Nahum

¹ An oracle concerning Nineveh. The book of the vision of Nahum of Elkosh. God’s Wrath Against Nineveh ² The Lord is a jealous and avenging God; the Lord is avenging and wrathful; the Lord takes vengeance on his adversaries and keeps wrath for his enemies. ³ The Lord is slow to anger and great in power, and the Lord will by no means clear the guilty. His way is in whirlwind and storm, and the clouds are the dust of his feet. ⁴ He rebukes the sea and makes it dry; he dries up all the rivers; Bashan and Carmel wither; the bloom of Lebanon withers. ⁵ The mountains quake before him; the hills melt; the earth heaves before him, the world and all who dwell in it. ⁶ Who can stand before his indignation? Who can endure the heat of his anger? His wrath is poured out like fire, and the rocks are broken into pieces by him.

In the British Museum, one can find the following relief, carved from 700 to 692 BC:

The Ancient History Encyclopedia describes what is happening in this scene:

This wall relief depicts the Assyrian king Sennacherib after the fall of Lachish (Lakhisha), the second largest city in Judah Kingdom. The king sits on a marvelous throne and watches prisoners. He also greets an Assyrian official who appears to be in very close proximity to him, almost touching the king. This man most likely represents the commander-in-chief of the Assyrian army.

The cuneiform inscriptions read “Sennacherib, the mighty king, king of the country of Assyria, sitting on the throne of judgment, before the city of Lakhisha. I give permission for its slaughter.”

Sennacherib’s face appears to be deliberately damaged, most probably by an enemy soldier after the fall of Nineveh in 612 BCE.[1]

It is no stretch to say that the scene depicted in that relief set the stage for the little Old Testament book of Nahum. The IVP Bible Background Commentary states that Nahum “most likely dates to the period between 663 B.C….and the fall of [Nineveh] to a combined army of Babylonians and Medes in 612 B.C..”[2]

The Assyrian Empire, of which Nineveh was its capital, had harassed and persecuted Judah for a very long time! Here is a nice summary of the historical situation:

Assyria was the Great Power that threatened Israel and Judah from the middle of the ninth century B.C. on. She had made Israel part of her provincial system after the fall of Samaria in 720 B.C. and had been taking tribute from Judah. Sennacherib’s attack in 701 B.C., after Hezekiah rebelled and withheld his tribute payment, left the country in ruins, with only Jerusalem intact (see 2 Kings 18-19). Judah was again a tributary.[3]

What we find in the little book of Nahum, then, is a divine promise of future deliverance in the midst of current distress. As such, its value lay in the fact that (1) it is God’s word to us, (2) it records God’s faithfulness to His beleaguered children, and (3) it offers hope to us in the midst of our own trials.

Continue reading →

James Montgomery Boice has passed along an interesting story he heard first from Watchman Nee.

            Watchman Nee, the Chinese evangelist, tells of a Christian he once knew in China. He was a poor rice farmer, and his fields lay high on a mountain. Every day he pumped water into the paddies of new rice, and every morning he returned to find that a neighbor who lived down the hill had opened the dikes surrounding the Christian’s field to let the water fill his own. For a while the Christian ignored the injustice, but at last he became desperate. He met and prayed with other Christians and came up with this solution. The next day the Christian farmer rose early in the morning and first filled his neighbor’s fields; then he attended to his own. Watchman Nee tells how the neighbor subsequently became a Christian, his unbelief overcome by a genuine demonstration of a Christian’s humility and Christlike character.[1]

It is an intriguing story because it hits at the core challenge in human relationships: the inability to see and understand one another as a result of our anger at one another or our need to be first or right. This farmer, in fact, did something profoundly counterintuitive. He subjugated his own needs to the needs of another. In essence, he considered his neighbor as more important than himself. In doing so, he broke down the growing wall of hostility that was between them and allowed the grace of God to move.

I believe that the New Testament calls us all to precisely this kind of thinking. I further believe that this kind of selflessness will result in a powerful movement of God in our midst. This idea of considering one another as more important than ourselves, while difficult, is the concluding statement in the first section of our covenant.

As a body of born again believers,

We covenant to become an authentic family by

loving one another as Christ loves us,

praying for one another,

speaking truth to one another in love,

being patient with one another,

protecting one another,

considering one another as more important than ourselves.

Again, these are daunting words and we might wonder if such is even possible. But I want to argue not only that it is possible, but that, to the child of God, it should become more and more natural to us.

Continue reading →

In January of 2008, Christianity Today quoted Robert Pollack, the lawyer for Cynthia Howell. Cynthia was suing her husband, Reynold Howell, the pastor of Grace Christian Church of Brooklyn, and wanted the church “considered a marital asset in their divorce.” In other words, she wanted the court to give her the church the way a judge might decide to give one spouse the house or one of the cars. The comment that Christianity Todayquoted from her lawyer truly gives one pause. Robert Pollack said: “That church is no different than any other business he might have opened.”[1]

I have been chewing on that statement, off and on, ever since I first read it ten years ago: “That church is no different than any other business he might have opened.” And my question is this: is Robert Pollack correct? Is the church no different than any other business that might be opened? It seems to me that this is one of the truly important questions. Is there anything different about the church, about who we are, about what we do? Or is it just another business after all?

The great tragedy is that any study of Christian history would reveal that oftentimes the church has acted just like any other business. To our shame the church throughout the ages and around the world has sometimes exhibited the same cunning politics, the same corporate greed, and the same disregard for actual humanity that we see in the cut-throat maneuvering of so much of the secular business world.

But must it be that way? Must the church act like any other business? I think not, and to that end we have been given the words of Jesus and the apostles to steer us home. And, on the basis of this, our church, like many others, has drawn up a covenant, an agreement of expectations for who we want to be. We have done this because we have a basic shared belief that the church is not just like any other business, that there is something different about the church. The gospel is at the center of the church! Christ is in our midst! And He is making of us a new people, a different people, a people who look different from the world.

As we have considered how we should look different from the world, we come today to the idea of protection. Here is how our covenant puts it:

As a body of born again believers,

We covenant to become an authentic family by

loving one another as Christ loves us,

praying for one another,

speaking truth to one another in love,

being patient with one another,

protecting one another

What an interesting phrase, “protecting one another.” Why would we include this in our covenant? What does it look like to be a church in which we protect each other?

Continue reading →

In a 2004 article for Touchstone magazine entitled “The Bookish Virtues,” Perry Glanzer wrote of the efforts of some schools to teach their students certain virtues. He wrote:

Should state legislatures tell us what kind of character our children should acquire? Actually, many states already do. Seven states recently passed a law requiring public schools to teach students “courage.” Texas and Virginia mandate that students learn to be “reliable,” and Arizona insists that they learn “orderliness,” while five states (Florida, Georgia, Iowa, South Carolina, and Texas) now require that children acquire “patience.”[1]

I am not sure what it says about Florida, Georgia, Iowa, South Carolina, and Texas that they “now require that children acquire ‘patience’” but probably most of us can resonate with the hope behind such an effort. Patience is hard to come by! Growing up, there was a little plaque on the window sill of our kitchen above the kitchen sink overlooking the backyard. It read, “Patience is a virtue, practice if you can, it’s found seldom in a woman and never in a man.” As I think back on that I wonder why my mother had to put such a little statement there. I can only assume it had to do with my two brothers. But I digress.

We have built patience into our church covenant. Whenever we recite it together, we are covenanted to be patient with one another and we are covenanted to help one another in that effort. Our covenant reads:

As a body of born again believers,

We covenant to become an authentic family by

loving one another as Christ loves us,

praying for one another,

speaking truth to one another in love,

being patient with one another

Once again we must ask ourselves the crucial questions: Is such a statement biblical? Should it be included? Why should we covenant to be patient with one another? Why does this matter?

I would like to argue that it matters a great deal. I would further like to argue that although you may have never heard a sermon on patience, it is a deeply and profoundly biblical idea. So let us approach the scriptures in an effort to answer our questions. Why should we covenant to be patient with one another?

Continue reading →

In the 4th poem of his collection of poems entitled The Black Riders and Other Lines, Stephen Crane, the author best known for writing The Red Badge of Courage, wrote:

Yes, I have a thousand tongues,

And nine and ninety-nine lie.

Though I strive to use the one,

It will make no melody at my will,

But is dead in my mouth.[1]

It is a fascinating thing for a person to admit, that they find lying much more natural than telling the truth. I wonder how many of us would have to say the same?

The church is to be a truth-telling community. For this reason, we have built a statement about telling the truth into our church covenant.

As a body of born again believers,

We covenant to become an authentic family by

loving one another as Christ loves us,

praying for one another,

speaking truth to one another in love

That is an interesting phrase, “speaking truth to one another in love.” Truth without love can be a blunt instrument of pain. Love without truth can be a mushy veneer that we use to coate over reality. But speaking truth in love, that is the biblical position.

Continue reading →

What if our church and, perhaps, most churches are simply neglecting the single most poignant gift that God has given to us to help us stay in right relationship with Him and with one another? What if He has given us a tool to help us cultivate authentic family around the whole gospel for the glory of God and the reaching of the nations but we refuse to pick it up? What if He has given us, in fact, a weapon to ward off the devil and his attempts to corrupt our character and mission as a church but we lean it up in a corner somewhere and promptly forget it?

I will let Samuel Chadwick reveal what this gift, this tool, this weapon is.

Satan dreads nothing but prayer…The Church that lost its Christ was full of good works.  Activities are multiplied that meditation may be ousted, and organizations are increased that prayer may have no chance.  Souls may be lost in good works, as surely as in evil ways.  The one concern of the devil is to keep the saints from praying.  He fears nothing from prayerless studies, prayerless work, prayerless religion.  He laughs at our toil, mocks at our wisdom, but trembles when we pray.

Any church that truly becomes a church that God can use powerfully for His purposes is a praying church. This is why we have crafted the next statement in our church covenant to say what it says:

As a body of born again believers,

We covenant to become an authentic family by

loving one another as Christ loves us,

praying for one another

Today, we will consider why. Why should we pray for one another?

Continue reading →

In his classic book, Healing for Damaged Emotions, David Seamands tells a humorous story that resonates deeply with me.

Perhaps you have heard about the man who was traveling on a dinner flight. When he opened his prepackaged meal, right on top of the salad he saw an enormous roach. When he got home he wrote an indignant letter to the president of that airline. A few days later, a special delivery letter came from the president. He was all apologies. “This was very unusual, but don’t worry. I want to assure you that that particular airplane has been completely fumigated. In fact, all the seats and the upholstery have been stripped out. We have taken disciplinary action against the flight attendant who served you that meal, and she may even be fired. It is highly probable that this particular aircraft will be taken out of service. I can assure you that it will never happen again. And I trust you will continue to fly with us.” Well, the man was terrifically impressed by such a letter, until he noticed something. Quite by accident the letter he had written had stuck to the back of the president’s letter. When he looked at his own letter, he saw a note at the bottom that said, “Reply with the regular roach letter.” So often we reply with the regular roach letter to people suffering with emotional problems. We give pat, oversimplified answers, which drive them to deeper despair and disillusionment.[1]

It is a disheartening thing to think that somebody cares, that somebody hears you, that somebody is invested in what you are saying, only to discover that they have just sent you “the regular roach letter,” that they really were just going through the motions. I want to call upon us all to stop sending “the regular roach letter,” to stop going through the motions in which we pretend that we hear one another, pretend that we are communicating with one another, and pretend that we love one another. I would like to call us to actual, authentic relationship. More than that, I would like to call us to actual, authentic love.

Toward that end, our church covenant begins with a strong statement concerning the need for love to reign in this church and the type of love that should reign.

As a body of born again believers,

We covenant to become an authentic family by

loving one another as Christ loves us

Our question is this: is this a biblical precept? Is it viable and true? And, if so, what would such a love look like?

Continue reading →

At the 2018 Annual Meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention in Dallas, Texas, during a nomination speech for one of the Vice President positions in the Convention, a gentleman making the speech said of the candidate, “the tongue in his mouth and the tongue of his shoe move in the same direction.” That is a brilliant way of saying that the man, “walks his talk” and that there is no disparity between what he says and what he does.

When we consider the New Testament picture of the church, one thing becomes abundantly clear: the tongue in our mouth must move in the same direction as the tongue of our shoe. We must be a people whose lives match our confession. There cannot be a gap between what we say we believe and how we actually live.

In point of fact, I believe one of the reasons Christ came to establish a church, a community of faith and conviction, was precisely so that we could help one another toward this end, toward the end of having the tongue in our mouth go the same direction as the tongue on our shoe. It is so very important that we do this, and the results are so very catastrophic when we do not do this, that God has given us the gift of His Spirit working in and through and among His people, together.

I would like to call us as a church to a careful, sustained, deliberate consideration of what it means to walk our talk. I would like to call us to a life of consistency. I need that in my own life and you need it in yours. We need it inourlife together.

Continue reading →

Haggai 2

²⁰ The word of the Lord came a second time to Haggai on the twenty-fourth day of the month, ²¹ “Speak to Zerubbabel, governor of Judah, saying, I am about to shake the heavens and the earth, ²² and to overthrow the throne of kingdoms. I am about to destroy the strength of the kingdoms of the nations, and overthrow the chariots and their riders. And the horses and their riders shall go down, every one by the sword of his brother. ²³ On that day, declares the Lord of hosts, I will take you, O Zerubbabel my servant, the son of Shealtiel, declares the Lord, and make you like a signet ring, for I have chosen you, declares the Lord of hosts.”

The book of Haggai ends in a way that the modern reader might find surprising. It ends by focusing on the governor of Judah, Zerubbabel. In a certain sense, this is not surprising. After all, Zerubbabel is mentioned in the first verse of the book. However, he is mentioned alongside Haggai and Joshua. In fact, throughout this book, he is mentioned but always alongside Joshua the priest. This is the first time that Zerubbabel becomes the sole focus of a divine word. This makes Haggai 2:20-23 unique, but it is what is saidto Zerubbabel that makes it truly surprising.

Yes, what is said is surprising, but it is also very important…and relevant…and “perspective-giving” to the entire book. In fact, these final words to Zerubbabel help us understand with shocking clarity just what is happening in this book and in Israel’s returning to its temple construction.

Through Zerubbabel, God shows how He can give a new name to those with a bad name.

To understand the significance of what is said in these verses, we must first understand from whence Zerubbabel came. He did not have, to put it mildly, a good name. In fact, Zerubabbel’s grandfather, Coniah (or Jeconiah), was singled out as the particular object of God’s wrath in Jeremiah 22. Listen:

²⁴ “As I live, declares the Lord, though Coniah the son of Jehoiakim, king of Judah, were the signet ring on my right hand, yet I would tear you off ²⁵ and give you into the hand of those who seek your life, into the hand of those of whom you are afraid, even into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon and into the hand of the Chaldeans. ²⁶ I will hurl you and the mother who bore you into another country, where you were not born, and there you shall die. ²⁷ But to the land to which they will long to return, there they shall not return.” ²⁸ Is this man Coniah a despised, broken pot, a vessel no one cares for? Why are he and his children hurled and cast into a land that they do not know?²⁹ O land, land, land, hear the word of the Lord! ³⁰ Thus says the Lord: “Write this man down as childless, a man who shall not succeed in his days, for none of his offspring shall succeed in sitting on the throne of David and ruling again in Judah.”

See in these verses the absolutely devastating consequences of God’s judgment against Coniah:

• Coniah was a signet ring that God tore off His hand.

• Coniah would be given to the Babylonians.

• Coniah and his mother would become exiles.

• Coniah would die in a foreign land without ever returning home.

• Coniah’s children would also enter exile.

• Coniah would be broken and despised among men.

• Coniah’s children would feel the full wrath of God.

• Coniah’s children would never sit on the throne of David.

This is what God said in Jeremiah 22 and this was Zerubbabel’s grandfather!This was his name! This was his lineage! This was his past! These were his people!

My grandfather, Leon Richardson, was a loved figure in my hometown of Sumter, South Carolina. He was a very kind man who pastored churches in the area, sold tombstones, and had lived in that town his whole life. He was such a pleasant man that everybody called him Rosie. As a boy I used to always smile whenever an adult, upon hearing my name, would say, “Are you Rosie’s grandson?”

It is a beautiful thing to inherit a loved name. It is a horrible thing to be saddled with a despised name.

I once pastored a church in a town in which there was a family that was infamous for being pugnacious. I will use a different name here, but they were known as “the fighting Johnsons.” And they were known by that name because they would…well…fight and get into scrapes and trouble and all of the kinds of things that make for a bad reputation. If you mentioned that name in that town you would get sad and knowing nods of exasperation at the alleged bad behavior to which the name pointed.

It is a terrible burden, having a bad name.

Zerubbabel was saddled with a name that had been condemned by God because of his grandfather’s unfaithfulness. Imagine the whispers among God’s people when they saw Zerubbabel. Imagine the stares. Imagine the feeling of despair. Imagine Zerubbabel’s long moments of contemplation at night, in the dark, and of his wondering how he could survive with that name, with that judgment, with that inheritance of shame.

God had said of Zerubbabel’s grandfather that he was a signet ring that God had cast off because of his disobedience. “In the ancient Near East,” the Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary says, “a signet ring was an engraved stone bearing a mark that was unique to the individual. Such signets were used to sign contracts and/or legal documents or to emboss seals of scrolls, and they could be entrusted to a trusted servant.”[1]The IVP Bible Background Commentary further states:

The term “signet” probably refers to a seal, which could have been either a cylinder seal worn with a cord around the neck or a stamp seal embedded in a ring, which is referred to here. The former was very common in Mesopotamia, while the latter was used in Israel. Thousands of cylinder seals and stamp seals have been found in Mesopotamia and Syro-Palestine respectively. They were a sign of authority, identification, and ownership.[2]

Thus, in God calling Coniah a cast off signet ring, He was speaking of a fundamental break in their relationship, of the consequence of the justly deserved divine wrath that fell upon Coniah.

Coniah, Zerubbabel’s grandfather, was a cast off signet ring.

Now listen to what God says to Zerubbabel, Coniah’s grandson, in the closing words of this book:

²⁰ The word of the Lord came a second time to Haggai on the twenty-fourth day of the month, ^21a “Speak to Zerubbabel, governor of Judah…

 ²³ On that day, declares the Lord of hosts, I will take you, O Zerubbabel my servant, the son of Shealtiel, declares the Lord, and make you like a signet ring, for I have chosen you, declares the Lord of hosts.”

Did you see that? “I will take you…and make you like a signet ring, for I have chosen you…”

Warren Weirsbe says of these words:

            Zerubbabel’s ancestor, King Jehoichin (Coniah), had been rejected by God, but Zerubbabel was accepted by God…(Jer. 22:24, NKJV). God was reversing the judgment…[3]

Yes, even though God had said to Coniah that he was a cast off ring and that neither he nor his children would sit on David’s throne, here He is, turning to Coniah’s grandson, Zerubbabel, and choosing him for service, giving him a governorship, allowing him to lead the people back to Jerusalem, and allowing him to play an important part in the reconstruction of the temple.

The one who had a bad name is now given a good name. Why? Because our God is the God who delights in giving a new name to those who are ashamed and broken, to those who feel cast off, to those who have been saddled with the shame of the past.

Hear the good news of the gospel: you may feel like a cast off thing, a rejected thing, a judged thing, an unloved thing, and an object of wrath, but God in love and grace has moved toward you in Jesus Christ and He is saying, “Bring your shame. Bring your fear. Bring your brokenness. For I love you! I value you! I will give you a new name! You have worth! You are my son, my daughter, my child! I have picked you back up! I have restored you! I have a plan for you!”

I talk to people all of the time who feel cursed, who feel alone, who feel cast off. I talk to people all of the time who seem to be ashamed of their name, of their past, of their family, of that thing that everybody whispers about, of that thing that everybody knows about. Dear friend, hear me: you are not defined by your past; you are defined by how you are loved…and you are loved!You are loved so much that God gave His only begotten Son to lay down His life for you!

Through Zerubbabel, God shows how He can give an eternal home to a hopeless people.

And this leads us to our final point, and, indeed, to the book of Haggai’s greatest point. Through Zerubbabel, God shows how He can give an eternal home to a hopeless people.

²⁰ The word of the Lord came a second time to Haggai on the twenty-fourth day of the month, ²¹ “Speak to Zerubbabel, governor of Judah, saying, I am about to shake the heavens and the earth, ²² and to overthrow the throne of kingdoms. I am about to destroy the strength of the kingdoms of the nations, and overthrow the chariots and their riders. And the horses and their riders shall go down, every one by the sword of his brother. ²³ On that day, declares the Lord of hosts, I will take you, O Zerubbabel my servant, the son of Shealtiel, declares the Lord, and make you like a signet ring, for I have chosen you, declares the Lord of hosts.”

The book ends with words that can only be described as “eschatological” or “pertaining to final things.” It ends with a prophetic note. The imagery is profoundly eschatological:

• “shake the heavens and the earth”

• “overthrow the throne of kingdoms”

• “destroy the strength of the kingdoms of the nations”

• “overthrow the chariots and their riders”

• “On that day…”

This is language and imagery that points to end times events. “That day” clearly involves Zerubbabel but goes beyond him as well.

We must understand two things about Zerubbabel: (1) by being chosen by God and being picked up as a signet ring, Zerubbabel represented the effective reestablishment of David’s line and (2) the promises made to Zerubbabel are clearly made to him as a typeand figure. That is, God is saying something to Zerubbabel in his particular and important moment of historical significance that went far beyond both him and his moment. To put it yet another way, it would be best to see Zerubbabel as a comma, not a period, as a door, not a final destination.

To the first point, Verhoef argues that “the vivid figure of the signet ring attested to the renewed election of the Davidic line, represented by Zerubbabel, the person in whom God had again invested the authority, promised to David and his dynasty. Thus, the historical governor of Judah is elevated to fulfill his God-appointed destiny within the context of the coming and imminent future dispensation.”[4]Bryan Beyer writes that “Zerubbabel’s connection with the line of David may have fueled messianic hopes in Judah.”[5]

This is so! Zerubbabel represented in his person and in his restoration the coming of a leader and a restoration compared to which he and his time were only a foreshadowing, a type. Warren Weirsbe summarizes it nicely when he writes:

            Zerubbabel’s ancestor, King Jehoichin (Coniah), had been rejected by God, but Zerubbabel was accepted by God…(Jer. 22:24, NKJV). God was reversing the judgment and renewing His promise that the Davidic line would not die out but would one day give the world a Savior.[6]

We know that Zerubbabel was a figure of the coming Savior for two reasons. First, Zerubbabel virtually disappears from the scene after Haggai’s references to him and, secondly, when his name does appear again, it is in two passages that are most telling. Here they are:

Matthew 1

¹² And after the deportation to Babylon: Jechoniah was the father of Shealtiel,and Shealtiel the father of Zerubbabel, ¹³ and Zerubbabel the father of Abiud…¹⁶ and Jacob the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born, who is called Christ.

Luke 3

²³ Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age, being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli, ^24a the son of Matthat, the son of Levi…²⁷ the son of Joanan, the son of Rhesa, the son of Zerubbabel, the son of Shealtiel, the son of Neri

Zerubbabel is mentioned near the beginning of the first and third gospels and he is mentioned in the genealogy of Jesus Christ. Meaning, the restoration of Zerubbabel represented the restoration of the line through which Jesus would come: David’s line. God’s picking Zerubbabel back up as a signet ring meant that His Son could now be born as had been prophesied, in the lineage of David.

The implications of this are staggering! It means that the building of the temple is not the main point of the book of Haggai. And it means that the restoration of Zerubbabel is not the main point of the book of Haggai.

It means that Jesus is the point of the book of Haggai! It means that Jesus is the greater temple to whom the restored temple pointed. It means that Jesus is the greater King to whom the restored governor pointed.

Suddenly we understand: the call to rebuild the temple was a call for God’s people to enter into the bigger story of God’s plan of salvation. Their little part was part of God’s rescue mission for humanity. God will indeed shake the heavens and the earth. God will indeed bring the throne of the nations down. God will indeed set all things right. And He will do so through Jesus…and Jesus would come through the line of David, at least in so far as His earthly flesh was concerned.

Are you frustrated? Do you feel hopeless? Can you not understand what God is calling you to, what God is doing in your life? Then dare to trust! When you trust in Jesus Christ you enter a story that is bigger than you and you get to play a part in a story that is truly bigger than its parts!

That rubble at your feet is part of a great and grand drama of salvation! Pick up a stone and put it on top of another! Get back to what matters most! God is moving in the world! God has a plan! God knows exactly what God is doing!

God wants to use you!

“But,” you say, “all I have is this rubble, the rubble of my life.” Then bring that to God! Bring all of it! Bring it and say, “God, this is all I have: my own failures and my own rubble. But I now give it all to you. I trust in you. I believe in Jesus Christ. I trust in Jesus my temple, in Jesus my King, in Jesus, Lord of all.”

Yes, bring that to Him. Bring it, and watch Him work!

It is time to get back to what matters most!

[1]Kenneth Hoglund, “Haggai.” Zondervan Illustrated Bible Background Commentary. Gen. Ed., John H. Walton. Old Testament, Vol. 5 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2009), p.199.

[2]John H. Walton, Victor H. Matthews, Mark W. Chavalas, The IVP Bible Background Commentary: Old Testament. (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000), p.798.

[3]Warren Wiersbe, Be Heroic. (Colorado Springs, CO: Cook Communications Ministries, 1997), p.80.

[4]Pieter A. Verhoef, The Books of Haggai and Malachi.The New International Commentary on the Old Testament. (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1987), p.147.

[5]Bryan E. Beyer, “Zerubbabel.” The Anchor Bible Dictionary. Ed. in Chief, David Noel Freedman. Vol. 6, Si-Z (New York, NY: Doubleday, 1992), 1085-1086.

[6]Warren Wiersbe, Be Heroic. (Colorado Springs, CO: Cook Communications Ministries, 1997), p.80.

Haggai 2

¹⁰ On the twenty-fourth day of the ninth month, in the second year of Darius, the word of the Lord came by Haggai the prophet, ¹¹ “Thus says the Lord of hosts: Ask the priests about the law: ¹² ‘If someone carries holy meat in the fold of his garment and touches with his fold bread or stew or wine or oil or any kind of food, does it become holy?’” The priests answered and said, “No.” ¹³ Then Haggai said, “If someone who is unclean by contact with a dead body touches any of these, does it become unclean?” The priests answered and said, “It does become unclean.” ¹⁴ Then Haggai answered and said, “So is it with this people, and with this nation before me, declares the Lord, and so with every work of their hands. And what they offer there is unclean. ¹⁵ Now then, consider from this day onward. Before stone was placed upon stone in the temple of the Lord, ¹⁶ how did you fare? When one came to a heap of twenty measures, there were but ten. When one came to the wine vat to draw fifty measures, there were but twenty. ¹⁷ I struck you and all the products of your toil with blight and with mildew and with hail, yet you did not turn to me, declares the Lord. ¹⁸ Consider from this day onward, from the twenty-fourth day of the ninth month. Since the day that the foundation of the Lord’s temple was laid, consider: ¹⁹ Is the seed yet in the barn? Indeed, the vine, the fig tree, the pomegranate, and the olive tree have yielded nothing. But from this day on I will bless you.”

In G.R. Evans’ very interesting biography of John Wycliffe (the 14^thcentury Christian who is sometimes called “The Morning Star of the Reformation”), she talks about the questions that common Christians had at that time about transubstantiation. Transubstantiation is the Roman Catholic belief that the substance of the bread and wine becomes the body and blood of Jesus in the eucharist. That is, while it still looks like bread and wine in its externals, its substance is “transubstantiated” into something new, the body and blood of Jesus. And this belief gave rise to some very interesting questions.

For some centuries people are known to have asked awkward common-sense questions [about transubstantiation], such as where the substance of the bread ‘went’; how the whole of Christ’s body could be contained in a wafer; or conversely, how all the wafers consecrated over the centuries were not much greater in quantity than the real body of Christ; or how Christ’s body could be ‘all there’ in one place, parish after parish, when a number of Eucharists were celebrated all at the same time; or what happened when a crumb fell to the ground and a mouse ate it.  (Was there some salvific effect upon the mouse?)[1]

That last question—would a mouse be saved if a crumb fell to the ground and the mouse ate it?—reveals some of the absurdities that a “magical” view of Christianity can bring about. We rightly chuckle at the idea that mere physical contact with the elements of the Lord’s Supper might have some saving effect on the soul. And, of course, we do not believe that the supper itself has saving properties. We believe, rather, that it points us to the Savior, Jesus, who alone saves.

But that kind of magical approach is more common than we think. If I step into a sanctuary, does that not make me holy? If I sing the hymns does that not make me a Christian? If I take the offering plate and put something in it does not that have some kind of effect on my soul? These are the “does the mouse get saved?” questions of modern Baptists.

This hope for some kind of magical, physical, talismanic relationship with God is as old as the Fall. In Haggai 2, we see that it was present also in Israel’s life. Perhaps it was inevitable. Perhaps we should not be surprised that some began to think that their mere physical proximity to and work on the temple would render them right before God. Obviously some began feeling this because in Haggai 2:10-19 the Lord addresses this very issue.

It is easier for fallen humanity to infect than to heal.

Haggai 2:10-19 is, at first glance, a very odd text that seems to be asking very odd questions. To modern ears, that is certainly the case. Yet these initial odd questions are asked to get us to some very basic and fundamental spiritual realities.

¹⁰ On the twenty-fourth day of the ninth month, in the second year of Darius, the word of the Lord came by Haggai the prophet, ¹¹ “Thus says the Lord of hosts: Ask the priests about the law: ¹² ‘If someone carries holy meat in the fold of his garment and touches with his fold bread or stew or wine or oil or any kind of food, does it become holy?’” The priests answered and said, “No.” ¹³ Then Haggai said, “If someone who is unclean by contact with a dead body touches any of these, does it become unclean?” The priests answered and said, “It does become unclean.”

There are two questions here, one dealing with holiness and one dealing with uncleanness. The first is this: “If someone carries holy meat in the fold of his garment and touches with his fold bread or stew or wine or oil or any kind of food, does it become holy?” The first question we might ask is why would somebody be carrying holy meat in the fold of his garment? The IVP Bible Background Commentary offers a helpful explanation.

The situation pictured here may have been quite common at this time. The altar had been rebuilt within a few years of the return (535), but the temple had not yet been built. This means that meat from the sacrifices could not be eaten in the regular temple precincts, as was the norm. Instead, the food would have to be transported to the eating place.[2]

Thus the question. Is the holiness of the sacrificial meat transferable through a garment to whatever the garment touches? And the answer is, “No.” In other words, holiness does not work like that. You cannot take a holy object, reduce it to a magical talisman, a magical object, and then go around rendering things holy by physical touch.

On the other hand, consider the second question: “If someone who is unclean by contact with a dead body touches any of these, does it become unclean?” Unholiness, uncleanness, can contaminate others.

While we are dealing here with ritual holiness and uncleanness, there is a powerful point to be made: it is easier for fallen humanity to infect than to heal.

Warren Wiersbe sums it up nicely when he writes of these verses that “you can transmit defilement from one thing or person to another, but you can’t transmit sanctity. The same principle applies in the area of health: you can transmit your sickness to healthy people and make them sick, but you can’t share your health with them.”[3]Ralph Smith agrees and summarizes it like this: “Holiness is not transferable…But impurity is transferable.”

The looming question over all of this is this: why would this point need to be made? And the answer is that it appears that many of the Jews who were rebuilding the temple had come to believe that their mere contact with and proximity to the holy and sacred temple made them holy, that just by virtue of their putting stones on top of one another and building the building they were having holiness and a right standing with God zapped magically into them!

Can a mouse become a Christian if he eats the Lord’s Supper?

Can an Israelite become a true child of God if he works on the temple?

Do you see how this works?

Ralph Smith writes:

Haggai seems to be saying that just restoring the temple building is not enough. The temple was no fetish. Its presence did not guarantee God’s blessings. Jeremiah in his temple sermon made it clear that the people’s right actions and attitudes brought security and blessing (Jer 7).[4]

It is a strange thing, but in this fallen world sin is more contagious than holiness.

Being right with God is a matter of internal transformation notexternal proximity.

Just as a garment carrying sacred food cannot render something holy simply by touching it, so too the Israelites were not rendered holy merely by virtue of their work on the temple.

¹⁴ Then Haggai answered and said, “So is it with this people, and with this nation before me, declares the Lord, and so with every work of their hands. And what they offer there is unclean. ¹⁵ Now then, consider from this day onward. Before stone was placed upon stone in the temple of the Lord, ¹⁶ how did you fare? When one came to a heap of twenty measures, there were but ten. When one came to the wine vat to draw fifty measures, there were but twenty. ¹⁷ I struck you and all the products of your toil with blight and with mildew and with hail, yet you did not turn to me, declares the Lord. ¹⁸ Consider from this day onward, from the twenty-fourth day of the ninth month. Since the day that the foundation of the Lord’s temple was laid, consider: ¹⁹ Is the seed yet in the barn? Indeed, the vine, the fig tree, the pomegranate, and the olive tree have yielded nothing. But from this day on I will bless you.”

It is possible to work on the temple of God, to be in close proximity to the holy, and yet be as unholy as you were before you started working, before you drew close. Why? Because proximity does not equal transformation. It is the changed heart that is rendered right! It is the redeemed heart that is saved!

Kenneth Hoglund, in commenting on our text, writes that “the point…is that other items do not become holy by contact with something that is consecrated; it takes an intentional action of devoting something to God to impart holiness.”[5]That is so. Israel needed that “intentional action of devoting [itself] to God.” So do we!

Again, Rex Mason summarizes this text thus:

It is a warning to the community engaged in the rebuilding that the mere presence of the temple would not automatically guarantee the holiness of the community. In the manner of the earlier prophets Haggai would be saying that repentance and a right way of life alone would invest the temple and its worship with true meaning.[6]

How is your heart? Are you truly walking with the Lord Jesus Christ or are you contenting               yourself with merely being around the things of God? Has the church become for you what the temple had obviously become for Israel, even in this stage of renewed rebuilding: a talisman, a supposed magical item nearness to which, you think, can render you right with God?

Hear the warning of Haggai! The mouse that eats the crumb is just a mouse eating a crumb! There is nothing magical there!

The Israelite piling stones on top of one another is just an Israelite piling stones!

The Baptist with his Bible might just be a lost person who owns a Bible!

Proximity is not transformation!

Taking the Lord’s Supper does not magically render you saved.

Going to church does not magically render you a child of God.

Singing the hymns does not mean that the truths you are singing have taken root in your heart.

Putting money in the plate does not mean you are carrying your cross.

Church, hear me: it is not enough to be near the things of God and it is not even enough to be busy with the things of God. We must be God’s child to be saved! We must be born again!

Some years ago Richard John Neuhaus reported on a fascinating and troubling statement by a church authority about people being reminded of their sinfulness at the Lord’s Supper table.

In the United Kingdom, a new Methodist Book of Worship has just appeared…Excluded is the “prayer of humble access” at Holy Communion, which begins, “We do not presume to come to this your table, merciful Lord.” The liturgical committee thought the prayer was too “grovelly.” Said the Rev. Norman Wallwork, speaking for the committee, “An overriding element of the Eucharist is to be lifted up by the healing of God. We do not want people to be brought down at this holy moment and reminded they are a sinner.” Maybe he is making a point about the collective nature of sin, or maybe his grammar is as muddled as his theology.[7]

Ah! If there is anything about which we need to be reminded, it is that we are sinners in need of grace! That fact of the matter is we cannot be “lifted up” until we realize that we have been brought low by sin and shame. Without a deep awareness of the tragedy of the unredeemed heart we will fool ourselves into thinking that other things—crumbs, or wafers, or stones, or offerings—might just save us. But they never will! They never will!

What is better than building the temple? Serving the Lord of the temple! If you truly give Him your heart, you will serve Him. But if you seek to serve without giving Him your heart, you will trick yourself into thinking that you have something you do not have: an actual relationship.

Jesus Christ calls to us to come to Him. Do not confuse your service for your Savior or nearness for relationship. Bow the knee and heart to Jesus Christ, and you will live!

[1]G.R. Evans, John Wyclif: Myth and Reality(Downers Grove, IL:  IVP Academic, 2005), p.187.

[2]John H. Walton, Victor H. Matthews, Mark W. Chavalas, The IVP Bible Background Commentary: Old Testament. (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000), p.797.

[3]Warren Wiersbe, Be Heroic. (Colorado Springs, CO: Cook Communications Ministries, 1997), p.77.

[4]Ralph L. Smith, Micah-Malachi. Word Biblical Commentary. vol.32 (Waco, TX: Word Books, Publishers, 1984), p.160-161.

[5]Kenneth Hoglund, “Haggai.” Zondervan Illustrated Bible Background Commentary. Gen. Ed., John H. Walton. Old Testament, Vol. 5 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2009), p.197-198.

[6]Rex Mason, The Books of Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi. The Cambridge Bible Commentary (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1980), p.22.

[7]RJN, “While We’re At It,” First Things. June/July 1999.