“… We continually ask God to fill you with the knowledge of his will through all the wisdom and understanding that the Spirit gives, so that you may live a life worthy of the Lord and please him in every way: bearing fruit in every good work, growing in the knowledge of God, being strengthened with all power according to his glorious might so that you may have great endurance and patience, and giving joyful thanks to the Father, who has qualified you to share in the inheritance of his holy people in the kingdom of light”  (Colossians 1:9-12).

The more we grow spiritually, the more we desire to please God; but how do we most effectively do that?  The New Testament mentions a number of ways in which we should please God – that we cannot please him without faith (Hebrews 10:38), without “walking in the Spirit” (Romans 8:8), etc. But in his letter to the Colossians, the apostle Paul makes a statement that summarizes the many answers to that question (Colossians 1:9-12).  Paul tells us he prayed that believers “… may live a life worthy of the Lord and please him in every way…” (vs. 10, emphasis added), and he then follows this thought by speaking of four specific ways that, taken together, please God in “every way.”

Paul’s statement is almost startling in both its reach and its simplicity. No other passage in the New Testament claims to tell us how to be completely pleasing to God, so we should look very closely at the characteristics the apostle tells us fulfill this goal.  The four things are:

1. Bearing fruit in every good work (vs. 10).    Paul makes it clear throughout his epistles that although good works do not save us, God expects us to produce good works as a result of being saved (Titus 3:8, 14, etc.).  Throughout the New Testament the expression “good works” primarily refers to works done to help others (Hebrews 13:16, etc.), but it also includes our obedience to God (1 Thessalonians 4:1, Hebrews 13:20-21, etc.). We should also notice Paul’s stress in Colossians 1 is not that “some” good works will please God, but that we are urged to “every good work” – to as many good works as possible! 

2. Growing in the knowledge of God (vs. 10).  Paul next cites our ongoing growing in the knowledge of God and his ways as being central to our ability to please God. It is only as we come to know God that we can learn to properly love, fear, trust, and obey him (Psalm 147:11). Knowledge itself is of no use without application (1 Corinthians 13:1-2), but growing in knowledge can enable us to better grow in good works (2 Timothy 3:16-17).

The first two points  Paul gives for how to please God correspond directly with the apostle Peter’s summary admonition that we should “…grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” (2 Peter 3:18, emphasis added). Paul also stresses these same two characteristics elsewhere in his writing (Philippians 1:9), but in Colossians 1 he goes further to add two more points that we need in order to fully please God:

3. Being strengthened by God (vs. 11).  This is not strength for its own sake, of course, rather  “… that you may have great endurance and patience” (Colossians 1:11, Ephesians 3:16, etc.). Given what Paul says in this verse, there is no question that this strengthening is actually something God must do in us: “being strengthened with all power according to his glorious might,” yet we must make this possible by asking God’s help and trusting him in faith to supply his strength. In that sense, this characteristic includes the quality of faith itself, as the basis of our strength, endurance and patience (Hebrews 11:6).

4. Giving thanks to God (vs. 12). The final characteristic that Paul tells us is pleasing to God is deep gratitude on our part: “… giving joyful thanks to the Father, who has qualified you to share in the inheritance of his holy people in the kingdom of light.” In fact, thankfulness is a theme to which the apostle returns numerous times in this short epistle (Colossians 2:7; 3:15, 17; 4:2) – in this way reinforcing our understanding of its importance in God’s eyes.

So Paul’s four summary characteristics of believers who truly please God are not what many of us might guess. Humanly, we might suppose that never-failing obedience, great sacrifice, frequent or long periods of prayer, or any number of other things that relate to our own lives might be what please God. But Paul’s four characteristics do not focus on our lives – they are all primarily outward looking toward others and God himself.    
​ 
Perhaps we should not be surprised that the things Paul says greatly please God are all expressions of our love for others and love for God.  That is basic enough, but the four specific characteristics Paul enumerates are worthy of our careful staudy – if we truly want to please God, they are among the highest goals for which we can aim.  

They are characteristics that Paul himself urged us to continually seek: “... we instructed you how to live in order to please God, as in fact you are living. Now we ask you and urge you in the Lord Jesus to do this more and more” (1 Thessalonians 1:4).

 The question of how many individuals wrote the book of Isaiah is an old one, but it is still frequently asked.

One Isaiah, Two Isaiah, Three Isaiah, Four?

The book of Isaiah clearly has two distinct halves – what is sometimes called “first Isaiah”(chapters 1-39), and  “second Isaiah” (chapters 40-66). These two halves have very different approaches and themes.

The first half of the book looks at judgment while the second half looks at redemption. The first section focuses on Judah and Assyria, while the second is about Jerusalem and Babylon. The second half of the book also appears to be set about two centuries after Isaiah lived and prophesied. The first half speaks of future captivity for the Jewish people, the second half speaks of their release – from what appears to be the perspective of that later date. There are also specific details which could not have been humanly known in Isaiah’s time. For example, the Persian king Cyrus is named 150 years before he lived (44:28; 45:1).

As a result of these facts, many claim that the second half of Isaiah cannot be ascribed to the same author.  Some scholars go one step further and divide Isaiah into three parts by citing differences between chapters 40-55 and chapters 56-66, and yet other scholars see indications of even more Isaiahs – other individuals who may have contributed later sections to many parts of the book. This last viewpoint is based largely on the fact that some ideas in Isaiah (such as the end of the age and the resurrection of the body mentioned in 26:19) are presumed to not have come into existence till much later, and while some sections of the book speak of the prophet in the first person (for example, chapters 6, 8), other sections such as chapters 7, 20, and 36-39 are stories about him, like those we see in the books of Kings – and so they are presumed to have been added by later writers.

Arguments for unity

On the other hand, there are numerous reasons why Isaiah can be viewed as the work of a single author.

Vocabulary and expressions:  Isaiah uses by far the largest Hebrew vocabulary in the Old Testament (almost 2,200 different words) and although there are subtle differences between the use of words in the two sections there are at least 25 words and expressions that are used nowhere in the Old Testament except in Isaiah, but which are used in both halves of the book.  For example, the expression “the Holy One of Israel” is rarely used in the rest of the Old Testament, but occurs 12 times in Isaiah 1-39 and 14 times in chapters 40-66, suggesting a single author.

Structure: The first half of Isaiah records his commission to preach condemnation (chapter 6), the second half records his commission to preach comfort (chapter 40). Both halves of the book of Isaiah begin with the old city of Jerusalem (1:1 and 40:2) and both close with God’s new city on Mount Zion (35:10 and 66:20). Structural parallels such as these suggest a unity in the work.

Argument from logic:  If the prophet could predict the coming of the Messiah in detail hundreds of years before that happened (chapters 42; 53; etc.), he could certainly have foreseen the return of the nation of Judah from eventual captivity, or the name of king Cyrus. This is no different from the  foretelling of Josiah’s name and reign three centuries before his birth (I Kings 13:1–2).

Manuscript Evidence: There is no known ancient manuscript of Isaiah, either in Hebrew or in Greek, which is divided in a manner indicating it was originally composed as two or more books. For example, the Isaiah scroll found among the Dead Sea Scrolls, and dating to the second century before Christ, has what we call chapter 40 beginning in the same column that contains what we call chapter 39. This is a strong early witness to the unity of Isaiah.

Evidence of the New Testament:  Jesus and the writers of the New Testament all speak of Isaiah as a single individual wherever they quote from the book. In John 12:37-41 Jesus quotes from both halves of Isaiah and attributes both quotes to the same author. Similarly, Matthew 3:3 and 4:14, Mark 1:2 and 7:6, Acts 8:30 and 28:25, and Romans 9:27 and 10:16 all quote Isaiah as a single person.

Conclusion
​
While it is perfectly possible that Isaiah was edited in some details in the course of later biblical history – perhaps by later prophets – most of the differences between the major sections of the book can be explained by the possibility that Isaiah completed the first half of the book in the period between 740 BC and  686 BC., and the second section somewhat later. The opening of the second section of Isaiah “Comfort, comfort my people, says your God. Speak tenderly to Jerusalem, and proclaim to her that her hard service has been completed, that her sin has been paid for” would then show that the prophet was looking ahead, past the judgment that had occurred, with words of comfort for the new situation of the second half of the book.  

Most Christians know the story of the teacher of the law who asked Jesus, “Who is my Neighbor?”  This was the question that prompted Jesus to reply with the Parable of the Good Samaritan – showing that even our enemies are neighbors when it comes to the law of God.

But what if the teacher had asked the question in a slightly different way, saying, “Who is my Friend?”  Could the answer to that question also impact our understanding of the Way of Christianity?  We don’t have any indication in the New Testament of that question being asked of Jesus, but we do have Jesus’ answer to it, nevertheless.

In his Gospel, Matthew tells the story of Jesus’ betrayal in the Garden of Gethsemane. Judas Iscariot, the disciple turned traitor, had led a group of soldiers and other armed men to where he knew Christ would be in order to betray him for a cash reward.  As Judas approached Jesus in the dark of night and greeted him with a kiss in order to identify him to those who were to arrest him, Matthew records Jesus’ surprising  words:  “ ‘Do what you came for, friend.’ Then the men stepped forward, seized Jesus and arrested him” (Matthew 26:50).

Think about this. Jesus was not one to soften the truth. He was the one who called the Pharisees “whitened sepulchers” and a “brood of vipers” – to their faces.  But at the very moment of his betrayal , Jesus did not call Judas all the things we probably would have done. He did not call Judas “Traitor!” “Enemy!” “Back-Stabber!” – he did not even call him “False Friend!”  Amazingly, he just called him “friend.”

Now if we want to get technical, the word the Bible uses to record what Jesus called Judas was not philos, the Greek word usually translated “friend” and meaning “dear” in the sense of a close friend.  It uses the word hetairos meaning “friend” in the sense of a comrade, one who is a friend without necessarily having any affectionate relationship.  But he did call Judas by a word that means “friend” in the general sense (Matthew also uses the word in this sense in Matthew 20:13 and Matthew 22:12).

How do we apply his example?   The Old Testament gives us some clues.  Hebrew has a word, merea, which is very similar in meaning to the Greek hetairos – it also means friend in the sense of companion or comrade and it is found in Job’s words: “He who withholds kindness from a friend forsakes the fear of the Almighty” (Job 6:14). It is the same word that is used to tell us that after Job prayed for his “friends” (the individuals who had been haranguing him), God forgave them (Job 42:10).  

So if righteous Job prayed for the “friends” who mistreated him, and Christ could even call Judas “friend” as he betrayed him, can we learn a lesson from this? When we pray for our enemies (Matthew 5:44), do we pray grudgingly, with reservations, or do we pray for them as we would for a friend?  

​Instead of focusing on the stories we know well about Peter and the other leading disciples and what may be unfounded legends and traditions regarding the others, whenever possible this book, by R. Herbert, looks at what the Bible tells us about the group as a whole – something we often read over without thought. Yet what the New Testament tells us about the group Jesus chose is not simply background information and often teaches some profoundly important lessons that were written for our education. Lessons from the Lives of the Twelve Disciples is available in formats for computer, e-book reader, or smart phone. You can download a free copy from the e-books page on this website, or from FreeChristianEBooks.org,  here.

Rejoice greatly, Daughter Zion!  Shout, Daughter Jerusalem! See, your king comes to you, righteous and victorious, lowly and riding on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey (Zechariah 9:9).
 
The Gospel of Luke recounts how Jesus fulfilled the words spoken by the prophet Zechariah as he entered Jerusalem in a “triumphal entry” during the climactic week at the end of his ministry (Luke 19:28-44).   Luke tells us how Jesus instructed two of his disciples to go to a nearby home where they would find a young donkey and to bring it to him. He told the disciples that if anyone challenged them, they were to simply say: “The Lord needs it” (Luke 19:31).  The disciples did this – explaining to the donkey’s owners what Jesus had told them.
 
This initial part of the story is interesting in itself.  Jesus was, in effect, invoking the ancient principle of angaria (from a Babylonian word meaning “mounted messenger”) by which kings, rulers and other individuals with official responsibilities could requisition property for official use.  Angaria originated in the earliest postal systems in the ancient Persian, Greek and later Roman cultures where an animal could be “requisitioned” from its owner to carry the mail on the next stage of its multiple-staged journey, somewhat equivalent to the “Pony Express” of the American frontier.  In the Judea of Jesus’ day, under Roman rule, animals could be commandeered in this way for the emperor’s service, and the right was also expanded to include the needs of the king, and even magistrates and rabbis. 
 
A Messenger Received in Joy
 
This incident was, then, the prelude to the actual triumphal entry in which the crowds provided what we would call today a “red carpet” entry for Jesus by covering the road with their capes and the branches of trees to welcome him as he rode on the donkey into the city (Luke 19:35-37).   The scene was not unlike a humbler version of the great Roman “Triumphs” in which the grateful citizens celebrated the procession of heroes who had served the people.  In fact, the similarity with a Roman Triumph is more than  superficial, because the Triumph was a civil and religious ceremony which was held to publicly “celebrate and sanctify” the success of a commander who had led his forces to victory in the service of the people.  

But Jesus rejected the aggrandizing nature of the pagan Triumphs which fed the cult of personalities in Roman and other cultures, and he did this by riding humbly on a young donkey – the antithesis of the great horses of conquering kings and heroes – while fulfilling the prophecy of Zechariah 9:9 in every detail. Yet Jesus did accept the people’s praise (Luke 19:40), and the details of the story from beginning to end show that a triumphal entry – a symbolic victory celebration – was intended.

The words of the crowds who welcomed Jesus in this triumphal entry are important. Luke tells us (Luke 19:38) that the crowds quoted from the great messianic Psalm 118 – which is why the Pharisees attempted to silence them (Luke 19:39).  This is the same psalm that contains, in vs. 22, the statement so significantly quoted by Jesus in Luke 20:17:  “The stone the builders rejected has become the cornerstone.”  But also this psalm contains clear references to the triumphal entry of the Messiah:

* I look in triumph on my enemies (Psalm 118:7).
* I will not die but live, and will proclaim what the Lord has done (vs. 17).
* Open for me the gates of the righteous; I will enter and give thanks to the Lord (vs. 19).
* Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord. From the house of the Lord we bless you. The Lord is God, and he has made his light shine on us. With boughs in hand, join in the festal procession up to the horns of the altar (vss. 26-27). 
 
Although Luke only cites a few of the words from Psalm 118, the psalm is in fact a full prophetic description of Jesus’ triumphal entry into Jerusalem.
 
What Was the Victory? 
 
But if this was a triumph, what was the victory? Jesus had not yet defeated sin and death on the cross, and he had not yet completed the work he came to accomplish in this regard.  Yet there was one way in which a victory was surely celebrated.  The primary purpose of the angaria, by which Jesus obtained the donkey on which he rode, was to deliver a message. And at this point, at the end of his ministry, Jesus had successfully delivered the news of the kingdom of God to the point that it was now established and would continue to spread throughout the world.  He had also lived the perfect life needed in order that he could give himself as a sacrifice for all humankind.

In that sense, Jesus had fully triumphed in his work when he came to Jerusalem as “... your king who comes to you, righteous and victorious, lowly and riding on a donkey” (Zechariah 9:9, emphases added). The entry of Jesus into Jerusalem prior to his death was indeed a triumph: it celebrated Jesus’ righteous life and the fact that he had succeeded in delivering the message that he brought into the world.
​
There is surely a lesson in this for us. In following Christ as his disciples we do not attempt to mimic everything he did, of course, but we should certainly follow in many of his steps, as he commanded us.  The dual nature of Christ’s fulfilled mission – of living in obedience to God and carrying his message – is a dual opportunity and goal for every one of his followers, also. To focus only on our own obedience or only on the message we were commissioned to carry is not a complete fulfillment of the calling we have been given.  To the extent that we are able, with God’s help, to live lives pleasing to God and to serve him in carrying his message, we too participate in the victory of Jesus. ​

​“… the LORD has sought out a man after his own heart  and appointed him ruler of his people …” (1 Samuel 13:14).
 
This is a verse that often comes to mind when we think about the character of David, king of ancient Israel, writer of so many of the Bible’s psalms, and ancestor of Jesus Christ himself.  Yet the expression “a man after [God’s] own heart” probably does not mean what we often think it means.

Many of us have thought about the expression and wondered – why would David be described as a man after God’s own heart – something not said of other great biblical figures?  What earned David that description?  Was it his total commitment to God or some other aspect of his character?

It is actually likely that no aspect of David’s character is in mind, and that it is God who is the focus of this verse.   The expression “the LORD has sought out a man after his own heart” reflects a standard ancient Near Eastern manner of expressing someone’s desires and wishes – things they wanted “in their own heart.”   Ancient Babylonian texts use the same expression of a god or a king installing a ruler of their choice.   In fact, the Nebuchadnezzar Chronicle (c. 599 BC) of the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar II tells how that king conquered Jerusalem and replaced the Jewish king Jeconiah with a king of his own choice – Zedekiah – exactly as recorded in the Bible (2 Kings 24:17).

In both the Bible and the texts of the nations that surrounded ancient Israel, the expression simply means that the new king would be to the liking of the one installing him. It is also paralleled  by the biblical description of God’s replacement of the High Priest Eli with Samuel: “I will raise up for myself a faithful priest, who will do according to what is in my heart and mind. I will firmly establish his priestly house, and they will minister before my anointed one always” (1 Samuel 2:35).

So the expression “a man after his own heart” used of David in 1 Samuel 13:14 is not saying that David’s “heart” or attitude  was somehow like that of God, that he was a man of extraordinary righteousness or moral excellence,  but that God had chosen someone according  to his own heart or wishes – someone he felt he could trust to be obedient and to do the work he was given to do.

That is why in the New Testament in Paul’s speech at Antioch, the apostle  said: “After removing Saul, he made David their king. God testified concerning him: 'I have found David son of Jesse, a man after my own heart; he will do everything I want him to do” (Acts 13:22).  It is not that God had found David to be “like his own heart,” but that he had chosen a man according to his own wishes.

Finally, the Bible’s chronological notations show that although David was about twenty-three years old when he became king, he was only a very young child when Saul was told that God had selected someone “after his own heart.”  David had not yet had time to demonstrate his character in order to qualify as someone with traits like those of God. Rather, 1 Samuel 13:14 means that God was intent on installing a king according to his own standards rather than according to the desires of the Israelites who had clamored for a king just like those of the nations around them (1 Samuel 8:5).  A man of powerful presence, yet with pride and many other failings, Saul was exactly the type of leader Israel’s neighbors had. 
​  
God then chose not a typical leader, as Saul had been, but someone of his own choosing who would be a better ruler.  The Old Testament shows that many aspects of David’s character were indeed admirable and that he did rule over Israel wisely and well, but the verse we have examined does not address that fact. It simply shows that God chose David, not why David was chosen.  ​​​​

​
Among Christians there are two major and opposite responses to the question of whether faith is something we must produce ourselves or something that God provides.  Most Christians of the Calvinist and Reformed traditions believe that faith is entirely a gift that is given to us by God, while most other Protestant Christians believe that faith is a response to God on our part.  The question is an important one as it affects how we understand many parts of the Bible and how we see faith itself.  Our new article looks at what the biblical evidence is on this important subject – read it here.

As Christians we know that the greatest responsibility and opportunity we have in the lives we are given is to love God and our fellow human beings (Matthew 22:37-39). But none of us is perfect in this regard; so how do we grow in love for God and others? 

The apostle John gives us an answer to this important question. In his letters, John talks extensively about love, mentioning the concept no fewer than 34 times, including his well-known summary statements such as “…God is love” (1 John 4:8). But John’s teaching on love is not as general as it might sometimes appear. 

In his first epistle, the apostle talks about an easily overlooked aspect of the two directions or dimensions of love – love of God and love of people – that must both be present in our lives. In doing so, John answers the question of “How do we increase our love for God and man?” by answering a slightly different one: “How do we know if we love God and others?”  He gives us the answer first in terms of whether we truly love God or not.  Notice what he tells us:

“Whoever claims to love God yet hates a brother or sister is a liar. For whoever does not love their brother and sister, whom they have seen, cannot love God, whom they have not seen. And he has given us this command: Anyone who loves God must also love their brother and sister” (1 John 4:20-21).

The proof of our love for God, John says, is that we love others (see also Hebrews 6:10 “the love you demonstrated for his name by serving the saints” CSB).  In the next chapter of his letter, John repeats this fact:  “... everyone who loves the Father loves whoever has been born of him” (1 John 5:1).  But the apostle then reverses the direction of this understanding:

“This is how we know that we love the children of God: by loving God and carrying out his commands. In fact, this is love for God: to keep his commands. And his commands are not burdensome” (1 John 5:2-3).

The proof of our love for others, John tells us here, is that we love God and are obedient to him. Just as it is not possible to truly love God without loving his children (1 John 5:1), it is also impossible to truly love God’s children without loving him (1 John 5:2). Together, these verses show the two directions that love must work in.  In the first case, our love and obedience to God involves – and is proved by – our love of our brothers and sisters. In the second case, we are told that our love for our brothers and sisters is based on – and proved by – our love and obedience to God.

Simple as it may sound, this two-way definition can be tremendously helpful to us as Christians.  We can see what John says as both admonition and encouragement.  First, there is clear admonition for all of us in the understanding that we cannot claim to love God if we cannot bring ourselves to love all people, and conversely, that we cannot pretend we truly love people if we do not deeply love God.  Love of one without love of the other is not genuine love.

But the encouraging side of this equation relates to our original question – “How can we grow in love of God and others?”  What John shows us indicates we can increase our love of God by loving people more, and if we want to increase our love of others, we can do that through actively developing our love of God.  It may seem counterintuitive, but it is a truth that solidly underlies much of what John tells us.

Why is this? The reason is that unless God is the center of our life – what we love above all else –  we will never  truly love others as much as ourselves, because without God at the center of our lives, we will love ourselves above all else – we will primarily be “lovers of ourselves” (2 Timothy 3:2).  Conversely, if we do not love others as much as ourselves, we are not fulfilling God’s command and our love of him will always be limited.

What John shows us is that as we grow in our love for God, our love for others will naturally increase at the same time.  The closer we grow to God, the more he changes the way we think about ourselves – and others – and the more we begin to love others.  As we grow to love the children of God more, it is a direct reaction that we begin to be less self-centered and our love for God naturally increases as a result.

John’s words on the two directions of love may indeed seem counterintuitive at first, yet they are profoundly true in showing us how we can know and grow our love for God and others.

The epistle of James was written in difficult times for early Christian believers, and so it is not surprising that the first topic the apostle discusses is that of problems and trials.  James immediately launches into this topic in the second verse of his letter by saying “Consider it pure joy, my brothers and sisters, whenever you face trials of many kinds” (James 1:2). He then continues this subject through most of the first half of his first chapter, closing the topic with the summary “Blessed is the one who perseveres under trial” (vs. 12).

Yet within what James says we notice something that might seem odd at first. The apostle tells his readers who are undergoing trials that they should pray (vs. 4) – as we might expect. But, contrary to what we might also expect, he does not encourage his readers to pray for deliverance from their trials or even for strength to survive the difficulties. Instead, James says that if we lack wisdom, we should pray for it.

At first this instruction to pray for wisdom might seem unrelated to the matter of trials, but if we look carefully at the context we see it is not. Directly after saying we should rejoice in trials, James says the reason we should rejoice is because: “the testing of your faith produces perseverance. Let perseverance finish its work so that you may be mature and complete, not lacking anything” (vs. 3). It is then that the apostle continues “If any of you lacks wisdom, you should ask God” (vs. 4). 

We should notice the connection there. After saying that trials can lead to our not lacking anything in verse 3, James then says if we lack wisdom, however, we should pray for it.  Bible readers often misinterpret this part of what James says by taking the command to pray for wisdom out of context – as though he counsels us to pray for wisdom in general. But why would James single out wisdom as the one thing we might be lacking? The answer is because it is the one thing  we may need if we are suffering. If we keep his context in mind, we see that the apostle is not speaking about wisdom in general – rather he is addressing the issue of the specific wisdom we need when we are suffering.

So often, when we go through trials and suffering, we do not see the overall perspective. When we hurt it is hard to see beyond ourselves.  But James tells us to gladly accept the suffering God allows us to go through. That does not mean we should somehow try to enjoy the trials themselves, but that we should ask God to help us see what suffering gives us  – if we let it. And we do this through wisdom. We do it by wisely looking beyond the trials we are enduring and keeping in mind God’s purposes in allowing suffering to fall on us. And James knew that trials would come to all of us. That is why he writes “my brothers and sisters, whenever you face trials …” –  not “if some of you face trials,”  but when you all do.

The fact is, we will all suffer as Christians – just as those around us who are not believers also suffer; but in our case, it can be to a greater purpose.   Peter tells us exactly the same thing: “Dear friends, do not be surprised at the fiery ordeal that has come on you to test you, as though something strange were happening to you. But rejoice inasmuch as you participate in the sufferings of Christ, so that you may be overjoyed when his glory is revealed”  (1 Peter 4:12–13).

Of course, this does not mean we cannot pray for help with sicknesses and other trials or that God will not rescue us out of them in due course. James and Peter both emphasize these things (James 5:14–5; 1 Peter 5:10), but James and Peter both tell us we should rejoice in trials while they are present because of what they can lead to – what God can accomplish through them if we stay close or move closer to him when we suffer – in order to better hear what we need to hear and to better see what God is trying to accomplish in us. 

James also gives us examples from the Scriptures to remind us of this truth:  “Brothers, as an example of patience in affliction, take the prophets who spoke in the name of the Lord. See how blessed we consider those who have persevered. You have heard of Job’s perseverance and have seen the outcome from the Lord. The Lord is full of compassion and mercy” (James 5:10–11).  Having given us these encouraging words, James reminds us, once again, of his basic point:  “Is any one of you suffering? He should pray” (James 5:13). But James does not call us to pray primarily for deliverance when we suffer – he calls us instead to pray for wisdom to understand why God allows us to suffer, to see what we need to learn and change, and to see what God will accomplish in the end. 

Although most Christians are familiar with the Great Commission scriptures of the New Testament – passages like Mark 16:15 and Acts 1:8 that lay out the gospel purpose and calling of the people of God –  we are often not as familiar with the “Great Commission” verses of the Old Testament.  The most important of those passages is found in the book of Isaiah:

“You are my witnesses,” declares the LORD, “and my servant whom I have chosen, so that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he.  Before me no god was formed, nor will there be one after me. I, even I, am the LORD, and apart from me there is no savior. I have revealed and saved and proclaimed … You are my witnesses,” declares the LORD, “that I am God.”   (Isaiah 43:10–12)

The context of these verses is a legal one: God brings a charge against those who refuse to acknowledge Him (verses 8-9) and calls His people as witnesses to His existence, saving work, and nature (verses 10-13).  While the immediate fulfillment of these verses applied to the people of ancient Israel, it is clear Israel failed in this commission (verses 26-28). It is also clear that the passage has a broader application to the people of God in a later age. In fact, just a few verses after stating His commission, Isaiah records God’s promise: “I will pour out my Spirit on your offspring, and my blessing on your descendants” (Isaiah 44:3), signifying the spiritual Israel (Galatians 6:16)  that would take up the commission – as was also foretold by the prophet Joel and cited by Peter at the foundation of the New Testament church (Acts 2:17).  

Isaiah’s Great Commission passage not only makes it clear that God’s people were to serve as witnesses on His behalf, but it also shows what the message of that witness was to be. Through Isaiah, God summarized that message in a particularly powerful way: “I, even I, am the LORD … I have revealed and saved and proclaimed … you are my witnesses” (Isaiah 43:12). The three things that God emphasizes in this passage were to be the very core of his people’s identity as witnesses  – the truth of God’s existence, the offer of his salvation, and the proclamation of his righteous nature and way of life. 

This “Great Commission” of the Old Testament becomes, of course, the Great Commission of the New – summarized in Jesus’ final words to His disciples before his ascension: “you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth”  (Acts 1:8). And when we look beneath the surface, there are a number of specific similarities between Isaiah’s Great Commission message and that of the New Testament. For instance, through Isaiah God says “… I am he. Before me no god was formed, nor will there be one after me” (Isaiah 43:10). The words “I am he” are the identical words Jesus declares of Himself in John 8:24 and 13:19 (KJV, NKJV, ESV, CSB, and most other translations) and that are found in the Greek Septuagint translation of Isaiah 43:10.

When the apostle Paul summarized the Christian message, he wrote: “the gospel … is the power of God that brings salvation to everyone who believes: first to the Jew, then to the Gentile. For in the gospel the righteousness of God is revealed – a righteousness that is by faith from first to last” (Romans 1:16-17). This is the same message of God’s existence (“the power of God”), the salvation of His people (“salvation to everyone who believes”) and God’s nature and way of life (the righteousness of God). 

Ultimately, the New Testament witness message is no different from that found in Isaiah – we are instructed to witness to the Son of God’s existence, the salvation that comes through him, and the proclamation of His nature and the way of life He commands.  There is no essential difference because God desires now, just as He did then, for “all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth” (1 Timothy 2:4). That is the Great Commission given to the people of the gospel – both then and now.

If you are looking for a truly worthwhile goal to set for this new year, Cornerstone's carefully prepared non-denominational and non-commercial courses provide in-depth information on the Bible – without advertisements or other distractions – to those who cannot attend Bible school or seminary, or who simply want to understand the Bible at a deeper level in their own personal study.  With Cornerstone courses you can study anywhere, on your own schedule, and you can download course materials without having to study while online.

General courses are available on the Old and New Testament, as well as a more focused course on the Old Testament Wisdom Books –  with more courses being planned. Significantly, all course materials – including e-textbooks – are provided for free and there are no charges of any kind.  If desired,  an optional  final exam can be taken online and a personalized certificate of completion is provided for all passing grades. Here are two sample comments from students:

"The Cornerstone course units are always refreshing ...they make me realize that there is still so much I don't know even though I have been reading the Bible all my life."  Anthony J. 

"I don't think there are many places (if any) where all these strings that you pull together so readably can be found! Never ending interesting things to learn!"  Lois S.

Download a free course and study materials today from the CornerstoneCourses.org site, here.​

“Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel” (Isaiah 7:14).
 
There have been endless arguments between Christians and non-Christians through history as to whether the Hebrew word betulah in this verse – translated “virgin” in most English Bibles – should actually be translated “virgin” or just “young woman.” Non-believers have also argued that the son promised by Isaiah was simply the Jewish king Hezekiah. Conservative Christians feel there is ample evidence to show that the translation “virgin” is correct,  and that the meaning of Immanuel – “God with us” – as well as the context of the promise could hardly be applied to Hezekiah.

But in this blog post we will go beyond those questions to focus on what the verse says and to look at its wider setting in the book of Isaiah. When we read Isaiah’s prophecy of the Immanuel to come, we may focus on the virgin birth of the child or the meaning of his name – but that is only half of the significance of this great verse. The incredible promise of “God with us” made in this verse is coupled, if we think about it, with the equally astounding prediction of Immanuel’s humanity. God could have dwelt with humanity in the form of some kind of  spirit being – to teach his ways – but the words “the virgin shall conceive and bear a son” show the humanity of the Immanuel as much as his name shows his divinity.

This duality of the fully human and fully divine Immanuel is stated again a few chapters later when Isaiah takes up the theme of the promised child again: 

“For to us a child is born, to us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace” (Isaiah 9:6).

The promised One’s humanity is seen in “for to us a child is born” with the emphasis on his human birth contrasted with “to us a son is given” signifying a non-human origin that is made clear in the titles that follow.  Interestingly, the four titles are equally indicative of the human and divine with “Wonderful Counselor” and “Prince of Peace” being essentially human titles and “Mighty God” and “Everlasting Father” being obviously titles that could only apply to God.

So, beyond its prediction of the virgin birth, the Immanuel promise of Isaiah stresses both the humanity and divinity of the One who was to come – a fact stressed equally in New Testament scriptures such as the transcendent opening verses of the Gospel of John:
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God … And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth” (John 1:1, 14).

The statements that “the Word was God” and “the Word became flesh” are equally important in showing the Immanuel promise was fulfilled in the person of Jesus Christ. Luke’s Gospel confirms the duality in the same way:

“He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over Jacob’s descendants forever; his kingdom will never end.” (Luke 1:32–33).
​
Once again, the words “Son of the Most High” and “his father David” proclaim the unique and unmistakable roles of the Immanuel – the promised one who would be born divine and human, equally God and man, and who would eternally bring the two together. 

Unfortunately, many Christians see doubt as something synonymous with unbelief – as though doubt and belief cannot exist at the same time.  This viewpoint is based largely on a misunderstanding of what the apostle James says: “you must believe and not doubt, because the one who doubts is like a wave of the sea, blown and tossed by the wind. That person should not expect to receive anything from the Lord. Such a person is double-minded and unstable in all they do” (James 1:6–8).
  
While James’ statement might seem at first sight to be against any kind of doubt, if we look at the context of what he says we realize that the apostle is talking about a specific kind of doubt that we must shun.   There are two possibilities. First, notice that James uses the expression “double minded” of the doubter, and he uses it again in the fourth chapter of his letter: “Cleanse your hands, you sinners, and purify your hearts, you double-minded” (James 4:7).  The context of this second use of the expression is clear: “Do you not know that friendship with the world is hostility toward God? Therefore, whoever chooses to be a friend of the world renders himself an enemy of God” (James 4:4).

So the first possibility is that in condemning doubting in 1:6-8, James is referring to the kind of double-mindedness that a person has who is not truly given over to God  – a person who has “one foot” in his religion, but the other foot solidly planted in the world. If James is using the expression “double-minded” with the same meanings in chapter 1 and 4, then he is telling us that a “friend of the world” who is torn between two loyalties cannot expect God to answer his or her prayers.  Alternately, if James is using “double-minded” in a different and more limited sense in chapter 1 – meaning someone who does not know for sure if God will answer his or her prayers – then the outcome is the same: they will not be answered. 

But these are the only two meanings of doubting and double mindedness that can possibly be found in what James says in 1:6–8.  Contextually, there is simply no way that this passage can be somehow expanded to mean doubts of any kind – such as intellectual doubts about the meaning of a given scripture, or as to what is God’s will in  a certain situation.  These kinds of doubts or uncertainties need not be seen as being somehow unchristian, and they are certainly not equivalent of disbelief.

In his excellent book In Two Minds, first published in 1976, author and social critic Os Guinness clearly explains the difference between doubt and unbelief:

"Doubt is not the opposite of faith, nor is it the same as unbelief. Doubt is a state of mind in suspension between faith and unbelief so that it is neither of them wholly and it is each only partly. This distinction is absolutely vital because it uncovers and deals with the first major misconception of doubt – the idea that in doubting a believer is betraying faith and surrendering to unbelief" (In Two Minds, page 27).

Guinness points out that failure to understand the true nature of this kind of intellectual doubt often causes great anxiety to many who experience such uncertainties, yet who are sincerely committed to God.  He continues to illustrate this fact in the following way:

"The word unbelief is usually used of a willful refusal to believe or a deliberate decision to disobey. So, while doubt is a state of suspension between faith and unbelief, unbelief is a state of mind which is closed against God, an attitude of heart which disobeys God as much as it disbelieves the truth ... Doubt is not the opposite of faith, unbelief is" (pages 27,30).

We should not see doubts that are occasional or limited to small or specific areas of uncertainty as being somehow spiritually wrong, therefore.  We should always address our doubts and resolve them quickly if possible, but just like temptations they are not in themselves sin – only when a temptation or doubt is acted upon does it become sinful (Romans 14:23; etc.).  

We should always remember that Jesus accepted and helped the man whom he had told “All things are possible for one who believes” and who sincerely prayed “I do believe; help me overcome my unbelief!” (Mark 9:23–24). This is in itself clear proof that James does not mean that a person with any kind of doubts cannot have answered prayer.  Jesus also continued to accept and work with his disciple Thomas to move him through his doubts (John 20:24–29).  

Doubts that are not based on the kind of double-mindedness that is not truly committed to God or simply cannot accept that God can or will help us are neither unbelief nor do they preclude God working with us. Such doubts are, in fact, often normal temporary uncertainties that are met and, with God’s help, eventually dispelled in the normal lifetime path of faith.

The English expression “above all” is a superlative: there can normally only be one thing that is “above all” in any given category – such as the highest mountain or the largest ocean.  In the New Testament, several Greek phrases function in the same way – they also connote something that is more important than any other among the things being discussed.  For example, the apostle James tells us “Above all, my brothers and sisters, do not swear” (James 5:12) – meaning that is the most important thing his readers must keep in mind in the context he is speaking about.

The apostle Peter uses the expression in the same way in his epistles, but interestingly he uses it not once but three times – each time of a different thing:

“Above all, love each other deeply, because love covers over a multitude of sins” (1 Peter 4:8).

“Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things” (2 Peter 1:20).

“Above all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires” (2 Peter 3:3).

At first sight these statements seem to be unrelated. They certainly speak of different things that the apostle urges us to keep foremost in mind – though it may seem strange that he mentions two things to keep in  mind “above all” in the same epistle.  Yet there is perhaps a thread that connects them all.

In the first of these verses, Peter’s subject is obvious – it is love of one another that he emphasizes must be paramount in our concerns.  We must not only love each other, he says, but we must love each other deeply.  

In the second verse the subject may seem a somewhat narrow one to be regarded as something “above all else,” but the context of the statement helps us to understand what the verse is emphasizing.  Peter is not simply talking about understanding Scripture, but about our perception of it in a context of faith. The epistle’s first verses tell us that Peter writes: “To those who through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ have received a faith as precious as ours” (2 Peter 1:1). 

A few verses later Peter expands the theme of faith: “make every effort to add to your faith goodness” (2 Peter 1:5).  Then in verse 16 Peter begins a defense of his readers’ faith: “For we did not follow cleverly devised stories” (2 Peter 1:16);  in verse 19 he adds “We also have the prophetic message” (2 Peter 1:19)  It is in continuation of this thought that he then writes “Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation” (2 Peter 1:20).  Peter’s point is that our faith is well grounded – something he urges us to place at the forefront of our minds.

In the final verse in which he uses the expression “above all” the apostle tells us “Above all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come” (2 Peter 3:3) and once again we must look at its context.  The third chapter of 2 Peter develops the idea that scoffers will come who, if they are able,  will undermine the very hope of every believer in the return of our Lord: “They will say, “Where is this ‘coming’ he promised?” (2 Peter 3:4), and Peter immediately follows this warning with a defense of the Christian hope regarding Christ’s return (verses 5–12) – concluding with the words “But in keeping with his promise we are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, where righteousness dwells. So then, dear friends, since you are looking forward to this” (verses 13–14 , emphases added).  Twice Peter stresses that which the believer is looking forward to – hoping for.  The context of 2 Peter 3:3 is clearly that it is paramount that we are not affected by scoffers and that we can continue to hope in the reality of the Lord’s return.

Whether consciously or not, Peter’s three references to things that we must keep in mind “above all” are related in that they have to do with the great triad of love, faith, and hope* (or “faith, hope, and love” as Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 13:13), that make up the centrality of Christian life.  There is no contradiction in what Peter writes – these three qualities are, indeed, things that we must strive toward “above all.”
 
* Download our free e-book These Three Remain: Why Faith, Hope and Love Are Even More Important Than You Realize  here.

“Jesus said, ‘My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jewish leaders. But now my kingdom is from another place'” (John 18:36).

The difficulty of this verse is that it appears to contradict other scriptures of the New Testament that show the kingdom of God to be something that would be established in this world. Adding to the apparent confusion, Jesus said in the second half of John 18:36 that his kingdom was not “in,” but “from” another place.

The answer to the seeming difficulty is that both aspects of the kingdom of God are true. On the one hand, the kingdom of God is certainly in heaven. This seems obvious in the expression “the kingdom of heaven,” though that is actually not a proof.  Matthew, writing to a predominantly Jewish audience, used “kingdom of heaven” because many Jews used that expression in order to avoid unnecessary use of the name of God – just as in English people sometimes say “Good heavens,” which is just an indirect way of using God’s name. All the other Gospel writers use “kingdom of God.” But apart from this detail it is obvious that God rules as King in heaven and in that sense, the “kingdom of God” is the “kingdom of heaven” (see Matthew 5:34; Daniel 4:37; etc.).

On the other hand, a great many scriptures  clearly show the kingdom of heaven will be established on earth – something Christ said we should pray for (Matthew 6:10) and a truth at the core of his teaching, as we see in the Gospels: “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near” (Matthew 3:2). The situation is not unlike that of earlier centuries when the colonial powers were located in their own countries, but took over distant lands. It was equally true to say that the “kingdom of France” and the “kingdom of England” were in their respective areas, but also that these kingdoms were “coming near” the areas they annexed, and that the rule of those kingdoms was finally established in the new lands.

With this background and a little extra information, we can now understand the meaning of Jesus’ words in John 18.36.   The Greek word used in John (basileia) and translated “kingdom” can mean not only the physical actual kingdom, but also the “rule” or “authority” of the king. In that sense, it is like the colonial analogy we used. French Canada, called “New France,” was not France, but part of the kingdom of France in the sense it was under the rule of the king of France.  Sometimes people say that Christ did not speak Greek, but rather would have said these words in Aramaic or possibly Hebrew.  Even if that is true, the Aramaic (malkuta) and Hebrew (malkuth) words have exactly the same double meaning.
​
So, the words “My kingdom is not of this world”  spoken by Jesus can just as properly be translated “My authority is not of this world … my authority is from another place.” Jesus’ words do not refer then to being the ruler of the kingdom in heaven, but to his having authority from the kingdom in heaven.

When we understand the double meaning of “kingdom,” we can see how John 18:36 does not contradict the many scriptures regarding the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth, but simply refers to the origin of Christ’s authority as that kingdom’s King.​

“Why, LORD, do you make us wander from your ways and harden our hearts so we do not revere you?” (Isaiah 63:17).
 
This is sometimes said to be one of the most difficult verses to understand in the Bible.  All the major translations essentially agree on how the verse should be worded, so the problem is not one of understanding what the underlying Hebrew text says, but simply what it means.  On the surface, the prophet Isaiah seems to blame God for ancient Israel’s sins, and to claim that it is because of God’s action in some way that we do not properly fear him.

Because the plain meaning of the words seems to contradict the rest of what the Bible teaches – that humans are entirely responsible for their own sins – some commentators have claimed that the passage must be understood as being spoken by those antagonistic to God who simply want to blame him for their wrongdoings.  But the context shows this explanation is impossible.  The section begins, in verse 7, with the words “I will tell of the kindnesses of the Lord, the deeds for which he is to be praised, according to all the Lord has done for us” and continues in this kind of positive and devout manner till the speaker says “you, Lord, are our Father, our Redeemer from of old is your name” (vs. 16) immediately before asking “Why, Lord, do you make us wander from your ways and harden our hearts …” (vs. 17). So, there is no sign of antagonism toward God at all – simply the asking of a question we would not expect Isaiah to ask.

The best way to understand this scripture is probably as referring to the fact that the people of Israel’s desire to do right – no matter how weak the desire may have been – was rendered useless by God’s continued displeasure with them, and the resulting lack of his help that they desperately needed if they were to do what was right (see vs. 10). As such, the statement is a strong affirmation of Israel’s own sinfulness and need of God rather than an accusation of God’s action in “making” them sin.  

This meaning of Isaiah’s words can be seen to be likely because the question is immediately followed by the request “Return for the sake of your servants” (vs. 18) – a request for God’s help as in times past (vs. 9).  So we might paraphrase Isaiah’s seemingly strange question as “Will you not help us again so that we are not left to our own wandering and hardness of heart?”

Certainly, there is nothing to be found anywhere else in the book of Isaiah that would suggest this is not the meaning of Isaiah 63:17.  In fact, the situation is clearly summarized in Isaiah’s very next chapter where the prophet speaks on behalf of Israel, saying: “You come to the help of those who gladly do right, who remember your ways. But when we continued to sin against them, you were angry. How then can we be saved? … for you have hidden your face from us and have given us over to our sins” (Isaiah 64:5–7).
​
Rather than an accusation that God was causing Israel to sin, Isaiah’s message is clearly that sinful Israel needed God’s help to do right – a lesson we can also learn from this powerful biblical book, and one we should never forget.

“The hearing ear and the seeing eye, the LORD has made them both” (Proverbs 20:12).
 
We talk about “hearing the word of God,” but it is interesting that the Bible frequently talks about both hearing and seeing God’s revelation.  We see this, for example, in the book of Numbers when it speaks of “him who hears the words of God, Who sees the vision of the Almighty” (Numbers 24:4), or in Jeremiah: “For who among them has stood in the council of the Lord to see and to hear his word” (Jeremiah 23:18).  This duality of  seeing and hearing God’s word has a specific application to us as Christians.

The first disciples of Jesus had the opportunity, of course, to see and to hear him – to see his actions and hear his words directly. As the apostle John wrote: “That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched – this we proclaim concerning the Word of life … We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard” (1 John 1:1, 3).

The original disciples experienced the word of God directly from “the Word” himself and sometimes it may seem to us that it must have been easier for those first Christians to experience and understand the word of God than it is for us now.  But we should remember that just hearing the words and seeing them in action is no guarantee of truly seeing and hearing them at a level of actual understanding – even if we had lived at that time.  As Jesus himself said of the majority who heard his public teaching: “This is why I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand” (Matthew 13:13; ESV).

In saying this Jesus was paraphrasing God’s words found in the book of Isaiah: “Go, and say to this people: ‘Keep on hearing, but do not understand; keep on seeing, but do not perceive’ … lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their hearts …” (Isaiah 6:9-10 ESV, and see Deuteronomy 29:4; etc.).

These words show symbolically that our minds must be “opened” – made receptive – by God in order for us to hear and see the full significance of spiritual things. The New Testament makes this clear also in what the apostle Paul tells us: “The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit” (1 Corinthians 2:14 NIV).  Jesus referred to this when he said “It is written in the prophets, ‘And they shall all be taught of God.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father, comes to Me” (John 6:45)        
  
But this does not mean that the Christian somehow understands spiritual things without going through the normal process of seeing and hearing.  What Ananias told Paul applies to all Christians to some degree:  “‘The God of our ancestors has chosen you to know his will and to see the Righteous One and to hear words from his mouth. You will be his witness to all people of what you have seen and heard” (Acts 22:14–15).

We are called to “see and hear” – to receive the information we are then helped to understand.   So how do we see and hear the word of God today?  “Hearing” the word of God is obviously accomplished through reading – or hearing someone else who is reading out – the words of the Bible. But how do we “see” the word today?

The answer is simple enough, yet we often do not think about it or utilize it in the way we could.  We “see” the word of God today when we fellowship with those in whom the word lives today.   The apostle John referred to this very fact when he wrote: “what we have seen and heard we also declare to you, so that you may also have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ”  (1 John 1:3 CSB).   Paul makes the connection even more clearly: “Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ” (1 Corinthians 11:1) and “What you have learned and received and heard and seen in me—practice these things, and the God of peace will be with you” (Philippians 4:9). And in the Epistle to the Hebrews we read “Remember those who led you, who spoke the word of God to you; and considering the result of their conduct, imitate their faith” (Hebrews 13:7).

Inasmuch as others follow God, we can learn from them by seeing the Word alive in their lives.  We must also hear the written word in order to know when others are imitating Christ, but the combined hearing and seeing guides us in growing more like Christ ourselves.  This is how we all have opportunity to hear and see the word and the Word of God – even those who are not blessed with physical sight or hearing in this life can see and hear the Lord in this way.

The Bible makes the dual power of speech – to hurt and to help – clear when it tells us that “Death and life are in the power of the tongue” (Proverbs 18:21 ESV).  Jesus himself linked discipleship and speech together (Matthew 5:22-23 etc.) and he left no doubt about the seriousness of this subject when he said “I tell you this, you must give an account on judgment day for every idle word you speak. The words you say will either acquit you or condemn you” (Matthew 12:36–37 NLT).  We will be judged, Christ says, as much by what we say as what we do. 

But although it can be destructive, the power of speech may be used for great good and The Power of Speech: The Potent Force that Every Christian Is Called to Use Daily shows how you can stop harming yourself and others through what you say and start using the power of speech for good  – as every Christian should.

You can download this new free e-book directly without any kind of registration from our sister-site FreeChristianEBooks.org here.

It is interesting that  one of the four Gospels focuses on faith far more than the others. That Gospel is the Gospel of John.  Actually, John does not use the noun “faith” at all – it occurs nowhere in his Gospel. Instead, John always uses the verb “believe” (Greek pisteuo), and he uses that word about 100 times (perhaps surprisingly, given most people’s perception of John, that is over twice as many times as he uses forms of the word agape or “love”!).  To put John’s use of “believe” in perspective, we should realize that this is more than the use of the word in all the other Gospels combined. In fact, John’s Gospel contains well over half of all the instances of pisteuo or “believe” in the whole New Testament.  Clearly, then, “believe” is a key word in understanding John’s Gospel, and we can learn a great deal about the nature of belief and believing by focusing on what the apostle tells us in his account.  Three points stand out, and John repeatedly shows our faith must be based upon these three aspects of believing. 
 
The Person of Christ
It is not coincidental that the great summary of God’s purpose set out in John 3:16 revolves around belief: “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life” (John 3:16, emphases added here and below).  What we miss, reading this so-often-quoted verse out of context – as is so often done – is John’s continued stress on believing: “Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son” (John 3:18).  Four times in the space of these two verses John hammers home the point that it is only as we believe in the person of Jesus Christ as the Son of God that faith will be rewarded with eternal life.  

Throughout his Gospel, John gives many examples of what and why we must believe (2:11; 4:41; 8:24; 10:38; 16:30; etc.), and they are all based upon the person of Jesus Christ, his nature, character, and the work that he accomplished. There is no room in John’s Gospel for any abstract “all you need is love” message.  John’s Gospel is deeply rooted in the necessity of active believing faith in Christ as much as it is in showing the importance of love.
Indeed, the very purpose for the Gospel of John, as the apostle himself tells us near its conclusion,  is so that we “ … may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name” (John 20:30-31). 

The Work of Belief

We know, as the apostle Paul clearly affirms, that “the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Romans 6:23), but John’s Gospel paints a complementary picture emphasizing that although God does give eternal life freely, the gift comes with responsibilities.  While Matthew’s Gospel shows Jesus asserting: “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven” (Matthew 7:21), John’s Gospel records Jesus instructing his disciples in the work that relates to faith: “Do not work for food that spoils, but for food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give you …  Then they asked him, ‘What must we do to do the works God requires?’  Jesus answered, ‘The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent” (John 6:27-29).

Although it is easy to presume that Jesus is talking about simply accepting or holding a belief here, John’s wording shows that in reality he is stressing the active believing that is itself something that we do, rather than just accept.  For John, our belief is not a thing that we possess, but an action that we do on a recurring basis – as we see in the way he repeatedly tells us that the disciples believed as they witnessed Christ’s miracles and teachings (John 2:11; 16:30; 20:8; etc.). This leads us to John’s final emphasis regarding the nature of true believing. 

Ongoing Perseverance

Precisely because true believing involves repeated action on our part, John also stresses that believing must be coupled with perseverance.  The apostle gives clear instances of individuals who had believed, but who stopped believing. In John 8, for example, we read: “Even as he spoke, many believed in him. So Jesus said to the Jews who had believed Him, ‘If you continue in My word, you really are My disciples’” (John 8:30-31).
The importance of ongoing and continuing faith was already stressed by John two chapters earlier when he reveals that previously believing individuals “… turned back and no longer followed him” (John 6:66).  This scripture alone shows that believing faith is not something entered into on a one-time basis, but an ongoing action that must be maintained through perseverance.

When John tells us, near the close of his Gospel, that “these [things] are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name” (John 20:31, emphasis added), the word “believe” is literally “be believing” –  ongoing believing –  and this conceptual conclusion of the Gospel echoes its opening  concept that “In him was life” (John1:4).
​
John’s Gospel clearly shows us that true believing is based on the person of Christ, involves active expression on our part, and must be maintained through perseverance.  The apostle makes it clear that lack of these three factors led to many not believing or losing the belief they once exercised.  It is in these three ways, however, that John shows we do truly believe, and through that believing we have life.

“There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to one hope when you were called; one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all”  (Ephesians 4:4–6).
 
One of the key teachings of Paul’s epistle to the Ephesians is that of unity. The apostle emphasizes, among other things, that there is “one faith,” and “one baptism” (Ephesians 4: 5).  Ironically, however, this particular section of Paul’s writings is sometimes misunderstood in a way that limits Christian unity and interaction. The apostle’s words are misconstrued as a call to doctrinal purity and to mean there is only one faith (“ours” and not “theirs”)  and one baptism (the way we do it, not how others perform the rite).

Doctrinal purity is important, of course; but it is hard to find a scripture to show that minor matters of doctrine trump the unity that God desires within his church.  Many attempt to find such scriptures, however, and often settle on Romans 16:17:  “I urge you, brothers and sisters, to watch out for those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Keep away from them.”  This verse is often used to attempt to show that even minor matters of doctrine are more important than unity, but that is really the exact opposite of its meaning. Paul is actually urging us to see that the divisions and offenses caused by some are contrary to doctrine – it is people who divide the church who are to be avoided, not those who may differ in understanding of minor points.

Some feel that every detail of doctrine as they understand it is important and cannot be negotiated, but Paul makes a clear distinction between the essentials of the gospel that cannot and must not be compromised (Galatians 1:8) and minor issues of understanding  (Philippians 3:15) that do not necessarily separate individuals from the body of Christ. 

But to return to Ephesians. To understand why Paul speaks of “one faith” and “one baptism,” it is vital that we keep in mind the context of what Paul is saying. Throughout Chapter 4, and throughout the whole epistle, Paul stresses the need for unity in the church and, not surprisingly, Ephesians has frequently been called the “epistle of unity.” 

Paul begins Ephesians by pointing to the great goal of unity (Ephesians 1:10) and continues throughout chapters 2 and 3 by stressing the unity God has made possible between Jews and Gentiles (note especially Ephesians 2:14-18) and concluding  “This mystery is that through the gospel the Gentiles are heirs together with Israel, members together of one body, and sharers together in the promise in Christ Jesus” (Ephesians 3:6, emphasis added here and below). In Ephesians 4, Paul then broadens the concept of unity to the whole church, instructing us:

Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to one hope when you were called; one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all. But to each one of us grace has been given as Christ apportioned it (Ephesians 4: 3–7).

Seen properly in this context, it becomes clear that far from meaning that there is only one faith (ours and not theirs) and one baptism (the way we do it, not how others perform the rite ), Paul seeks to unify the body by emphasizing its unity in all things.  Just as there is “one Lord,” so there is “one faith” and “one baptism,” etc. These are all examples of things that unify us rather than divide us.   In other words, we all worship the same Lord, we are all part of the same faith, and all share the same way of life -  our essential beliefs and actions show the unity we have, or should have, in Christ.

The whole of Ephesians is written from the perspective of the unity we share, the unity which is the basis of our relationships in Christ, despite our differences.  And Paul is not blind to those differences but sees them as part of a unified body of Christ: “From him the whole body, joined and held together by every supporting ligament, grows and builds itself up in love, as each part does its work” (Ephesians 4:16) “for we are all members of one body” (Ephesians 4:25).  That is perhaps why Paul ends his epistle by saying “Grace to all who love our Lord Jesus Christ with an undying love” (Ephesians 6:24).
​
Doctrinal accuracy is important, of course, but we must always be careful that we do not overuse the concept so that minor matters become a hindrance to unity in the body of Christ.  The Sermon on the Mount indicates the kingdom of God is not so much about the pure in doctrine as the pure in heart. Ultimately, it is the presence of the Spirit of God within us and our way of life, not the minor details of our beliefs, that define our identity as members of the body of Christ. 

King David’s life and reign  are so well documented in the Bible that the many people involved – truly a cast of hundreds – can be confusing at times. But the identity of some of these individuals is important for understanding David’s story.*

For example, the individual Zeruiah is named a total of twenty-six times (twice as many times as Nehemiah, for example) in four separate books of the Old Testament. Zeruiah also had three prominent sons: Joab, Abishai, and Asahel (2 Samuel 2:18).  But who was Zeruiah?

The answer to this question is found in the genealogy of David, recorded in 1 Chronicles 2:3-16. This genealogical summary records that David had seven older brothers (also mentioned in 1 Samuel 16:10-11) and two sisters. Zeruiah was one of David’s two sisters, and the three sons of Zeruiah (Joab, Abishai, and Asahel) were David’s nephews.  This explains a number of otherwise puzzling events or circumstances in David’s reign.

For example, 2 Samuel tells us that when David’s son Absalom attempted to forcibly take the kingship and sought to kill his father, he made Amasa the commander of the Israelite army (2 Samuel 17:25).  Even though Amasa led the forces that tried to overthrow and kill David at this time, once Absalom had been defeated King David retained Amasa as commander of the army in place of the previous commander Joab who had disobeyed David by killing Absalom.
We might wonder why David would trust Amasa,  but the answer to this question is found in 2 Samuel 17:25 and 1 Chronicles 2:16–17.  Amasa was the son of a woman called Abigail (not David’s wife by that name).  This Abigail was David’s other sister in addition to Zeruiah (1 Chronicles 2:16).  So Amasa was David’s nephew. This is why David asked Amasa, “Are you not my own flesh and blood?” (2 Samuel 19:13).

Unfortunately for Amasa, Joab (the son of Zeruiah) killed his cousin to regain his role as head of Israel’s army.  The fact that Joab was David’s nephew explains  why David would not execute him despite his crimes, but had Solomon kill him – as Solomon did not have the same direct familial ties to the commander.

Royal politics, as with many other aspects of life in the biblical world, were often driven by such family connections and relationships.  Responsibilities to close family members were particularly strong, and it was rare for individuals in power to kill or even punish close relatives unless they were perceived as a direct threat. In the cases we have looked at here, David not only would have had to break this societal attitude if he had executed his nephews Amasa or Joab, but also he would have disgraced his own sisters by doing so.

The identity of David’s two sisters helps us to understand David’s actions or lack of action on several occasions and looking at the family connections involved can often help us to understand the story of this and other Old Testament kings.

*Download a free copy of our e-book Lessons from Old Testament Leaders, here.

Lessons from the Life of Jesus: Practical Insights from the Gospels has always been one of the most popular downloads on this site and is now even better!  The new, expanded, third edition includes five new chapters – enhancing an already helpful book and adding many new practical lessons.

Rather than simply retelling the story of the life of Jesus, this e-book focuses on some of the details of the Gospel narratives that are easy to miss, but which can help us to better understand his life and teachings.  In each case there are lessons we can learn and apply – sometimes with the potential for an effect on our lives that is well out of proportion to the seemingly small detail that conveys the lesson.

Enrich your understanding of the life and work of Jesus and take away lessons you can apply today.  You can download a copy in any of three formats – .pdf, .epub, and .mobi – to read on your computer, smart phone, or e-book reader.  No registration or email address is needed - simply click and download from our e-books page here.

Every Christian knows Jesus’ words that his followers were to be the “salt of the earth” and the “light of the world” (Matthew 5:13-16).  Being the light of the world seems easy to understand – it clearly involves the responsibility to “illuminate” the world through the witness of our lives and, of course, to reflect the light of the God who himself can be described as “Light.”

​But what about the salt – what exactly does that represent?  Salt was used for many different purposes in the Middle East during the first century, so there are a number of possibilities regarding what Jesus intended. We should consider all of the most likely meanings.

1. Perhaps the most obvious possibility is that Jesus’ reference to our being “salt” has to do with the use of salt as a flavor enhancer (Job 6:6) –  that we are to make the world more pleasing or “palatable” to God (Romans 8:8).

2. Salt was also widely used to preserve food, especially meat which would spoil quickly in the heat of the Palestinian desert environment.   The sense of long-lasting preservation is seen in the biblical expression “a covenant of salt” (2 Chronicles 13:5).

3. Salt was utilized to purify things such as offerings made in the tabernacle or temple (Leviticus 2:13).  This is the meaning behind Jesus’ words “For everyone will be salted with fire ...” (Mark 9:49) and Paul’s words “Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt” (Colossians 4:6).

4. On the other hand, the ability of large quantities of salt to kill vegetation and render land unusable led to salt being used metaphorically for the concept of emptiness and destruction (Job 39:6, Ezekiel 16:4, etc.). 

5. Despite the fact that large quantities of salt kill all plants, much smaller quantities were used as the world’s oldest chemical fertilizer.  In fact, after vegetation has been killed by a heavy application of salt, the plants often eventually come back more profusely.  Because the word “earth” in Jesus’ expression “you are the salt of the earth” can mean “soil,” some commentators feel that he may have meant his followers were to bring new life to the world, like a little salt to soil; but the likelihood of this meaning is certainly unsure in this context. 

6. Ancient peoples also often put salt on the wicks of oil lamps to cut smoke and increase their brightness.  This meaning seems attractive as the use of salt in this sense would then be parallel with light, in believers being both “salt and light.”  But in Jesus’ words in Matthew 5:13-16, salt is discussed before light is mentioned, indicating he probably had a more common use of salt in mind.

Many other meanings have been claimed for Jesus’ words based on other uses or characteristics of salt. For example, some have claimed that just like salt, believers can make the world thirsty for God’s truth.  But this and similar ideas are somewhat fanciful and would not have been understandable in the context of what Jesus said without explanation. Likewise, it is commonly thought that Roman soldiers were paid in salt (hence the word “salary”), so that salt might have been a symbol of the disciples’ “worth,” but in fact the Empire’s soldiers were paid in normal money (or not at all), but not with salt.

Because Jesus did not explain which aspect of salt he intended in using the metaphor, we must presume that he had the most basic aspect in mind, which would mean that either or both meanings 1 and 3 above – salt as a flavor enhancer or a purifier – are most likely what he had in mind and how his hearers would have understood the expression. Understood in either of these ways, being the “salt” of the earth would certainly mean that we represent the world to God, just as in being the light of the world we represent God to humanity (Matthew 5:16).

But Jesus’ words also hold some practical aspects in his use of salt as a metaphor. After saying “you are the salt of the earth,” Jesus proceeded to say “But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled by men” (Matthew 5:13). This is interesting as salt cannot actually lose its saltiness unless it is diluted by water or mixed with other substances. Salt spoiled in such a way might often have simply been thrown out on the street, and it is also possible that such low grade salt was spread on Roman roads to inhibit vegetation growth. In either case it would be “trampled by men,” but the lesson would be that our belief and behavior must not be diluted by things of the world around us.

There is another way that spiritually we might lose our “saltiness.”  Jesus also told his disciples “Salt is good, but if it loses its saltiness, how can you make it salty again? Have salt among yourselves, and be at peace with each other” (Mark 9:50, emphasis added). This suggests that our saltiness can be lost through a lack of peace with one another, and that we may cease to fulfill our function of making the world more acceptable to God by our “saltiness” either being diluted, as we saw above, or by not living peaceably with others.   These obstacles to successful discipleship are both worth thinking about.  ​

When we read the apostle Paul’s great “Faith, Hope, and Love” summation of the most important qualities in the Christian life (1 Corinthians 13:13), it is sometimes  easy to forget the importance of other spiritual qualities that support that great triad.  One such quality is trust, which actually underlies all of Paul’s “Big Three” and enables each one to function.
​
Faith and Trust

There is a good deal of overlap between the words faith and trust in English, but they are also different.  At the most basic level, faith is a noun – it is something we have or are given. Trust is primarily a verb; it is something we do.  This is true in the Bible, also.  Although the same Hebrew and Greek words are translated as both “faith” and “trust” in the English Bible, context and the form of the words  show us whether faith or trust is meant.    
 
How does the difference between faith and trust affect us? To use a physical analogy, we believe that aircraft can fly – we probably have absolute faith in that fact – but to board a plane for a flight we also must trust the pilot. If we suspect the pilot is inebriated we might get off the plane immediately – we have faith that it can fly safely, but we do not trust that it will.
 
In the same way, we can have faith in something or someone and still not trust them.  The prophet Jonah is a Biblical example of this – Jonah had faith in God, but did not trust him (Jonah 4:2). In the New Testament, the apostle James tells us that even demons believe in God (James 2:19). They have “faith” that God exists , but they do not choose to trust and follow him.  So it is not enough to just have faith in God, we must also trust him – and the connection between faith and trust is a two-way street.  On the one hand, trust is our active response to what we already have faith in, but on the other hand, the more we develop our trust in God, the more our faith grows with it.

Hope and Trust

Hope and trust are also directly related.  If we do not really trust any person controlling a situation in which we are involved, we will have very little hope in the outcome.  That is why our trust in God is so important for a life that is truly based on hope.  We can see this principle in the book of Romans: “May the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace as you trust in him, so that you may overflow with hope by the power of the Holy Spirit” (Romans 15:13).   Here, Paul clearly tells us that we will be filled with the joy and peace that come from hope “as” or to the degree that we trust in God – and he stresses that fact a second time in the same verse by telling us a result of trusting God is that we will overflow with hope!

This is a principle found throughout the Bible – it is only to the extent that we trust God that we will really look forward with hope for this life and the next.  In the apostle John’s description of his vision of the new heaven and earth he tells us “He who was seated on the throne said, ‘I am making everything new!’ Then he said, ‘Write this down, for these words are trustworthy and true’” (Revelation 21:5).  John reminds us that we can look forward to  renewed  life in a renewed world precisely because God is trustworthy – we can hope because we can trust!

Love and Trust

There is an old proverb that “When mistrust comes in, loves goes out” and it has often been said that we cannot deeply love those we cannot really trust because the foundation of all love is trust.  This principle  is often as true spiritually as it is physically.  Even if we say that God is able to love us with a perfect love that needs no trust, this may be true, but theologians have argued that ultimately  God’s love is based on trust in his own power to eventually bring us to love him. 

But whatever the case may be regarding God’s love for us, it is clear that our love for God, and for others, is largely built on trust.   We love God because we have first been loved (1 John 4:19), but our response to that love is based on our trust – just as David says in the Psalms: “But I trust in your unfailing love …” (Psalm 13:5).

Trust usually precedes love and is always needed to maintain it.  Trust is the glue that holds relationships together and allows them to grow.  We must be willing to extend trust to those we want to love, and we  must give ultimate trust to the One who has given us ultimate love.

The Foundation of Trust

So trust really does function as the foundation of faith, hope, and love.  But while faith, hope, and love are all ultimately gifts given to us by God, we must remember that our willingness to trust underlies the effectiveness of those gifts.  Faith, hope, and love are all doomed to falter and certainly will not grow if trust is not our response to these qualities.  It is as we learn to trust God fully that our faith is strengthened, our hope is increased, and our love grows.   Faith, hope, and love may be the most important spiritual qualities in our lives, but we must actively apply trust to receive and to grow in them.  

So how do we develop our trust in God?  In any relationship, we develop trust in someone by getting to know them and seeing that they are trustworthy.  God is completely trustworthy, of course, and the Bible shows that unequivocally:   “God is not human, that he should lie,  not a human being, that he should change his mind. Does he speak and then not act?  Does he promise and not fulfill?” (Numbers 23:19 ). But because humans  are the way we are, most of us need to see that trustworthiness  in our lives to fully appreciate it and to respond to it.  

We do that in two ways – by getting to know God better through the study of his word – where we see countless examples of rewarded trust – and by paying close attention to the events in our own lives and the lives of others where God is clearly acting.  Gratitude plays a role here, too. If we are noticing and giving thanks on a daily basis for even the smallest things in life that show God’s help, we will  usually find that our trust grows quickly.  And as it does, so will the faith, hope, and love in our lives.