One of the advantages of reading through the Bible on a regular basis is that you will encounter passages that you might not otherwise read.  In my reading today it was the juxtaposition of the OT and NT readings that raised some interesting questions.

The OT reading for today included Psalm 18, a portion of which reads:

20 The LORD dealt with me according to my righteousness;
according to the cleanness of my hands he rewarded me.
21 For I have kept the ways of the LORD,
and have not wickedly departed from my God.
22 For all his rules were before me,
and his statutes I did not put away from me.
23 I was blameless before him,
and I kept myself from my guilt.
24 So the LORD has rewarded me according to my righteousness,
according to the cleanness of my hands in his sight.
(Ps. 18:20-24, ESV)

Here David says that God rewards him for his righteousness.  But the NT reading was from Romans 3, which includes these verses:

10 as it is written:
“None is righteous, no, not one;
11 no one understands;
no one seeks for God.
12 All have turned aside; together they have become worthless;
no one does good,
not even one.”
(Rom. 3:10-12, ESV)

The contrast between these two statements really jumped out at me.  Was David righteous or was he not?  Was he simply deceived or arrogant for claiming to be righteous?  Or was he using the word “righteous” in a different sense? It might be tempting to explain this as a different view of righteousness in the OT and NT, but that won’t do because the Romans passage is excerpted from Ps. 13:1-3 and Ps. 53:1-3.

In Romans Paul is talking about our lack of absolute sinless perfection, but David was talking about something else.  David was very aware of his sinfulness as some of the other Psalms attest (Psalm 51 comes to mind).  So I don’t think that his statement in Psalm 18 was a claim to sinless perfection.  David was aware not only of the need for forgiveness, but also the need for God’s grace to live for Him (Ps. 19:12-13).  Can a person who has needed to confess some serious sin and who needs God’s help every day to walk with Him still talk about “my righteousness” and “the cleanness of my hands”?  Apparently David thought so.

Should we think of ourselves as righteous?  I don’t mean only “positional righteousness” (I am considered righteous by God because Christ died for me) but “practical righteousness” (I generally live my life according to God’s standards).  I am not suggesting a legalistic approach or an arrogant superiority (”I am not like other men,” Lk. 18:11-12).  But if we are serious about following Jesus should we see ourselves as people who normally do the right thing and usually obey God?  Perhaps if we did we might find it a little bit easier to live as God intended us to live.  If we constantly tell ourselves and each other, “You’re going to sin, and sin a lot” it might become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

What do you think?  Was David right to think of himself as righteous?  How do you think of yourself?

In today’s reading in my church Bible reading program there is a curious phrase:  “Azariah the son of Nathan was over the officers; Zabud the son of Nathan was priest and king’s friend” (1 Ki 4:5, ESV).  There is nothing unusual about the king having friends, but this statement appears in a list of officials in Solomon’s court: “King Solomon was king over all Israel, 2 and these were his high officials. . .” (vs. 1-2).  All the other titles mentioned in 1 Kings 4:1-6 are clearly government officials, so that made me wonder if the “king’s friend” was also an official position.

Solomon was not the only one to have an official “friend.”  In a list of officials in David’s government we find this statement:  “Ahithophel was the king’s counselor, and Hushai the Archite was the king’s friend.”  (1 Ch 27:33, ESV).  Why would “the king’s friend” be listed among top government officials?

We really don’t have a lot to go on here, but it seems likely that “the king’s friend” served as a close personal adviser and confidant.  While it might be anachronistic to say that Zadub was Solomon’s accountability partner, it is possible that he was a close personal friend who had the right to speak the truth to the king.  Apparently this relationship was important enough to be listed among the other high government officials.

We all need someone like that in our lives, someone with whom you can share your deepest secrets, and on whom you can depend to be loyal to you and keep your best interests in mind, and who has the right to speak to you honestly or even bluntly when the situation requires it. Early Celtic Christians called it a “soul friend.”  Brigit of Kildare, an Irish nun and abbess in the fifth century said “Anyone without a soul friend is like a body without a head.”

Of course some who talk about “soul friends” are into kooky mystic stuff.  But the basic concept is sound.  Solomon was given extraordinary wisdom, and he saw a need for such a friend.  Those who are in leadership positions are especially in need of a friend like that.  We are prone to take ourselves too seriously and to neglect nurture of our own souls.  In our individualistic society we tend to try to forge on ahead by ourselves.  God didn’t design us to be lone rangers.

Do you have a “soul friend”?  If not, do you want one?  Are you able to be a “soul friend” to someone else?

In my church Bible reading program we are currently in 2 Kings.  While reading this part of the Bible you may have noticed that it is pretty difficult to sort out the historical flow of kings. That is partly because the narrative keeps jumping between the kings of Judah and those of Israel. Once the kingdom divided after Solomon, there are two interrelated histories, that of Israel (10 of the original tribes) in the north, and Judah (and Benjamin) in the south.

What makes it more confusing is the fact that some of the kings have very similar names, and some kings are referred to by more than one name. Some examples:

• Joash king of Judah is also called Jehoash (these are two forms of the same name). But there was also a different Jehoash who was king of Israel around that time. It is important to pay careful attention to whether is says “of Judah” or “of Israel.”
• Each kingdom had a king named Ahaziah.
• King Azariah of Judah is also called Uzziah. Since he is mentioned in Isaiah 6, we know where to place Isaiah in biblical history.
• There are two kings of Israel named Jeroboam. The first one, whom we may call Jeroboam I is called Jeroboam the son of Nebat in the Bible. He was the first king of Israel after the division between the northern and southern kingdoms, and he started Israel down the path of idolatry. Many of the later kings of Israel are condemned for not departing from the sins of Jeroboam the son of Nebat.
• Several of the kings have very similar sounding names, such as: Azariah, Ahaziah, Amahziah, Athaliah (queen mother).  It is helpful to consult a chart to keep things straight.

At the right is a helpful diagram I found on Wikipedia that shows the flow of kings of Judah and Israel along with their genealogical relationships (click on the chart for a larger image). The solid lines indicate genealogical relationships, and the arrows indicate succession. The horizontal arrows indicate a change in dynasty, that is, a king succeeded by someone who is not his son.

One of the interesting things that jumps out at me in this chart is that all of the kings of Judah are David’s descendants while in Israel there is only one king who had passed the throne on to his grandson and beyond. God promised David that he would always have a son on the throne (2 Sam. 7:16). Since Jesus is descended from David, one day in God’s kingdom David will still have a son on the throne.

For those of you doing the Bible reading program, what have you been learning from 2 Kings?

What does righteous behavior look like?  Ezekiel 18:5-18 emphasizes individual responsibility, and states that God will not reward a wicked son because he has a righteous father or punish the righteous son of a wicked father.  In this discussion, the passage lists righteous/wicked behavior in three lists that are very similar.  Here is the first one: Read the rest»»

Sometimes it is helpful to look to past generations for an example of godly devotion. One such example is John William Fletcher (1729-1785), whom John Wesley admired and desired to imitate. Seven months after his conversion, Fletcher penned a covenant with God which is a classic statement of Christian devotion. The covenant in its entirety is quoted by Fred Sanders in Scriptorium Daily.

Read the rest»»

There is a new web site with the goal of mapping every location mentioned in the Bible on Google maps.  Tim Kimberley of BibleMap.org is a Th.M. student at Dallas Seminary who has taken on the task of creating this free map resource for Bible study.  The site is still in “Beta” because it is not finished yet, but it is already quite useful.  Read about his experience in an interview on  the ESV web site.  It’s great that a seminary student with a family can still find the time to create this resource and share it with us all.  Way to go, Tim!

What difference does it make whether or not the body of Jesus remained in the tomb? The way in which you answer this question reveals a lot about your understanding of the Christian faith.

To many, Christianity is a religious system that has much in common with the other religions of the world. Most of them teach that we should live for a higher purpose, treat others well, and try not to be too selfish. In that case, what really matters is that the teachings of Jesus live on. What happened to his body after his death isn’t really important.
Read the rest»»