Home » Posts tagged 'Israel' (Page 2)
Tag Archives: Israel
Suzerain-Vassal Treaties & the Books of Moses: Joshua Berman
I had the privilege of interviewing Jewish scholar Dr. Joshua Berman, professor of Hebrew Bible at Bar-Illan University in Israel, on the fact that the books of Moses, the Pentateuch, follow the late second Millennium BC format of a suzerain-vassal treaty. This fact strongly supports the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch, and, hence, the existence of genuine and unavoidable predictive prophecy in the Bible, and, thus, the Bible’s Divine authorship. Jehovah, the God of Israel, is the suzerain or great King, and Israel is the vassal, the subordinate dependent on the suzerain.
When my wife and I visited Egypt last year as part of a faculty tour of Egypt led by evangelical scholar James Hoffmeier, we had the privilege of interviewing Dr. Berman in Luxor, Egypt, on the issue of suzerain-vassal treaties (he prefers to be called “Joshua.”) Joshua Berman explains the issue quite clearly and effectively, so if you find the terminology “suzerain vassal treaty” scary, watch the video below of the interview, and I suspect you will both understand the issue and see the value of it for Christian apologetics.
I have posted about apologetics videos recorded on this trip to Egypt in previous posts on this blog, such as this one on the famous Merneptah Stele.
Ironically, when I debated president of the Freedom From Religion Foundation, Dan Barker, on the Old Testament, Mr. Barker claimed that “The Israelis over in Israel … the archaeologists are throwing up their hands saying, ‘No, there’s nothing. None of these stories has any archaeological evidence at all.’” Barker’s assertion was always ridiculous, as was demonstrated within the debate itself, but the interview with Dr. Berman provides even more evidence for the foolishness of Mr. Barker’s argument.
After the interview with Dr. Joshua Berman, other scholars, including Kenneth Kitchen (On the Reliability of the Old Testament), James Hoffmeier (The Archaeology of the Bible), and Meredith Kline (Treaty of the Great King: The Covenant Structure of Deuteronomy) are also quoted. You can learn more about archaeological evidence for the Old Testament here.
So please watch the video below. You can watch the embed below, or view it on faithsaves.net here, or on Rumble by clicking here, or on YouTube by clicking here.
–TDR
The Essence of the Bondage Mentality or Worldview, Witnessed in Old Testament Israel and Reflected in the Democrat Party in the United States
The Israelites lived in bondage in Egypt. In this bondage, they ate a preferred variety of food without a threat of immediate death. If they went along, they could go along. However, God wanted Israel to leave the bondage of Egypt to the liberty of the land that He would give them. He raised up and then used Moses and Aaron to lead them out. God also hardened Pharoah’s heart to do his will. The Apostle Paul explains in Romans 9:17-18:
17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.
18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.
Deuteronomy 4:20 communicates a similar purpose: “But the LORD hath taken you, and brought you forth out of the iron furnace, even out of Egypt, to be unto him a people of inheritance, as ye are this day.” A very short while after Israel left Egypt, the people wanted back in Egypt in bondage. They could escape Egypt, but they could not escape their bondage mentality or worldview. They wanted back in bondage as seen in many passages in the Old Testament. Reacting to lesser food, they said (Numbers 11:1-7):
1 And when the people complained, it displeased the LORD: and the LORD heard it; and his anger was kindled; and the fire of the LORD burnt among them, and consumed them that were in the uttermost parts of the camp.
2 And the people cried unto Moses; and when Moses prayed unto the LORD, the fire was quenched.
3 And he called the name of the place Taberah: because the fire of the LORD burnt among them.
4 And the mixt multitude that was among them fell a lusting: and the children of Israel also wept again, and said, Who shall give us flesh to eat?
5 We remember the fish, which we did eat in Egypt freely; the cucumbers, and the melons, and the leeks, and the onions, and the garlick:
6 But now our soul is dried away: there is nothing at all, beside this manna, before our eyes.
Israel said in Numbers 20:5, “And wherefore have ye made us to come up out of Egypt, to bring us in unto this evil place? it is no place of seed, or of figs, or of vines, or of pomegranates; neither is there any water to drink.” They spoke another version in Numbers 21:5, “And the people spake against God, and against Moses, Wherefore have ye brought us up out of Egypt to die in the wilderness? for there is no bread, neither is there any water; and our soul loatheth this light bread.” They would rather stay in bondage, because liberty meant manna, while bondage apparently brought fish, cucumbers, melons, leeks, onions, and garlick.
A second group of passages repeat the words, “die in the wilderness” (Exodus 14, Numbers 21, 26), as in Exodus 14:11-12:
11 And they said unto Moses, Because there were no graves in Egypt, hast thou taken us away to die in the wilderness? wherefore hast thou dealt thus with us, to carry us forth out of Egypt?
12 Is not this the word that we did tell thee in Egypt, saying, Let us alone, that we may serve the Egyptians? For it had been better for us to serve the Egyptians, than that we should die in the wilderness.
If the people of Israel trusted God, would they die in the wilderness? It seemed like it to them. They made decisions based on this worldview or mentality. You might call the bondage mindsight also a crybaby one, because everytime Israel chose bondage, they cried or complained like a baby to God.
Also reflecting the bondage or crybaby worldview or mentality was Israel’s desire for a king. God warned against having a king. 1 Samuel 8:1-18 (click to see this passage, while reading here) records what God thinks. Israel expressed the desire in verse 5: “And said unto him, Behold, thou art old, and thy sons walk not in thy ways: now make us a king to judge us like all the nations.” Their bondage mentality or worldview guided their desire. It displeased the Lord (verses 6-8) and it still does.
Thomas Ross writes about 1 Samuel 8 and chronicles the given reasons God opposes the bondage worldview, what he calls “big government” mentality. He exposes the following arguments:
- Loss of freedom of association (verses 10-13)
- Loss of freedom in a military draft (verses 11-12) [in contrast to God’s will, Deuteronomy 20:1-9]
- Loss of freedom of occupation (verses 11-13)
- Weakening of the private sector for the public sector (verses 11-13)
- Loss of Freedom of Property (verses 14-16)
- Loss of freedom and protection for physical property through “redistribution” (verse 14)
- Loss of freedom and protection for growth in wealth and income through 10% taxation (verse 15)
- Loss of freedom and protection for human “property” (verse 16)
In the end, Israel would regret its bondage or crybaby mentality or worldview (verse 18). Thomas Ross lists reasons in the text for taking this false view of the world:
- Rejection of the Word of God (verse 19)
- A Desire to Follow the Ungodly (verse 20a)
- Abdication of Responsibility (verse 20b)
- Faithlessness (verse 20a and c)
When Israel finally went into captivity, Israel also wanted to stay, similarly to returning to Egypt. Daniel begrudges this and God prophesies the chastisement (Daniel 9-12).
The Democrat Party of the United States reflects the bondage and crybaby mentality. I call it bondage rather than slave even though the latter works, if expounded. The Bible says everyone is a slave, either to righteousness or unrighteousness, so it seems unescapable. The Democrats keep people in bondage to government, which is bondage to unrighteousness according to God. Slavery to God isn’t bondage, but liberty. With liberty comes responsibility.
Going back to Egypt meant dependence on Egypt. Israel could rest in the world system, following along with its ways, never breaking from its position or direction. The Democrats sacrifice the permanent on the altar of the immediate. They encourage everyone to live a temporal life.
Late in his life, Booker T. Washington visited Washington DC from Tuskegee and on his way, he witnessed and then criticized African Americans for moving to and crowding near Washington DC to obtain their means to live. This became Booker T. Washington’s debate with socialist African American leader W.E.B. Dubois, offering different trajectories for the future. Dubois’s view won out. This became the strategy of the Democrat Party, especially represented by Woodrow Wilson and then Franklin Delano Roosevelt.
Victor David Hansen on June 29 wrote a piece titled “The Cry Baby Leftist Mind.” This agrees with what I’m writing here. The overturning of Roe v. Wade brought out further crying. What will women do now? How will they survive? Democrat California says, “We will pay for your abortion.” Even Republican governor Kristi Noem of South Dakota reacts by saying, “We must do what we can to help women in crisis,” as a beginning comment. She further said, “We will continue helping women navigate pregnancies they did not plan.” That is better than paying for the abortion, but it panders to a bondage and crybaby mindset.
God does not approve of the bondage and crybaby mindset. It will not succeed in a nation. People will not be better. They will be worse. Let us oppose it together.
Why Do Jews Get Special Favor from True Christians?
Based on what’s committed against the United States and people’s talk about Islamophobia, one might think Moslems would receive more crimes against them for their religion. They don’t. The FBI reports 227 Moslem victims in its last report in 2019 and 1,032 Jewish victims. Jews themselves also know that antisemitism grows rapidly.
For most of my life (born 1962), evangelical Christians were a very reliable ally of Jewish people and especially Israel. Yet, by far I hear and read among evangelicals more anti-Jewish language and writing than I’ve ever heard. I did not grow up around Jewish people and don’t ever remember even meeting a Jew until I was in college, but I still heard on a very regular basis, “The Jews are God’s chosen people.” I thought that too.
What Is Worldly Worship?
At least twenty years ago, from scripture I came to the following as a definition of worship. It is my definition, but I believe it reflects what the Bible says. “Worship is acknowledging or recognizing God for Who He is according to His Word and giving Him what He says that He wants.” If I were going to add a secondary important aspect, “worship necessitates coming to the right God and in the right way.” You aren’t worshiping God if He isn’t actually God and then you’re not worshiping Him if you are doing it your way. God doesn’t accept just anything.
I googled the two terms “worldly worship” and it produced 12,300 results. Those were not all articles written by me, although I found I had used that terminology in some online writings. It is a known concept though, worship that is worldly that is not acceptable to God, which is of the nature of the world system and not the nature of God. I went ahead and googled “syncretistic worship” too, because I think it’s a related concept. That showed up 6,060 times.
Syncretize means: to “attempt to amalgamate or reconcile (differing things, especially religious beliefs, cultural elements, or schools of thought).” When referring to syncretism in worship, many have pointed to the practice in Israel of bringing aspects of the worship of paganism into the worship of God, mixing the two. Many examples of syncretism are seen in the nation Israel (Exodus 32:1-8; Leviticus 10:1-7; Deuteronomy 12:30-31; 1 Kings 3:5-10; etc.). The way Israel syncretized is not the only way to syncretize. Mixing something impure with purity makes it impure.
Speaking of worship, Paul commands, “be not conformed to this world” (Romans 12:2). Because God accepts only holy worship, not profane, then it can’t be conformed to this world system, the spirit of the age. Obviously, everything we do occurs in this world or on this planet, on earth. The world system clashes with God. It is represented by darkness and all the characteristics described in scripture as seen in many places, one of which as an example is James 3:15: “earthly, sensual, and devilish.” There are many more. One should assume that all of these can be understood and applied.
The world is attractive to sinful flesh. Satan shapes the world system to lure people away from God. Because the world is a lure, it also works when a church uses it. Satan designs it as a lure and if a church takes that lure and uses it, it’s still a lure. That’s the temptation of using anything worldly.
Varied aspects of this world are filled with meaning. Many of those meanings are not congruent with God. One should even expect that they are not. Whatever it is that will please God has already been around. One should question any new style or method, especially that has proceeded from worldly lust, which Titus 2:11-12 says that the grace of God teaches us to deny. I contend that rather than denying worldly lust, most churches today promote it. They might argue that this new way is neutral, neither good or bad. God’s people didn’t originate it, actually rejected it, and then after a period of time, accepted it, then used it, arguing now that God also wants it.
Someone may ask, what basis do I have that churches are using worldly music? I haven’t been in all these churches, so how do I know? Not only have I been all over the country, but I’ve looked at websites of churches all over. I know enough.
Every church and their leaders should want accountability as to whether they are using worldly worship. They should look for constructive criticism. People are deceived in many different ways as they relate to God. The broad road to destruction has many religious people on it. When I read the materials of the church growth movement used as a model for thousands of churches, they encourage worldly worship as means of church growth.
God doesn’t accept worldly worship, so why would churches still do it? Why would Nadab and Abihu offer strange fire to the Lord? I would contend that the strange fire of Nadab and Abihu is a lesser perversion of worship than most worldly worship, and God killed them for offering it. They were still offering incense. They just changed the recipe. They offered something God didn’t say that He didn’t like. They offered something different than what God said He wanted. It seems that Nadab and Abihu just didn’t take God seriously, what could be called, not fearing God. We know what they did was bad and wrong and sinful, but it was still not something that God had said was wrong.
Worldly worship we know God doesn’t want. There are two obvious motives for giving God something He doesn’t want, and they are seen in scripture. First, the one offering it likes it. This is the serving the creature of Romans 1. He’s not really even giving to God as much as he’s doing something for himself that he likes. I’ve seen this again and again in churches I’ve visited. It can happen anywhere. Second, other people will like it too, so it will make the church more popular. The people wanting that worship don’t like what God likes, but they either convince themselves or are just deceived into thinking that God will accept it. A third reason is deceit. The feeling the worldliness causes often is mistaken for a spiritual experience.
Worldly worship parallels with a worldly life. The world offers what the flesh desires. There were times in church history that a wide chasm existed between the worship of the Lord in the churches and the world. That gap has shrunk to where there isn’t much difference. It’s worse that that. The churches like the world and they expect God to like it too. It shows an amazing lack of understanding of God and what He wants.
As you have read this, reader, perhaps you wanted to know more specifics. “Give me a specific of worldly worship.” I could say, using the world’s music in worship. To get more specific, I could go further, using rock music in worship. There are many other specific examples. It’s better to start with the principles for discerning what is worldly and that God doesn’t want something worldly.
To accommodate worldliness, I have heard evangelicals give a very narrow understanding of worldliness as internal only, that nothing external is worldly. However, Paul wrote, “Be not conformed to this world.” There is internal worldliness, the love of the world in the heart, but conforming by definition must be external. God doesn’t want something we can see and hear is worldly. He rejects it.
Recent Comments