What is the meaning of verse 13 in Isaiah 14" TARGET="_blank">Isaiah 14?

The previous chapter begins Isaiah’s burden against Babylon and blends statements about Babylon’s total devastation (yet future, Isaiah 13:9-13, 20;" TARGET="_blank">Isaiah 13:9-13, 20; Revelation 18:21-23)" TARGET="_blank">Revelation 18:21-23) with her overthrow by the Medes in 539 BC (vv 7, 8; 21:2-4; Dan 5:25-31)." TARGET="_blank">Dan 5:25-31). Chapter 14 continues and extends the thought. God’s judgment on Babylon in 538 BC would assure Israel of God’s millennial blessing on Israel. What was going to happen, when some from Israel returned from Babylon (now past, see Ezra, Nehemiah), foreshadows Israel’s yet-future return from the nations and her ascendancy. Likewise, the proverb (vv. 4-20) that Israel takes up against the king of Babylon may have this same duality - bringing together Babylon’s kings (like Belshazzar in the past) and all kings who attempt what Babylon’s kings hoped to accomplish. That includes the Beast, the future "Man of Sin." Babylon’s king fell (Dan 5:30)." TARGET="_blank">Dan 5:30). Political, infernal, and internal national results follow (Isa 14:4-11)." TARGET="_blank">Isa 14:4-11).

Some able commentators apply the next verse to the exalted brilliance of the king this proverb addresses. He became so great and boasted such power. Though proud, he had fallen ("cut down") like a tree. Masterfully, the following verse portrays the thinking of a Nebuchadnezzar (Dan 4:22, 30, 31)," TARGET="_blank">Dan 4:22, 30, 31), a Belshazzar (5:23), as well as the Beast (7:23, 25; 2Th 2:4;" TARGET="_blank">2Th 2:4; Rev 13:4-6)." TARGET="_blank">Rev 13:4-6). Each of those Babylonian kings (the first kings during the "Times of the Gentiles," Luke 21:24;" TARGET="_blank">Luke 21:24; Dan 2:31-44)" TARGET="_blank">Dan 2:31-44) and the Beast (the last of those kings) was (or will be) opposed to God and His people, lifted up with pride, and judged as was the devil (1Ti 3:6)." TARGET="_blank">1Ti 3:6). Each reflects the consummate pride of Satan, who uses each one, particularly the Beast. But, this is a proverb or simile. None of those men were capable of the full extent of pride the devil expressed. None had been exalted so high or would be so shamefully defeated as he.

Therefore, this section of the proverb (vv. 12-15) is about Satan himself, Lucifer. This proverb, combined with Isaiah’s poetic style, uses figurative language (the morning, cut down, stars of God, mount of the congregation, sides of the north, heights of the clouds); it addresses Lucifer for at least two reasons. First, just as Satan, a greater than earth’s greatest kings and lifted up with unmatched pride, could not rival God, so neither could those proud kings prosper in opposing God and His people. Second, this passage exposes Satan as the instigator behind those kings and all else that opposes God’s people.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

How large did Jacob's family grow in Egypt?

If Jacob's family "increased abundantly" (Exodus 1:7)" TARGET="_blank">Exodus 1:7) in Egypt for 430 years (Exodus 12:40)," TARGET="_blank">Exodus 12:40), wouldn't their population have been much more than 2 million?

When they arrived in Egypt, the descendants of Jacob numbered 70 (Exodus 1:5)," TARGET="_blank">Exodus 1:5), not counting Joseph and his two sons, or the family's marriage partners. The "population growth rate" from the time Jacob received his wives was at least 7%. With only a 5% rate of growth, the population after 430 years would be almost 200 million.

This is one reason to take another look at the 430 year figure in Exodus 12:40." TARGET="_blank">Exodus 12:40. This figure and the 400 years of sojourning and persecution in Genesis 15:13" TARGET="_blank">Genesis 15:13 must be understood with Paul's figure of 430 years from the promise of blessing through Abram's Seed until the giving of the law (Galatians 3:17)." TARGET="_blank">Galatians 3:17).

If we identify the beginning point of this period with Genesis 12:1-7," TARGET="_blank">Genesis 12:1-7, Abram was 75. 25 years takes us to the birth of Isaac (21:5), 60 more years to the birth of Jacob (25:26), and an additional 130 years to Jacob's arrival in Egypt (47:9). That's 215 years (25 + 60 + 130).

A 5% growth rate for the remaining 215 years of the total 430 years comes to around 2.5 million, a more reasonable figure. The following figures lend support to this.

According to Exodus 6:16-20," TARGET="_blank">Exodus 6:16-20, 4 generations (see Genesis 15:16)" TARGET="_blank">Genesis 15:16) span the time from Jacob's entering Egypt until the Exodus: Levi, Kohath, Amram, Moses. Since Moses was 80 at the time of the Exodus (Exodus 7:7)," TARGET="_blank">Exodus 7:7), that brings the total years to 295.

When Jacob entered Egypt at 130, Joseph was 39. He had become governor at 30 (Genesis 41:46)," TARGET="_blank">Genesis 41:46), and after 7 years of plenty, his brothers came for corn in the second year of famine (45:6). Joseph was born, therefore, when Jacob was 91 (130 minus 39), at the end of Jacob's 14 years of service for Rachel and Leah (30:25; 31:38). At the time of Joseph's birth, Jacob had been married to Leah 7 years (29:21-22,25); he was 84 when married. Levi was Leah's third son, so Jacob would have been about 87 at Levi's birth. Levi, then, was 43 years old (130 minus 87) when he moved down to Egypt. Kohath had been born already (46:11), but would not likely have been 23 - likely closer to 3. His son Amrarn was born sometime in the next 110 years, since Kohath died at 133 (Exodus 6:18)." TARGET="_blank">Exodus 6:18). Amram died at 137 (6:20), so the time between entering Egypt and the birth of Moses must have been less than 243 years (110 plus 133).

If, instead, we make the reasonable assumption that Levi, Kohath, and Amram were, on average, 46 when their sons were born, then the total from Genesis 12" TARGET="_blank">Genesis 12 to Exodus 12" TARGET="_blank">Exodus 12 is 430" TARGET="_blank">is 430 years. The sojourning in Exodus 12" TARGET="_blank">Exodus 12: 40 began when Abraham entered Canaan as a sojourner. The 400 years of being strangers and being persecuted by the Egyptians (Genesis 15:13)" TARGET="_blank">Genesis 15:13) began with Ishmael's mocking Isaac (Gen 21:9)." TARGET="_blank">Gen 21:9).

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

How could Christ be tempted by sin since He is God?

How are we to reconcile the truth that Christ is God and Christ is Man, in one Person, or rightly to estimate what belongs to each?

Again, how could our Lord be tempted in all points, like as we are, sin apart, if, as we believe, sin had no appeal to Him, as it has to us?

It is noticeable that when our Lord affirms that “no one knoweth the Father save the Son,” He at once adds, “and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal Him.” Why did He not, when affirming as he had just done, that “no one knoweth the Son but the Father” add “and he to whomsoever the Father will reveal Him”? Is it not that there are mysteries in the Union of the two Perfect Natures, Divine and human, in the One Person of our Lord Jesus Christ, which the Father nowhere promises ever fully to reveal? Not only are they too deep for us (we do not even understand our own tripartite being), but it is unnecessary for us thus to analyse His Being. One thing we aught never to forget, our Lord was not a dual personality, that is two Persons, Divine and human, but ONE DIVINE Personality, in equal relation to His two perfect natures. “The Word was God. . . the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us.” (John 1:1, 14)." TARGET="_blank">John 1:1, 14).

The Modernists, and alas, they have their representatives everywhere to-day, will not brook to be told that there are things their highest powers cannot grasp, and they so attempt to reconcile what has never been out of harmony, and explain what they ought rather to believe.

To some persons a glib bad answer, seems preferable to saying “I do not know.” As we read the Gospels under the influence of the Holy Spirit, it is not like chemists, with our test- tubes and reactives analysing all the mysteries of Christ, or like physiologists with our instruments dissecting His Personality, but as disciples and as worshippers.

The human sympathy of Christ is not a mere theory, which we must make real to ourselves by a certain manipulation of His Person to satisfy the logical deductions of some shallow minds, but a blessed reality, which He makes true in our experience when we embrace Him by faith. The effect of this wrought by the Spirit in our souls, will not be some philosophical demonstration that after all “He is altogether such an one as ourselves—sin apart,” but the adoring cry of Thomas, “My Lord and my God.” The question of the temptation of our Lord is not after all so far beyond our grasp, if we remember that temptation is used in two distinct senses in the New Testament: of allurement—’ ‘Every man is tempted when he is drawn aside of His own lust and enticed” (James 1:14)," TARGET="_blank">James 1:14), and of testing —“He was tempted (or tested) in all points,” according to the similitude, “apart from sin.” (Hebrews 4:15)." TARGET="_blank">Hebrews 4:15).

When we read that “God did tempt Abraham” (Genesis 22:1)" TARGET="_blank">Genesis 22:1) it was in this latter sense. He put him to the test. So Christ was tested by Satan in the wilderness, and proved to be the Son of God; but He was never tempted in the sense of being “drawn away of lust and enticed,” for He had none—He was “holy, harmless and undefiled” (Hebrews 7:26)." TARGET="_blank">Hebrews 7:26). “He did no sin” (1 Peter 2:22);" TARGET="_blank">1 Peter 2:22); “He knew no sin” (2 Corinthians 5:21);" TARGET="_blank">2 Corinthians 5:21); “In Him is no sin” (1 John 3:5)." TARGET="_blank">1 John 3:5).

I am sadly Convinced that the attempts of modernist teachers to emphasise the humanity of our Lord, on the plea of establishing His power of sympathy with us, is for the most part quite unreal; for, taken as a class, they are a self-sufficient, self-satisfied type of man; but rather, unconsciously to themselves it may be, and we trust it is, they “cast Him down from His excellency,” through undermining His Divinity.

W.H.

Other pages in this section

About this site

How is the Lord Jesus Christ a priest like Melchisedec?

What is the significance of "Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec" (Psalm 110:4)" TARGET="_blank">Psalm 110:4)?

Aaronic priests served in an earthly sanctuary with repeated sacrifices under an old covenant. By comparison and contrast, Christ’s priesthood is linked with a heavenly sanctuary, a final sacrifice, and an eternal covenant (Hebrews 7-10)." TARGET="_blank">Hebrews 7-10). Israel’s high priest transferred his office to his son. Our Great High Priest (4:14) is unique. Melchisedec, like the Son of God, did not derive His office from ancestors nor delivered it to successors, since his genealogy and posterity are not recorded (Genesis 14:18;" TARGET="_blank">Genesis 14:18; Hebrews 7:3)." TARGET="_blank">Hebrews 7:3). The Bible’s first priest, Melchisedec, is from a mold into which no one else fits. The original (the mold), in God’s purpose, is His Son.

Melchisedec was both a priest and king. The meaning of his name and title, King of Righteousness, King of Peace (7:2) is significant (Psalm 72:3;" TARGET="_blank">Psalm 72:3; Isaiah 60:17)." TARGET="_blank">Isaiah 60:17). He appears after the Bible’s first war and battle, involving a confederacy of kings (Genesis 14;" TARGET="_blank">Genesis 14; Psalm 2:2)." TARGET="_blank">Psalm 2:2). He assures Abram of God’s ability to give him the land of promise. All of this reminds us of a coming day when our Lord will be a priest on His throne (Zechariah 6:13)." TARGET="_blank">Zechariah 6:13). Until then, we enjoy the benefit of His priesthood.

The single, defining act of Melchisedec’s priesthood was blessing Abram (Hebrews 7:1)." TARGET="_blank">Hebrews 7:1). By lifting Abram’s vision to "the most high God, possessor of heaven and earth," he strengthened the pilgrim’s faith to withstand the coming trial.

Assured by an oath of the immutable God (Hebrews 7:21)," TARGET="_blank">Hebrews 7:21), our Lord’s priesthood "after the order of Melchisedec" is non-transferable, eternal, millennial, and spiritual, strengthening faith in the Unseen.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

How can God be fair and send people to Hell for eternity?

How can God be fair and send people to Hell for eternity?

“Fair” is a word that implies “treating everyone the same”, or “giving everyone an equal chance”. In the Bible Jesus tells us a true story (complete with names, Luke 16)" TARGET="_blank">Luke 16) about a very rich man and a beggar, a homeless man so destitute that dogs licked his untreated oozing sores. He survived on the garbage the rich man threw out.

Is that fair? No . . . it is not.

Many are bitter toward God because He has allowed them to be poor, broken and sick in this life while, taking away friends and family while others sail along without a care or trouble. The famous poem “Invictus” was written by a man who – through no fault of his - suffered deeply in this life and shook his fist at God in return.

But this story gives us the other side of the story. When God gives poverty and earthly suffering He tends to compensate by giving spiritual favors to the ones who missed out. “Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him?” (James 2:5)" TARGET="_blank">James 2:5) Jesus even said, “Blessed be ye poor, for yours is the kingdom of God . . . blessed are ye that hunger now . . . blessed are ye that weep” and contra positively, “Woe unto you that are rich! for ye have received your consolation” (Luke 6:20-27)" TARGET="_blank">Luke 6:20-27)

As it turned out, the rich man never prepared for eternity, and the homeless man, having nothing this life, did. When they died the saved man went to heaven, and the wealthy man opened his eyes in the flames of hell. The rich man, now the beggar, asked his many times over great-grandfather Abraham to send the homeless from heaven with a drop of water to cool his tongue, but was told it was physically impossible to move from one place to the other. Abraham reminded the rich man, “Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented”, explaining how fair God is.

When the rich man appealed for the homeless man to be sent back to earth to warn the rich man’s brothers to get saved we get another insight on how fair God is. Abraham explains that EVERYONE has the Bible and churches and preachers to tell them all they need to know to get desperate to get ready, and a supernatural visit from a dead person would not change a single mind. Other Scriptures that tell us that even the creation all around us drives us to seek the One who made it, and that God is carefully looking for any seeking heart anywhere in the world to guide to His Son. If what you already know should persuade you to drop everything and – to the point of losing everything, if necessary – gain eternal life for yourself, miracles will not change that.

Turns out God balances everything out very carefully. Everyone gets enough information to motivate them to find God’s salvation. The Lord says, “And ye shall seek me, and find me, when ye shall search for me with all your heart.” (Jeremiah 19:13)" TARGET="_blank">Jeremiah 19:13) Eternal hell cannot be changed, as this is the unavoidable consequence of dying without knowing God, part of the fabric of the universe. God has, however, sent His only Son – Jesus – to bear the punishment of hell for us in unimagined and completely unfair suffering on the cross so we can all be born again. That payment is worth more than the universe, all of us included. Having done so He commands us all to repent and trust Jesus as Savior and Lord (master). God expects us to drop everything and do exactly what He says. When He provides opportunity after opportunity to do so, even with special favors given to us that He withholds from others as well as special warnings aimed directly at us, and we decide we have better things to do, is God unfair when we suddenly open our eyes to find that we have shamed and dismissed Him one too many times?

Alfred Corduan

Other pages in this section

About this site

Where did the "Gap Theory" come from?

Where did the idea of a "gap" between the first two verses of Genesis 1" TARGET="_blank">Genesis 1 originate?

Thomas Chalmers of Edinburgh University first proposed the Gap Theory in 1814. By inserting a chronological gap between the first two verses of the Bible, Chalmers felt that he could make room for the vast ages demanded by the geologists of his day, yet still maintain a literal interpretation of the Scripture. This view, now called the Gap Theory, asserts that the account beginning at Genesis 1:2" TARGET="_blank">Genesis 1:2 describes a re-creation, not the original creation. George Pember widely disseminated Chalmer's Gap Theory, with some embellishments, in his book "Earth's Earliest Ages" (first edition, 1876). Pember believed that Genesis 1:1" TARGET="_blank">Genesis 1:1 described an original creation, which included a race of pre-Adamic men and a world of prehistoric animals. He taught that God destroyed this primeval creation when Lucifer fell. A footnote in the Scofield Reference Bible (first edition, 1917) enormously popularized the Gap Theory in the English speaking world. It is only fair to add that many able and godly teachers among us men deserving of deepest respect - hold this view.

D. Vallance
Other pages in this section

About this site

How can I know what work to do for God?

How can I know what work to do for God?

What a valuable expression of devotion to the Lord!

"He that is faithful in that which is least is faithful also in much" (Luke 16:10)" TARGET="_blank">Luke 16:10) teaches us God’s way of entrusting lesser responsibilities initially. In fact, lifelong willingness to do "that which is least" is becoming for bondservants (see Philippians 2:5)." TARGET="_blank">Philippians 2:5). Mark 12:34," TARGET="_blank">Mark 12:34, "The Son of Man is as a man taking a far journey, who . . . gave . . . to every man his work," highlights the Lord’s manner: He desires to employ every hand and entrusts to each of us our personal responsibility. "Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might" (Ecclesiastes 9:10)" TARGET="_blank">Ecclesiastes 9:10) advocates putting all our strength into what we do; that is especially appropriate for spiritual work.

Three factors may guide us in fulfilling our responsibility. First, our work will present itself to us. As part of living daily by the power of the Spirit, we should expect perceived need to encounter spiritual opportunity (Genesis 24:27)." TARGET="_blank">Genesis 24:27). Second, our work will not be disruptive. The Scriptures use a body to illustrate assembly functioning (Romans 12:5;" TARGET="_blank">Romans 12:5; 1 Corinthians 12:27)." TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 12:27). If we assume we are a "thumb" and our functioning displaces another believer, we are either on the wrong hand (going about our work in the wrong way) or misdirected (doing the wrong work). Third, our work will have encouragement. Seeking others’ approval ought to be disappointing, yet the absence of encouragement should produce humble waiting on God. Work done for the Lord will eventually have His encouragement, perhaps in small, very personal ways, and the encouragement of respected believers. Only intimacy with God, however, can impart the essential awareness in the soul that a particular work, especially public service, is God-given.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

How much alcohol should a Christian drink before feeling that he has gone too far?

How much alcohol should a Christian drink before feeling that he has gone too far?

A simple answer is that a believer should avoid alcoholic drinking in a social setting. Drinking alcoholic beverages can become a habit and lead to drunkenness. The first time wine is mentioned in the scriptures is in connection with Noah, "And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent" (Genesis 9:21)." TARGET="_blank">Genesis 9:21).

Drunkenness and impurity are associated, as wise King Solomon points out in Proverbs 23:29-35." TARGET="_blank">Proverbs 23:29-35. Genesis 19:32" TARGET="_blank">Genesis 19:32 gives further evidence of this. Wine in itself is not condemned in scripture; however, it is clear that drunkenness is a very serious sin (1 Corinthians 5:9)." TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 5:9).

Paul exhorts Timothy to "use a little wine" as a medicine, not a beverage. He limits the amount to "a little" (1 Timothy 5:23)." TARGET="_blank">1 Timothy 5:23). "Be not drunk with wine, ...but be filled with the Spirit" (Ephesians 5:18)." TARGET="_blank">Ephesians 5:18).

What about a Christian's testimony before unbelievers to whom he has spoken about Christ when they see that believer drinking?

J. Abernathy

Other pages in this section

About this site

Will young children be taken in the rapture?

CHILDREN AND THE RAPTURE

Is it scriptural to say that the children of believers shall be caught up when the Lord comes?

Some evangelists say they will, while others say they will not. I mean children not old enough to understand.

Does not the difference of view among the Lord’s servants arise from the fact that there is no clear revelation in the Word of God? It would seem unthinkable that the small children of unconverted parents throughout the world should be all caught away when the Lord returns, for if any go all must go. It is equally unthinkable that the irresponsible children of Christians, the subjects of believing prayer, should be all left behind when their parents are taken, for if any are left all must be left. Can we not leave the matter to God in the assurance that the Judge of all the earth will do right? In the meantime diligently point the little ones to the Saviour.

W.H.

Other pages in this section

About this site

Can a sister shepherd or teach a brother?

Can a sister shepherd or teach a brother?

Guidance for this answer comes from Acts 18:26." TARGET="_blank">Acts 18:26. Priscilla’s care for Apollo was not in the context of assembly meetings. Several translators indicate that the expression, "they took him unto them," suggests receiving him to their home. In addition, Priscilla acted in concert with her husband. She didn’t assign Aquila the job of getting Apollos to their home. They moved together and worked together for his spiritual benefit.

It seems abundantly clear that as Apollos learned "the way of God more perfectly," Priscilla didn’t sit demurely in the corner while Apollos and Aquila engaged in "men talk."

Our society’s laxness underlines the need for all female and male interactions to be "with all purity" (1 Timothy 5:2)." TARGET="_blank">1 Timothy 5:2).

Keeping these things in mind, a sister can be used by Lord in trying to help a brother spiritually.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Main Menu