Subscribe to receive each blog post via email:

Bookmark and Share

May 2020

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31            

Books for the Journey:

« May 22nd readings | Main | May 24th readings »

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Foot washing

I would like to comment more on the spiritual side of foot washing. Most commentators do not delve into this symbolism too deeply.

John 13:10
Jesus answered, "A person who has had a bath needs only to wash his feet; his whole body is clean. And you are clean, though not every one of you."

["The bath represents salvation and the foot-washing represents restoration. The "bath of salvation" is not something a believer takes every day. It is done once and for all when a person receives Jesus Christ as his personal Savior. From that time onward he is "clean" of sin--his sins are eternally forgiven and he is no longer "dirty" in God's sight--because of his identification with Christ. This is the "washing of regeneration" that is mentioned in Titus 3:5. The Lord told Peter that he had already received the bath of salvation (v10). He was clean, and so were the rest of the believing disciples--only unbelieving Judas was not clean (v11).....

....The believer's permanent relationship to Christ is pictured in the bath. The believer's daily fellowship with Christ is pictured in the foot-washing. The bath is for UNION--IN Christ (2 Corinthians 5:17). The foot-washing is for COMMUNION--WITH Christ (notice the "with" instead of "in" in verse 8). The link of union is so strong that nothing can break it (see John 10:27-29 and Romans 8:38-39). The link of fellowship is so fragile that an unholy walk will always break it (see 1 John 1:6).

How does the Lord wash the believer's feet? It is accomplished primarily by the frequent application of His Word to our lives. The Word of God is the means by which we get the bath. (See Psalm 119:93, John 15:3, Romans 10:17, 1 Peter 1:23.) The Word is also the way we get the foot-washing. David said, "How can a young man cleanse his way? By living according to Your Word" (Psalm 119:9). Our Lord said that those who believed in Him would be sanctified (kept pure and set apart for God's use) by God's Word (John 17:17, 20). Our bath and our foot-washings are both accomplished through the Word of God! In Ephesians 5:26 we read that "Christ loved the Church and gave Himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the Word." How important it is for us to read the Bible every day!"]
http://www.growingchristians.org/dfgc/feet.htm

Ingesting of water is symbolic of the Holy Spirit. External washing of water is representative of the "WORD".

The bath is not baptism - baptism is the symbolic dying with Christ and being resurrected to a new life. The bath is symbolic of the one time cleansing of a believer's salvation. Their is stll a war between the "flesh" and the "spirit". In our daily walk, our feet get dirty with sin. By staying in the Word, and prayer (instructed by the Word) we can minimize dirt and cleanse what we do pick up on the "worldly" road.

Besides the physical act of servitude and humility, Jesus is telling the disciples (and all future Christians) "you should also wash one another's feet". You should be in fellowship and be in the "Word" with each other. You should not do this from a "holier than thou" perspective, but humbly with the attitude of love to help one another. Encourage, exhort, and edify one another in the "Word". This should be done frequently as our feet get dirty with greater frequency than many (including me:)of us would like to admit.


Some thoughts on Joab and Abner:
It's interesting to me that both these guys were second in charge, but took ultimate authority into their own hands. Their first conflict at Gibeon almost seemed to start as sport. It seems that the battle was not "authorised" by either David or Ish-Bosheth. (Please correct me if I'm wrong because the rest of this post is based on this thought!)

Ish-Bosheth seemed to be more of Abner's puppet than anything else, but then again, it was Abner who arranged Ish-Bosheth's kingship in the first place. So there was probably quite a lot of dependency there. It was Abner who made the decision to unite with Judah, albeit by creating fear in Ish-Bosheth.

When Joab, under David's kingship, was expected to unite with Abner, this was of course very difficult because of the hot blood between them generated by "unauthorised" conflict. So Joab takes ultimate authority into his own hands and does what he sees fit, which we see is catastrophic.

Now the interesting part to me is David's comment: "And today, though I am anointed king, I am weak, and these sons of Zeruiah are too strong for me." It makes me wonder where David was in all the above goings on. Did he know that there was something he could have done to prevent it? Ch 3v1 says: "The war between the house of Saul and the house of David dragged on and on." (Msg Bible). David must then have been party to this war? Should stricter discipline/ guidelines have been laid down by David after the "unauthorised" conflict?

I think that every great leader relies on people around them, but ultimately, the leader should be making the final decisions. I get the feeling that neither David nor Ish-Bosheth were acting within their full authority here.

One last comment: Ramona, your thoughts yesterday on Jonathan's loyalties got me thinking, although I don't know if I agree with you on them. My thoughts today made me wonder about whose authority Jonathan was under. As son of king Saul whom David revered as Israel's king, was Jonathan not right to remain under Saul's leadership until God raised up David as king?

2 Samuel 2:12-3:39


Caryn J you have brought up something I have wrestled with for years. (You know it is hard to discuss David’s faults or character failures amongst a lot of people: they throw stones at you.). The wives, and they are only the ones he married in Hebron; the failure to restrain his nephews, the wavering between seeking God and allowing God to work to bring about what He declared to pass; but I think there may have been a little seed of vengeance that grew up in him. We see that tendency to drift over into vengeance in his dealings with Nabal. It is “the I deserve it mentality” we get. I call it a spirit of arrogance. It may not manifest itself all the time, but it is akin to the us-four-and-no-more mentality and the “posse” mentality we see in many celebrities. This should be no surprise to the readers because Samuel declared this very thing when he warned them what they would get with their king (1 Samuel 8: 9-18).

Vengeance is Mine, and recompense, in the time when their foot shall slide; for the day of their disaster is at hand and their doom comes speedily. (Deuteronomy 32:35 AMP)

Has anyone ever wondered why God requires us to leave vengeance to Him? I believe something happens to us when we seek it, it turns us into little god like idols seeking to direct and control outcomes. David had a relationship with Saul; after all, he had been his father-in-law before David took back his daughter as his wife. (By the way the taking of a sitting kings wife, or even a dead one, was a proclamation in the ancient world that one was claiming the throne-thus the incident with Palti and the rift between Ishbosheth and Abner). David didn’t have a relationship with Nabal, but he had one with his sister and her kids. One should also note that David wasn’t well liked by his brothers so there was more than likely a rift that had built up over time kept them on the outs, thus we don’t really read about his brothers or their off-spring being in the picture.

If one is observant with family dynamics and sibling rivalry, you will find that the one “picked-on” will usually try to show his worthiness to gain some iota of recognition. I am not sure if this a problem per say, but it can lead to doing the wrong thing for the wrong reasons. If we look at David as a type of deliverer, then the One True Deliverer did not try to gain His Families approval when he went about ministering.

Now Jesus went home, and a crowd gathered so that they were not able to eat. When his family heard this they went out to restrain him, for they said, "He is out of his mind." (Mark 3:20-21 NET.)

While Jesus was still speaking to the crowds, his mother and brothers came and stood outside, asking to speak to him. Someone told him, "Look, your mother and your brothers are standing outside wanting to speak to you." To the one who had said this, Jesus replied, "Who is my mother and who are my brothers?" And pointing toward his disciples he said, "Here are my mother and my brothers! (Matthew 12:46-49 NET.)


There is something that makes what Joab did a particular heinous crime. Hebron was a city of refuge (Joshua 21:13), a city set aside for anyone who had killed someone accidentally. Was Asahel’s death accidental? Wasn’t it done during a time of fighting? Is this something along the lines of, “You can dish it out but you can’t take it,” mentality? I do not believe Abner turned to face Asahel because the butt of the spear took him out not the tip. More than likely Abner thrust the sword attached to his side or even in his hand to try to knock the wind out of Asahel as he chased behind him.

Whatever way the death happened, Joab called Abner back into a city of refuge to kill him, a clear breach of the law.

Grace and peace,
Ramona

John and Caryn--

Thanks for your wonderful insight.

Caryn my line of thinking: If David is to be seen as a type of Christ then, like Christ, when people recognize his kingship shouldn't they follow him, like Christ. Somehow or at some time Jonathan received a revelation of David's kingship.

When Jesus came to the area of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, "Who do people say that the Son of Man is?" They answered, "Some say John the Baptist, others Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets." He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?" Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." (Matthew 16:13-16 NET.)

When you get a revelation of who the King is, are you not responsible to follow the King? Knowledge and information makes you "without excuse."

The scripture I used to bring up the question had a "but" in it (1 Samuel 23:18, always watch out for the "BUTs"

I could be wrong but do you follow your family down the garden path to destruction when you know without a doubt that they are wrong? If that's the case then I am dead to wrong because I have a family built on a lifestyle of criminality. I have been told that, "I don't care anything about family” because I have turned away from how they chose to live their lives. I have one son, who is in and out of jail, because he chose to continue that path. It that right? Just some things to make you really think about the choices with make and the paths we choose to follow. Hmmmm.

Caryn you are free to contact me off-line

Grace and peace

John 13 (NKJV)
15
For I have given you an example, that you should do as I have done to you.
16
Most assuredly, I say to you, a servant is not greater than his master; nor is he who is sent greater than he who sent him.
17
If you know these things, blessed are you if you do them.

~~
Note: Note that we are to follow the example of the Lord Jesus expressed clearly in verse 5 (NKJV): “After that, He poured water into a basin and began to wash the disciples’ feet, and to wipe them with the towel with which He was girded.”

I am amazed that Jesus washed ALL of the disciples’ feet—including Judas. Jesus knew that “the devil having already put it into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon’s son, to betray Him” (verse 2).

Jesus washed Judas’ feet. Jesus washed the feet of His betrayer—knowing that Judas was to betray Him.

From a natural point of view, a question comes to mind: “Why would Jesus do such a foolish thing?”

Because Jesus loved the Father, and because Jesus loved you and I so much that He gave His life for us as a blood covenant, as a willing sacrifice for our sins. Because though Jesus could have legitimately judged us for our sins, He did not.

Jesus wants us all to come to repentance and find life.

It is staggering to me that the so-called “discovery” of the “lost gospels” of Jesus, (i.e., Gnostic gospels) are being taught by some professors as the original gospels and that the New Testament documents are the heresies.

The Gnostic Jesus (a false version of Jesus), as well as people first-century Gnostics in the first century believed the human body was evil. This worked in either one (1) of two (2) ways:
1. Since the human body was evil and had no spiritual importance, it was all important to remove the human body to be pure.
2. Since the human body was evil and had no spiritual importance, it was OK to freely follow sexual desires as the spirit was the most important thing.

However, contrary to the so-called Gnostic “gospel of Judas”, Jesus did NOT ask Judas to hand him to the Roman authorities so that Jesus could be free of his “evil” and “defiled” human body.

Also, contrary to the so-called Gnostic “gospel of Philip”, Jesus did not have sex with Mary Magdalene or with other women because he viewed his body as not important.

Psalm 119 (NKJV)
9
How can a young man cleanse his way? By taking heed according to Your word.
10
With my whole heart I have sought You; Oh, let me not wander from Your commandments!
11
Your word I have hidden in my heart, That I might not sin against You.
12
Blessed are You, O LORD! Teach me Your statutes.
13
With my lips I have declared All the judgments of Your mouth.
14
I have rejoiced in the way of Your testimonies, As much as in all riches.
15
I will meditate on Your precepts, And contemplate Your ways.
16
I will delight myself in Your statutes; I will not forget Your word.

~~
Note: I really pray verses 10 and 12 for myself in this paraphrase:

“Lord, do not let me wander from Your commandments. I cannot seek You with my whole heart without Your knowing, praying, and obeying Your Word. Blessed are You, Lord! Teach me Your statutes!”

Worry, television or some other distraction are the gods of the flesh and of comfort.

We really need each other to follow the Lord Jesus with a pure and holy heart.

Vance

2Samuel 2&3

For those that like detailed information in their commentary, Bob does a god job in the link Mike provides. Especially the two sections profiling Abner and Joab.

Bob also has a longer commentary on 2Sam 2-5 at the link below. One insightful comment that I had never thought of:

[GOD and SATAN]
"I am inclined to think God providentially removes Abner so that David will not become king thanks to Abner, the king-maker, but rather thanks to the King-Maker....Abner's approach to David seems similar to Satan's approach to our Lord in His temptation (Matthew 4:1-11; Luke 4:1-12). Like Satan, Abner claims that the kingdom he offers is really his (compare 2 Samuel 3:12; Luke 4:5-7). Abner wants David to enter into a covenant with him (2 Samuel 3:12), but when David does become king of all Israel, he enters into a covenant with them (the people) “before the Lord” (2 Samuel 5:3). Somehow, I see Abner's offer as a shortcut, an easier path to what God wants to give David another way. If so, Abner's death and the resulting delay in David becoming king make sense."
http://www.bible.org/page.asp?page_id=560

[Note: David might have been releuctant to do anything to Joab because David was his uncle. Joab, Abishai, and Asahel were David's nephews, the sons of David's sister Zeruiah (1 Chronicles 2:16)]

======================================================

David Guzik has quite a few insightful comments at enduringword.com:

1)Ishbosheth the Son of Saul: Saul had three sons who died with him in battle (1 Samuel 31:6). There is no previous mention of Ishbosheth among the sons of Saul, so it is possible that he was an illegitimate son or the son of a concubine.

i. We shouldn't forget that David was also a son of Saul by marriage. David married Michal, the daughter of Saul (1 Samuel 18:17-30).

2) There was a long war between the house of Saul and the house of David: This shows how wrong it was for Joab to accept Abner's appeal for a cease-fire at the battle of The Field of Sharp Swords. The fact was that they couldn't just get along, and that there could be no peace between the rightful king David and the pretender to the throne, Ishbosheth. The cease-fire seemed to make things better but it only made things worse, and it caused the long war.

i. When we try to make peace between King Jesus and King Self within us, the result is a long, bitter war. It is so much better to simply surrender and submit to the reign of Jesus.

ii. "In the lives of many Christian people today there is raging, literally, a civil war. The flesh - the kingdom of Saul, struggles with the spirit - the kingdom of David, and the conflict is bitter. We do everything we possibly can to hold up the tottering kingdom of self, so that it might exist just a bit longer. If only we could preserve some rights; if only we could have at least part of our own way; if only we could keep this or that at any cost! We feel we must bolster up this kingdom of self, that we cannot let ourselves be crucified with Christ." (Redpath)

[Regarding Polygamy]
3) Sons were born to David: During David’s seven-year reign in Hebron, his six different wives gave birth to six sons. This shows that David went against God’s commandment that Israel’s king should not multiply wives to himself.

i. David was wrong to have more than one wife. His many wives went against God’s command to kings (Deuteronomy 17:17) and against God’s heart for marriage (Genesis 2:24, Matthew 19:4-6).

ii. David’s many wives were common. Adding many wives was one of the ways great men and especially kings expressed their power and status.

iii. David was troubled because of his many wives. Some wonder why the Bible doesn’t expressly condemn David’s polygamy here, but as is often the case here the Scripture simply states the fact, and later records how David reaped the penalty for this sort of sin in regard to his family.

[Retrieving Michal]
4) Give me my wife Michal: Why did David do this? Did he really need another wife? David insisted on receiving Michal as his wife again for at least three reasons.

i. David remembered that Michal was simply his wife by both love and right, and that King Saul took her away as part of a deliberate strategy to attack and destroy David.

ii. David wanted to show that he harbored no bitterness towards Saul’s house, and he would show this through his good treatment of Saul’s daughter.

iii. David wanted to give himself a greater claim to Saul’s throne as his son-in-law.

iv. “However distressing it was to take her from a husband who loved her most tenderly, yet prudence and policy required that he should strengthen his own interest in the kingdom as much as possible.” (Clarke)

5) Why wasn’t Joab pleased that Abner had defected and joined David’s side? There are at least three reasons for his hostility.

i. Joab feared Abner was a deceiver, a double agent working on behalf of Ishbosheth, the pretender king.

ii. Abner killed Joab’s brother, and Joab was the avenger of blood for Asahel (as described in Numbers 35:9-28).

iii. As the chief general of the former King Saul, Abner had a lot of top-level military experience. Abner might take Joab’s place as David’s chief military assistant.

[City of Refuge]
6) Joab took him aside in the gate: Joab carefully engineered this murder so the killing was done outside the gate of Hebron. This was because Hebron was a city of refuge (Joshua 20:7), and it was against the law for Joab, as Asahel’s blood avenger, to kill Abner inside the city.

[NOTE: Refuge seems to be once you pass through the city gate (Joshua 20:7). Being in the "midst" of the gate or "aside" in the gate is apparently not "in" the city.]

http://www.enduringword.com/commentaries/1002.htm

http://www.enduringword.com/commentaries/1003.htm

26Jesus answered, "It is the one to whom I will give this piece of bread when I have dipped it in the dish." Then, dipping the piece of bread, he gave it to Judas Iscariot, son of Simon. 27As soon as Judas took the bread, Satan entered into him.

"What you are about to do, do quickly," Jesus told him, 28but no one at the meal understood why Jesus said this to him. 29Since Judas had charge of the money, some thought Jesus was telling him to buy what was needed for the Feast, or to give something to the poor. 30As soon as Judas had taken the bread, he went out. And it was night.

There are a few things that got me thinking here.
1)were the disciples not listening when Jesus said the one that would betray him is the one he gave a piece of bread to....Peter urged the disciple Jesus loved to ask who it was...and the answer seemed so clear yet it seems they were not so keen on hearing the answer.
2)Judas must have hated Jesus from the start...just seeing Jesus bend and wash his feet did nothing to soften his heart...He had watched miracles happen,he saw Jesus cry,he was one of the people who was always around Jesus.Usually a bond forms when people spend so much time together yet this was not the case.I think Judas is one of the cases of when you deliberately choose to reject Jesus...then satan has the door wide open to make sure you never get the chance to love Jesus.
Reading about the man who God said was after His own heart makes me realise just how merciful God is.David did have a lot of issues...marrying so many wives,during the war between the house of Saul and David I'm sure the philistines Israel was supposed to fight was having a great time watching Israel destroy itself...sounds a lot like the squabbles between the churches these days.I'm learning alot from the old testament is happening today...in a modern way:(
God bless you all

Tough call for David. It is apparent to me that Joab had King David's best interests in mind. Abner had set up Ish-Bosheth as king, maneuvered Ish-Bosheth and deceived him when he made an alliance with King David, and Joab clearly recognized manipulative behavior of Abner. Of course, in addition he was nurturing bitterness and resentment over the death of his brother at the hands of Abner. In reading the text, I agree with the poster who said it was unintentional when Abner killed Asahel.

"23 But Asahel refused to give up the pursuit; so Abner thrust the butt of his spear into Asahel's stomach, and the spear came out through his back. He fell there and died on the spot. And every man stopped when he came to the place where Asahel had fallen and died."

It appears when "every man stopped" that they were shocked!

In any event, there was certainly a "Hatfields and McCoy" mentality in avenging the blood of their brother, and as is usually the case, much was brewing that resulted in the death of Abner; I think today he might be considered an opportunist.

David's firstborn was Amnon the son of Ahinoam of Jezreel; he later raped his half-sister Tamar and later was killed for his crime.

his second, Kileab or Chileab the son of Abigail (who was the widow of Nabal of Carmel)

The name appears as Daniel in 1 Chronicles 3:1. Whatever his exact name, David's second son disappeared from history here and did not figure in the later disputes over who would succeed David as king. His name could be associated with the clan of Caleb.

According to John MacArthur, Chileab apparently died before he was able to enter into position to contend for the throne, as nothing more is said about him).


The third, Absalom the son of Maacah daughter of Talmai king of Geshur;

The fourth, Adonijah the son of Haggith (a princess from a region in Syria--not Israel). John MacArthur offers this: "David may have married her as part of a diplomatic agreement made with Talmai, the Gesurite king, to give David an Ally north of Ishbosheth. Later Absalom, in fear of his life, fled to Gesur." Though he was a strong contender for the throne, he was assassinated.

David's fifth, Shephatiah (means "The Lord Judges") the son of Abital (means "My Divine Father of Dew").

The sixth, Ithream the son of David's wife Eglah.

These were born to David in Hebron.

Quite a list of sons who would vie for the throne of David.

Eglah. Meaning: a heifer. one of David's wives, and mother of Ithream (2 Sam. 3:5; 1 Chr. 3:3). According to a Jewish tradition she was Michal.

(Note from SissySue: Scripture denotes, however, that David did not have children with Michal after the big fight they had over David dancing when they returned the Ark of the Covenant).

-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o

What a tragedy for Judas; how quickly he ran to dishonest gain only to realize too late that he was wrong! WRONG! W R O N G !

And then, instead of confessing he, like Saul, conditioned through years of taking wrong paths and running from God, took the ultimate path to irredeemable self aggrandizement. How it must have pained the Lord.

-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o

Oh my! God is so faithful; "open my eyes so that I may see the wonderful things in your law," and I received the book "ALWAYS READY" by Greg Bahnsen that is helping to open my eyes! Glory to God.

Tough call for David. It is apparent to me that Joab had King David's best interests in mind. Abner had set up Ish-Bosheth as king, maneuvered Ish-Bosheth and deceived him when he made an alliance with King David, and Joab clearly recognized the manipulative behavior of Abner. Of course, in addition he was nurturing bitterness and resentment over the death of his brother at the hands of Abner. In reading the text, I agree with the poster who said it was unintentional when Abner killed Asahel.

"23 But Asahel refused to give up the pursuit; so Abner thrust the butt of his spear into Asahel's stomach, and the spear came out through his back. He fell there and died on the spot. And every man stopped when he came to the place where Asahel had fallen and died."

It appears when "every man stopped" that they were shocked!

In any event, there was certainly a "Hatfields and McCoy" mentality in avenging the blood of their brother, and as is usually the case, much was brewing that resulted in the death of Abner; I think today he might be considered an opportunist.

David's firstborn was Amnon the son of Ahinoam of Jezreel; he later raped his half-sister Tamar and later was killed for his crime.

his second, Kileab or Chileab the son of Abigail (who was the widow of Nabal of Carmel)

The name appears as Daniel in 1 Chronicles 3:1. Whatever his exact name, David's second son disappeared from history here and did not figure in the later disputes over who would succeed David as king. His name could be associated with the clan of Caleb.

According to John MacArthur, Chileab apparently died before he was able to enter into position to contend for the throne, as nothing more is said about him).


The third, Absalom the son of Maacah daughter of Talmai king of Geshur;

The fourth, Adonijah the son of Haggith (a princess from a region in Syria--not Israel). John MacArthur offers this: "David may have married her as part of a diplomatic agreement made with Talmai, the Gesurite king, to give David an Ally north of Ishbosheth. Later Absalom, in fear of his life, fled to Gesur." Though he was a strong contender for the throne, he was assassinated.

David's fifth, Shephatiah (means "The Lord Judges") the son of Abital (means "My Divine Father of Dew").

The sixth, Ithream the son of David's wife Eglah.

These were born to David in Hebron.

Quite a list of sons who would vie for the throne of David.

Eglah. Meaning: a heifer. one of David's wives, and mother of Ithream (2 Sam. 3:5; 1 Chr. 3:3). According to a Jewish tradition she was Michal.

(Note from SissySue: Scripture denotes, however, that David did not have children with Michal after the big fight they had over David dancing when they returned the Ark of the Covenant).

-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o

What a tragedy for Judas; how quickly he ran to dishonest gain only to realize too late that he was wrong! WRONG! W R O N G !

And then, instead of confessing he, like Saul, conditioned through years of taking wrong paths and running from God, took the ultimate path to irredeemable self aggrandizement. How it must have pained the Lord.

-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o-|-o

Tough that: being an adult and thinking you have the answers and having to receive discipline, but we are never too old to learn, are we? We are just sometimes too arrogant! :)

The comments to this entry are closed.