Theodidacti

A Character Study of Ezra

Ezra was a scribe who had been living in captivity in Babylon during the reign of Artaxerxes (Ezra 1:1, 6). He prospered in what he put his mind to and, perhaps as a result of this apparent favor, Artaxerxes would grant all of Ezra’s petitions. He was allowed to go back to Jerusalem with a delegation of Israelites, notably religious types, anyone who wanted to accompany him (Ezra 1:13). Ezra was religious too, particularly in the study of the Law of Moses. Artaxerxes sent with Ezra an offering of gold and silver to the God of Israel. The intention was clear: the Temple in Jerusalem was to be rebuilt and offerings to be made there to Ezra’s God. The king appointed Ezra leader over the entire affair.

If Ezra was the writer of the book that bears his name, he was a dutiful scribe who recorded a good deal of genealogy. This too, was religious in purpose. Painstaking genealogical records would assure them of were to be priests in the rebuilt Temple. Ezra, like King Hezekiah, was a prudent man of faith. Since they were traveling with so much precious metal—basically as much as they could carry—they would undoubtedly be the target of robbers on the long journey. The man of faith appointed a fast and asked God to protect them and the record says he did (Ezra 8:23, 31). The man of prudence divided the silver and gold amongst twelve of the priests, who were given solemn responsibility to keep there trust until they reached the holy city. Perhaps Ezra was just a detail-oriented scribe, or perhaps a man who took what had been entrusted to him very seriously, or perhaps a man who did not totally trust other men, but whatever the cause, he weighed every bit of silver and gold and counted the vessels as he gave them to the twelve priests.

When the delegation arrived in Jerusalem, what should have been a happy day was saddened at the news that the people of Israel, especially their leaders, had intermarried with the foreigners in the land. Ezra, a student of the Law, was appalled and tore his robe and hair and fasted and prayed. The prayer is recorded (Ezra 9:6-15) and in it, Ezra assumes the guilt of the people though he had not married outside of Israel. It is as though all will pay for the sins of some. Even the innocent pay when people do wrong. Ezra notes that though Israel was allowed to return from enslavement, they were still practicing the very things that led them into captivity. Then he cried. Many of the people were then moved to weep too. This was a sign of repentance. Further proof was that they made a covenant to put away their foreign wives and children. They reassured the disgusted scribe, saying that they would promise to put away their foreign families and that they were behind him in his commission to restore the Temple—and it would follow, a faithful people as well.

Ezra calls the priests to take oaths from the people while he went away to mourn the faithless people. A proclamation (evidently from Ezra) was made that the people would be given three days to comply with their oaths or their profit would be forfeit. As the men of Judah and Benjamin gathered three days later, Ezra has taken on a new role. He is no longer simply a scribe, a student of the Law of Moses. He has become a priest (Ezra 10:10). This was his right as he was of the line of Aaron (Ezra 7:1-5). Ezra the priest would not let the people out of the oath but reiterated their sinfulness in taking foreign wives. Upon the close scrutiny to which a scribe is perhaps well-suited, it was found that even many of the priests had taken foreign wives.

Evidently, Ezra had been successful in leading the people back to God. The most dramatic of the scenes of Ezra is when he was asked by the people to bring the Law out to read to the people (Neh 8:1-8). He read it to men and women alike, who sat from early morning until midday listening attentively to the priestly scribe read. Not only did Ezra read but 13 Levites also helped the people understand what was being read. The people wept and worshiped as the heard the words of the Lord. Not only had Ezra rebuilt the temple but the Lord brought revival in his day.

A Character Study of Solomon

The story of Solomon in 1 Kings begins with his brother Adonijah deciding to be king of Israel (1Kin 1:5). In Eli-like manner, King David never criticizes Adonijah which must have affirmed and intensified his craving for the throne. He had the king’s general, Joab, on his side. To seal his bid for power, he made sacrifices outside the city, perhaps a kind of royal picnic with himself at the head table. His brother Solomon was not invited (1Kin 1:10)—nor of course, were David and the prophet Nathan. In this section of the story, Solomon is shown as a pup, whose mother must look after his affairs. One is reminded of Rebekah looking after helpless Jacob.

David is painted in no warmer light as Bathsheba told him to let the people know their son, Solomon, will be king instead of letting his sons decide. Nonetheless, David quickly devised a plan whereby his other sons are left out of a royal pronouncement inside the city. Solomon was named king and all of his brothers were not invited to the “picnic,” which effectively became their own sacrifice. David’s pronouncement inside the city brought Adonijah back from outside the city to face reality (and David). He seized the horns of the altar, ironically akin to a sacrifice. Because Adonijah now feared Solomon (He must have feared him even earlier since he did not invite him to his king making.) he had Solomon swear his safety and set up the first of supposedly many wise judgments by the new king (the text informs us that he was wise but the examples are few). Solomon’s simple response was that if Adonijah behaves himself all will be well. Adonijah is taken down from the altar horns and knelt before Solomon, to which Solomon told him, in effect, Go home. Your place is not in the palace. Adonijah was no king; the king said so. But Adonijah could not keep away and it cost him his life (1Kin 2:23).

Solomon continued to clean up his father’s poor decisions (e.g.: Joab, another sacrifice on the horns of the altar), acting with wisdom and decisive strength. These judgments, followed through with decisive action, “firmly established” Solomon’s kingdom (1Kin 2:12). Soon, Solomon’s own decisions began to go off course. Instead of marrying within the Faith, he made a political bond with Egypt. Nevertheless, Solomon is said to have loved the Lord—even though he carried on the pagan practices of sacrificing on the high places (1Kin 3:3).

God spoke to him even in such a place at Gibeon, perhaps because Solomon offered a thousand burnt offerings there (1Kin 3:4). God told him in a dream to ask for whatever he desired. Again Solomon showed wisdom. Instead of asking to win the lottery or an equally selfish request, Solomon asked to govern the people well, knowing the difference between good and evil (1Kin 3:9). His prayer is seen granted by how he dealt with the two prostitutes (1Kin 3:16-28). Such wisdom was essential for the ruler of all the lands between the Euphrates to the Mediterranean and down to Egypt. The citizens of Judah and Israel were “happy” (1Kin 4:20). Has this been said before or since his reign? At very least, Solomon was a great administrator and a wise judge. The king of Tyre also thought so (1Kin 5:7) and was enlisted to help in the building of the Temple. Yet, in order to pull off this building project he conscripted forced labor. The formerly mentioned happiness of Judah and Israel is not likely to last. Still, he was able to finish a house for the Lord (1Kin 6:14).

Once this concern of his father’s was accomplished, Solomon expanded his power as well as his love for all things shiny and beautiful. A king was commanded to “not acquire many wives for himself, lest his heart turn away, nor…acquire for himself excessive silver and gold (Deut 17:16). Yet Solomon surrounded himself with exclusively golden goblets and many wives—many foreign wives, expressly forbidden by God (1Kin 11:2) since they would “turn away [his] heart after their gods.” Over a thousand wives and concubines led him away from an understanding that there was only one God in the land (Deut 6:4). For all his insight into the affairs of others, in the end Solomon had little wisdom left to apply to himself.

A Character Study of Absalom
and Comment on the Upcoming Election

Absalom was David’s fifth son, the first being the child who died after his affair with Bathsheba, the second Solomon by Bathsheba, the third Amnon by Ahinoam, the fourth Chileab by Abigail, and fifth but not last, Absalom by Maacah. The first story of Absalom, who was an exceptionally handsome man (2Sam 14:25), involves his sister Tamar, who was also beautiful. Amnon, David’s first son beyond Bathsheba, raped Tamar (his half-sister). Absalom held his anger for two years but finally killed him because of his violation of Tamar. It might be argued that this also disposed of one heir to the throne—one who preceded Absalom. Though David’s heart mourned Amnon, he loved Absalom and would have forgiven the trespass (2Sam 13:9) yet the murdering son went into self-imposed exile where his heart became harder still. (There is some confusion as to whether Absalom may even have been “banished” {2Sam 14:13}). Joab, David’s nephew-general brought Absalom back from exile, though he was forced to live apart from King David and the court. Presumably, Absalom’s heart was further hardened toward David by this decree. His heart was hardened toward Joab, though bringing him back from exile was by Joab’s own design. Eventually, for Joab’s troubles and because he honored David’s ruling on Absalom, the difficult son burned Joab’s barley field.

Another Absalom story is either difficult to believe or David’s shekel weight was far less than typical. Absalom’s hair grew at a rapid rate and was markedly thick. At the end of each year, evidently because he just couldn’t keep his head up anymore, he had his hair cut off and it weighed over five pounds. (2Sam 14:26 says his hair weighed 200 shekels. A single shekel is 11.33981 grams…times 200 shekels equals 2,267.962 grams. A gram is .0353 ounces…times 2,267.962 grams equals 80.06 ounces or a little over five pounds of hair.) At first glance, this anecdote has no bearing on the Absalom tale. Yet it may go far in explaining what now seems like an ironic ending to Absalom’s life. It is obvious that Absalom was pleased with his appearance and importance. He was a handsome prince and he would charm or coerce his way in the kingdom. Indeed, once brought back into the king’s presence—again by Joab’s doing—Absalom fancied himself king. Every morning he would sit in the gate as an elder or ruler and judge disputes. The text insinuates that this was not by the decree of David but Absalom’s own presumption of his value to the people, since it was the king’s rulings that the people requested (2Sam 15:6).

This kingly pursuit was not enough for the prince. Next he appointed himself the king of Hebron (where Abraham bought a burial plot for Sarah for the price of two years of Absalom’s hair in silver), which put him in direct conflict with his father since Hebron was just to the south and west of Jerusalem. It was also at Hebron where David was anointed king and reigned for his first seven and a half years (2Sam 5:3-5). Absalom is clearly endeavoring to steal his father’s kingdom. It was working too since the people were turning their favor toward Absalom with such fervor that David was now forced to go into exile (2Sam 15:13-14). This cleared the way for Absalom to carry his “kingship” to Jerusalem, and he did, to the extent that he even took his father’s concubines as his own. There was no end to Absalom’s arrogance.

Next he hunted David (reminiscent of David’s early days with Saul, hiding in caves and pits {2Sam 17:9}) with the intent of quelling any question of who was king in Jerusalem. It was during this quest that Absalom was riding under a terebinth tree. One is left to assume the irony that it was his heavy, long, thick hair that was Absalom’s undoing by becoming tangled in the limbs, leaving him easy sport for jilted Joab. There, hanging in a tree, Absalom might have considered Deuteronomy 21:23. If he had, he would have thought of some way to blame his curse on the father who loved him. Absalom’s grand enterprise to overthrow a kingdom ended in shame—his own as well as David’s.

In light of the elections tomorrow, it is interesting to note that Christians ought to vote for the right candidate but all too often, we let our emotions get far out in front of us. We become Democrats and Republicans first and Christians second. To put it another way, we are US citizens first and children in the family of God second. Because I am a Christian and only secondly a citizen of the United States, I am trusting God with the election. He is sovereign. I don’t believe that means God controls who is going to win the elections tomorrow. But it does mean he will have his way, despite who gets into office.

Absalom may have been more popular with the people but God promised that throne to Absalom’s father. Good looks and smooth talking only go so far. But God is sovereign. He will have his way with the United States (even if that means God turns his back on us) no matter who goes to the oval office in January. So vote your conscience and trust in the Lord. And pray for God to heal our land (2Ch 7:14).

I have even decided not to vote for those who waste resources advertising excessively on TV.  If it takes all that to get people to vote for them, maybe they’re not the ones for those offices.

Next voting season I’m writing down every candidate who calls my house—especially the recorded calls. Then I will not vote for that candidate. I don’t care if the candidate stands for what I want or not. I’m not voting for that candidate. So just go ahead and count me out of the next presidential election.

As much as I disdain the so-called We’re calling to get your opinion calls, I dislike even more the ones where I can’t tell the caller how much of an invasion of my home it is to get a half dozen calls a day telling me to vote for their candidate.

Years ago, I started voting against any candidate who had someone come up to me with a sticker or nail file or handbill at the poll. I hate with an absolute hatred being told how to vote. The very idea of planting your candidate’s name in my head with a last-minute slip of paper is so insipid that it inspires me…not to vote for that candidate.

So imagine how much I dislike the telephone calls. I bet you don’t have to imagine. You hate them too. The only ones who don’t mind are the ones who want to tell you how to vote.What if the Church started a calling campaign that tells people how to believe? Hello. I’m calling for Jesus. I’d like to remind you to make your decision count by choosing Yahweh as your God. Go to church this Sunday and make a difference. The first ones to complain about those calls would be the ones who are calling us about their candidate.

So I’m doing them a favor next year since it’s so almighty important to them. I’m giving my opinion now. I’m letting them know exactly how I will vote. You call me and the vote goes the other way. You both call me, I’m voting Libertarian. If they’re wasting their precious funds on annoying the voters, I’m writing in a candidate. Okay. Okay. So my vote won’t count because my candidate won’t get elected. I haven’t seen too much difference in who gets in office anyway. There’s war and taxes either way—no matter what they promise us.

I realize I may end up voting only for the state soil commissioner. And that will be just fine. After all, I’m supposed to vote for what is important to me, right? Not calling my house is very important to me (and everyone I’ve ever asked about it says the same thing) but I wager the candidates don’t really care what is important to us. If they did, the National Do Not Call Registry would apply to political candidates as well. They too are selling me something. Don’t tell us that it doesn’t cost us. It costs us increased taxes, $30 a month for a phone, and the aggravation of having to stop what we’re doing to listen to some canned party line. Our time is worth something—just not to a politician or political party. My time is costly; it’s about time it cost them something too.

One final thought: Do any of these politicians think that we listen to these calls? Don’t you do what I do and hang up?

Next year, I’m not hanging up so fast. I’ll listen just long enough to find out who wants my vote so badly that they’ll call during supper or a Saturday afternoon nap. And when I hear your name, I’m writing it down, and I’m not voting for you. Count on it.

My Premium Calfskin English Standard Version Study Bible was waiting for me on the front porch yesterday. I opened the box, took off the shrink wrap, and opened it upon the table…and it laid there without closing up. It was almost like it was already broken in from months of use.

The bindery is much better than the ESV Greek/English Interlinear Bible. Some of the pages were dogearred when the books were cut and so they stick out now. This SB looks to have been carefully produced. The color maps and illustrations are well-printed and clear. The abundance of maps throughout the text (as well as in the back) should be very helpful. The amount of articles—beyond the study notes—is impressive. I look forward to using it with Susan in our devotions over the next 14 months.

Susan received her ESV-SB hardcover yesterday. Scott got his ESV-SB Trutone too. Scott said, “That Study Bible is like having Jesus right there with you.” From down the hall, we heard Brad say, “He is, Scott.”

My calfskin ESV-SB won’t ship until next week. Besides using it in my devotional reading with Susan, I look forward to reading all of the text and notes next year as my church reads through the Bible chronologically. We’ll see how good the binding is that way.

My old, leather NASB that I purchased from the local American Bible Society represntative back in 1974 or ‘75 and used “religiously” for years has held up well but some (evidently favorite) pages from John and Acts are loose and the binding between John and Revelation detached years ago. If it had remained my primary Bible (which none do for long) it may have crumbled by now. Of all the Bibles I’ve had over the years, I used that NASB longer than any. Maybe this ESV-SB will now take the lead. I doubt it though since I really like my ESV Journalling Bible.

A Character Study of Abigail

After the death of Samuel, the story of Abigail is related in scripture. Abigail was the wife a badly behaved, harsh man named Nabal, a Calebite (1Sa 25:13). David and his men were in the wilderness and hearing of Nabal shearing his sheep (perhaps an idiom not then used but appropriate to the story nonetheless), sent a delegation to him, expecting some tribute for keeping his sheep and shepherds safe—and also for doing some of the work of shepherding themselves. Instead of tribute, Nabal disrespects David, insinuating that he was a “nobody” or at best a disobedient servant who had broken away from his master (v10). David was told of Nabal’s discourteous response and wasted no time in forming his own, 400-man comeback.

Before he could reach Nabal, the worthless fellow’s wife, Abigail, closed the gap between David and Nabal, meeting David with a tribute she had prepared. Her hope was that she might at least take the edge off David’s sword response. She might have hoped for more as well. She fell at David’s feet and took all the blame for her husband. She made no excuses for him but painted him in a bad light, poking some fun at his name (naval, a Hebrew form or perhaps the root of the word for villainy or foolishness). She as much as said that he deserves what treatment he gets but at the same time apologized for not having met David’s delegation. Had she known they were there, she assured David that they would have received a better welcome.

Abigail asked David’s forgiveness for something David must have understood was beyond her control. She further requested David to spare Nabal’s life, which would also spare David of any bloodguilt. It is to be understood, of course, that part of the bloodguilt might have been David taking the life of this innocent woman too. Though it would have been the males his troops would have sought to annihilate (v34), perhaps she too would have been hurt (at least). David granted her petition for peace with Nabal.

When Abigail returned to her home, she found Nabal drunk. “In the morning, when the wine had gone out of him” (an amusing note on the morning ritual especially after a night of drinking), Abigail informed him of all she had done with David. The inference to be drawn was that she had treated David honorably and as one man should another man—but as Nabal had failed to do. A woman had done a man’s job, done it face-to-face, and in so doing had managed to spare her husband’s worthless hide. Nabal was stricken. Perhaps it was his conscience; maybe he was shamed. Then again he might have feared that David would still arrive with his 400 swords (Abigail would not have left out the detail of how many men had been on the way to deal with Nabal.). The scripture states that Nabal’s heart turned to stone, which some translations interpret as a seizure or heart ailment. Ten days later, Nabal died.

When David heard the news, he was happy that the Lord avenged him of Nabal’s insult. he must have been especially happy now that Abigail had convinced David to allow vengeance to the Lord’s (Deut 32:35). He then sent for Abigail, the new widow, who would surely still be as beautiful and discerning (v3) as when they had met. He sent for her, not so much to look after her needs but to take her as his wife (v39). Her only delay in coming to David was to first show respect to David’s delegation—the very thing that did not occur to her late husband during their first visit to the house of Nabal. Abigail then quickly mounted a donkey, not packing anything it would seem, but a retinue of five women, and hurried to David. She immediately became one of his wives. Abigail bore a son for David, his second, whose name was Chileab. 1 Chronicles 3:1 records Chileab’s name as Daniel.

Abigail was an honorable woman who took a stab at getting herself out of a loathsome predicament. She was surrounded by morons because she was married to one and the rest did his bidding. She was trapped in a bad marriage (probably one arranged by her family) but bad as the situation was, she could still do the right thing—and sometimes doing the right thing has a way of coming back round to one’s benefit. Though she could not have known it would kill Nabal, she must have known it would shame him when he heard how she had dealt with David like a man when he had not. Instead of being rude from the supposed safety of distance, she confronted David in person. In doing so, striking as she was, perhaps she also hoped to appeal to David on a deeper, emotional level.

If she didn’t…it worked anyway.

A Character Study of Eli

Eli was the great-grandson of Aaron (Exo 6:23-24 shows Eli’s father, Elkanah, in the Aaronic line) and so, being in that priestly lineage, we find him as both Judge and Priest at Shiloh when he is first mentioned in Scripture (1Sa 1:3). This introduction is one of an old priest, since his sons, Hophni and Phinehas, had taken over the priestly duties and since 1Sa 2:22 states “Eli was very old.” Still, he really must have been “very old” by the time Elkanah and Hannah have had six children. This would have been perhaps a decade following this introduction. Perhaps, since we find out in 1Sa 2:12 that Eli’s sons were “worthless men” that perhaps they had forced Eli into a diminished role while he was old but not too old to perform his ministry. Perhaps doing what duties might still be allowed him, he sat at the doorway of the temple where he observed a woman named Hannah crying and inaudibly mouthing words. He mistook her for being drunk. This is not too surprising, based on his sons’ behavior and his collusion in their priesthood, Eli was no great judge of character. Nor was he one to reprove a wrongdoer (at least not Hophni and Phinehas) so it is a little surprising that he had no problem correcting Hannah. When she set the matter straight, he was quick to give her a blessing, if only perhaps to get her out of the temple. It is interesting, if this is the case, since decorum in the temple did not seem to be of much concern to Eli. Surely his sons had caused more disrespect and trouble to the temple than Hannah did that evening. This is not flattering behavior on Eli’s part.

Hannah and Elkanah had their first child and named him Samuel. They later dedicated Samuel to the Lord’s service with Eli. Conceivably, because they had made such a sacrifice in giving up their son to the Lord’s ministry (1Sa 2:11) or perhaps in order to make up for his errant accusation of Samuel’s mother, Eli would bless the parents each year, asking God to give them more children (1Sa 2:20).

By the time we are certain Eli is “very old” (1Sa 2:22) he has been hearing of the sins of his sons against Israel. Though Eli would have understood his sons were not merely sinning against the young women by having sex with them (1Sa 2:22) or against God by treating his sacrifices with contempt (1Sa 2:17), he did not attempt to run them off as he had tried with Hannah. He did, however, make an effort to cajole them. Such efforts are futile when there are no “ears to hear.” Yet Eli heard, even if his sons could not, for the rumors were widespread. The people were informing Eli about his ill-behaved offspring. Still, all Eli had in him was to scold them in such a way as to insinuate his disappointment: I didn’t raise you to be like this. Their behavior was a sin against the whole of Israel and if it was not dealt with, all would pay for their sin. This is clearly seen in that Eli was called to account for his poor fathering skills, vis-à-vis his wayward sons. A man of God came to tell Eli in straightforward fashion that Eli loved and honored his sons with their sinful, faithless, and abusive character more than he esteemed the Lord (1Sa 2:29). Either Eli was associated with the actions of his boys or their uncorrected sins had at least spread to their father’s doorstep.

When Eli sat in the entrance of the temple and spied a young woman that he could easily correct, he was instead corrected by her. He quickly recanted and this paved the way for Samuel to become priest. But while he sat in that doorway, had Eli only looked within his own home, he would have found two men, also priests, who were sorely in need of correction. Eli spent that night on the outside of his home because he was not able to manage what was on the inside. Eli’s legacy is one of complicit corruption, disregard for the things of God, and a father who was incapable of raising and disciplining his children. This is a sad heritage for a priest who should have done better than raise a couple of selfish animals (Deut 6:7). As a result, his priestly line will be cut off altogether during the reign of Solomon (1Kgs 2:27).

What we fail to deal with, God will eventually straighten out. He didn’t raise us to act like this and he won’t put up with worthless, animal behavior forever.