jehovah commanded Moses to take the sum of all the congregation of the children of Israel—”From twenty years old and upward, all that are able to go forth to war in Israel.” It was clearly a matter of order and importance that the number of the people should be known at the commencement of their desert journeyings, and it is given as 603,550. Then again in chap. 26, Moses and Eleazar were commanded to number the people at the close of their wanderings. They actually shewed a decrease of nearly 2,000, surely an eloquent commentary on the effect of their disobedience. Had they taken possession of the land when this was proposed to them they would, no doubt, have shown a large increase over a like period. In the case of David’s census, we read that “the anger of the Lord was kindled against Israel and He moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah” (2 Samuel 24:1)," TARGET="_blank">2 Samuel 24:1), of which census a man of the world like Joab, and also the captains of the host, saw the futility. Joab’s words are remarkable; he expresses the desire that God might add a hundred-fold to the people, that the king might see the increase, i.e. without any need of a census. In 1 Chronicles 21:1" TARGET="_blank">1 Chronicles 21:1 we read, “Satan stood up against Israel,” which simply means that Jehovah in inflicting judgment on His people for their transgression, allowed Satan to move in the matter as His agent. Men may make difficulties and cavil at God’s ways, but He is Sovereign and He will be justified by all, when His ways and the secrets of men are known. In reality there was no command to David from Jehovah to number the people. It was an arbitrary act of self-will and self-glorying, resulting in the infliction of the plague on the very ones on whom God would inflict judgment. We see, then, in the “Samuel” account God in government carrying out His judgment on David and the people—He is the ultimate cause; but in the “Chronicles,” Satan is presented as the instrumental cause—He tempts David to engage in the path of self-will, and the King allows himself to be led astray and is responsible, as he admits himself (2 Samuel 24:17)." TARGET="_blank">2 Samuel 24:17). David, however, knows the grace of God, as well as His government, and his prayer is: “Let me fall now into the hands of the Lord; for His mercies are great: and let me not fall into the hands of man” (v. 14); and so he is led to build an altar unto the Lord and offer burnt-offerings and peace- offerings, typical of the sacrifice of Christ.

W.H.

Other pages in this section

About this site

Does Hebrews teach that salvation can be lost if a believer sins?

Some passages in Hebrews seem to indicate that believers can fall away. Please explain these passages.

Three passages typically raise this issue in the "warning passages" in Hebrews: 3:14 (with verse 6); 6:4-6; 10:26-27.

   1. "For we are made ("have become," Young's Literal Translation) partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast unto the end" (3:14). This is logically the same as saying that those who had not become partakers of Christ would not remain faithful to Him. What had happened in the past determined their future. Those who had been saved would demonstrate their salvation, by continuing steadfastly. Those Hebrews who at first claimed to accept Jesus as Messiah, but turned away from Him, were not actually partakers with Christ; they had never been saved.
   2. "For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, and have tasted the good Word of God, and the powers of the world to come, if they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance;" (6:4-6). Their involvement with the Spirit, the Word of God, and the miracles of the Messianic age ("powers of the world to come") links them with those who say, "Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Thy name? and in Thy name have cast out devils? and in Thy name done many wonderful works" (Matthew 7:22)" TARGET="_blank">Matthew 7:22)? The Lord's answer, "I never knew you" (verse 23), shows they were never saved. Sadly, although enlightened, these Hebrews also were never saved, but fell away, never to be brought to the place of repentance they once claimed.
   3. "For if we sin willfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation..." (10:26, 27). These are the "enlightened," having clear understanding of the truth about Christ. Turning from Him and returning to Judaism was sinning "willfully." Since Christ offered the "one sacrifice for sins" (verse 12), they were without a sacrifice for sins. In light of the prophecies of the destruction of Jerusalem (Daniel 9:26;" TARGET="_blank">Daniel 9:26; Matthew 22:7; 24:2)," TARGET="_blank">Matthew 22:7; 24:2), to return to Judaism meant facing the fiery indignation which took place in 70 A.D. What tragedy awaited in those who thus spurned Christ, despised the privileges into which the blood of the new covenant brought them, and insulted the Spirit of grace!

Throughout the "warning passages," it is valuable to note the use of "we" for all the Hebrews who claimed a relationship with Christ, "you" for those whose fruits showed they were genuine believers, and "they" for the individuals who turned away, thus showing that they were never saved.

D. Oliver

Other pages in this section

About this site

What does "known of Him" mean in 1 Corinthians 8?

What is the meaning and context of "known of Him" in 1 Corinthians 8:3" TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 8:3?

Some at Corinth seemed content in knowing that idols were not actual gods. They therefore were free to eat in their own homes meat that had been dedicated to idols before they bought it. Their knowledge inflated their view of their own value; love would actually have increased the spiritual value of others (8:1). Anyone whose supposed knowledge inflates his view of self has not begun to grasp true knowledge (8:2). The ultimate in knowledge is not to know about divine things, but to know and love God. Such a relationship excels mere knowledge. A believer enjoying a divine relationship is "known of Him" (8:3).

Since Paul doesn’t seem to question the reality of his readers’ salvation, this expression, "known of Him," hardly seems to be in contrast to the Lord words to unbelievers, "I know you not." Nor does it seem significant to say that God is acquainted with ("known of Him") a believer who enjoys a relationship with Himself. Paul is carrying his thought forward, though, if we view the expression as being similar to "the Lord knoweth the way of the righteous" (Psalm 1:6)" TARGET="_blank">Psalm 1:6) or "He knoweth them that trust in Him" (Nahum 1:7)." TARGET="_blank">Nahum 1:7). This is "approving knowledge." The meaning, therefore, seems to be: the Lord is aware of and smiles on one ("he is known of Him") who is living in relationship with Him, that is,who loves Him.

The Lord taught that love for God and love for others are interdependent (Matthew 22:37-40)" TARGET="_blank">Matthew 22:37-40) and inseparable (see 1 John 4:20, 21)." TARGET="_blank">1 John 4:20, 21). Such a relationship with God manifests itself in caring for others, a thought continued in the passage (see verse 12). This is well-pleasing to God.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Does marriage involve mutual submission?

What is the significance of "Likewise" in 1 Peter 3:7" TARGET="_blank">1 Peter 3:7?

Peter uses this word three times in his first epistle. The third use is "Likewise, ye younger, submit yourselves unto the elder" (1 Peter 5:5)." TARGET="_blank">1 Peter 5:5). As the overseers submit to the Chief Shepherd in doing the work He entrusted to them, so the younger are to submit to older believers. This is the Lord’s arrangement; it is done because of submission to Him and for His approval.

The other two uses of "likewise" in the epistle are in chapter three. The chapter begins, "Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands." This links this section of the chapter with the previous chapter. At its conclusion, chapter two highlights the suffering of the Lord Jesus which was inflicted unjustly, but which brought us such great blessing because the Sufferer trusted His God (vv 22-25). This is our pattern to follow (v 22). Earlier in the chapter believers are suffering wrongfully, but as they act in a godly way, blessing results. Now chapter three focuses specifically on a believing wife with an unbelieving husband. Through no fault of her own, she may suffer rejection, but she is to continue, as Sara did, to trust in the Lord and submit to her husband. She expects that her "well-doing" will be used by God for the blessing of her husband.

Most commentators take the "likewise" that begins the next paragraph addressed to husbands to merely balance the message to wives and continue the exhortation within the domestic sphere of marriage. Typically, they understand "as heirs together of the grace of life" to mean that the husband and wife share together in salvation, the grace of spiritual life. They may also understand "your prayers" to refer to the prayers of the husband and wife.

A difficulty with this view is that "likewise" in verse one and here in verse seven links this passage back to the truth in chapter two. The context is suffering wrongfully, which hopefully doesn’t apply to husbands in a Christian marriage. Giving honor to a believing wife "as unto the weaker vessel" hardly qualifies as suffering, or especially suffering wrongfully. The thought of submission which runs through chapter two hardly seems evident here either.

If we understand "the grace of life" to be a description of the exalted state of marriage, this may help. Christianity exalts marriage - whether involving believers or unbelievers - to a higher level. Marriage is a unique provision of God for the good (Genesis 2:18)" TARGET="_blank">Genesis 2:18) of the human family. It has the possibility of involving the highest experience of love known in human relationships (Ephesians 5:25-32)." TARGET="_blank">Ephesians 5:25-32). Christianity teaches that marriage has the potential of being the "crowning grace" of life. In addition, since the teaching addresses husbands, is it not likely that "your prayers" are the prayers of the husband? Why should the failure of a husband to properly honor his believing wife hinder his wife’s prayers?

The full potential of marriage is within the reach of a believing couple. If the believing husbands in this verse are living with unbelieving wives, just as the believing wives, in the previous verses, are living with an unbelieving spouse, what an encouragement to them! God has handed these husbands the possibility that their marriages will rise to their full potential if they show Christian grace and consideration. Thus honoring a wife who rejects the gospel and perhaps appears to reject her own husband can only be the result of submission to the Lord. In so doing, he will cooperate with the Lord in seeing his prayers answered in His wife’s salvation.

D. Oliver

Other pages in this section

About this site

What is "my Father's Kingdom" in Matthew 26?

ASPECTS OF THE KINGDOM

To what time do the references to the Kingdom belong in Matthew 26:29" TARGET="_blank">Matthew 26:29 (“My Father’s Kingdom”); Mark 14:25" TARGET="_blank">Mark 14:25 (“the Kingdom of God”; see also Luke 22:16);" TARGET="_blank">Luke 22:16); and 2 Peter 1:11" TARGET="_blank">2 Peter 1:11 (“the Everlasting Kingdom”)? Are these terms interchangeable?

It is evident that the expression, “My Father’s Kingdom” in Matthew 26" TARGET="_blank">Matthew 26: 29 refers to the same Kingdom as “the Kingdom of God” in Mark 14: 25," TARGET="_blank">Mark 14: 25, for the same occasion is referred to. It may be noticed that the Lord does not say “our Father’s Kingdom,” but “My Father’s Kingdom.” It reminds us of “My Father and your Father,” where there is a distinction with a difference. We might refer also to Matthew 13:43" TARGET="_blank">Matthew 13:43

“Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the Kingdom of their Father.” The One whose Kingdom it is, will be in special relation to the redeemed—His own children—who will share in it; but as the Kingdom in its millennial aspect (which is specially in view here) will embrace in its scope many, who will not be children of God, born in the earth during its course, it is called also “the Kingdom of God.” He will be God of such, but not Father. Though the Millennial Kingdom is only the first stage of the Everlasting Kingdom, of 2 Peter 1:11" TARGET="_blank">2 Peter 1:11 and though our Lord Jesus Christ will reign over both in the Father’s Name, the two are quite distinct. In the Millennial Kingdom, though Satan will be excluded, evil will still be present, and the reign will close with the last great rebellion under Satan, who will be liberated for a short space. Then will all the enemies of God and of His Christ be subdued for ever under His feet and judged, so that in the Everlasting Kingdom, in which Christ will continue to reign for ever, there will be no “evil concurrent,” no opposing will, and righteousness will no longer “reign” as in the Millennium, but “dwell.”

W.H.

Other pages in this section

About this site

Main Menu