ACTS 15:1-4

 Q: Is there something in the modern day that we could equate circumcision with? Also, how

 would they know who was circumcised and who was not? I assume they weren’t running around

 naked. It is hard for me to understand the depth that this seems to have to their cultural identity, and

 especially what it has to do with faith. 

 

On your first question, liturgical churches tend to equate circumcision with baptism even though there is

little real NT justification for that idea. On your second question, it is a clearer indication of religion than

with any other religion and actually became important during the Hellenistic Period when athletes would

compete in the nude. In addition would be distinctions in clothing, hair style and dietary habits. On your 

last point, Paul would agree with you. It was intended to be a reminder of the covenant between Israel and

God -- a blood sacrifice in a way. Therefore it was more a sign to the person himself, not to other Jews.

ACTS 13:9

 Q: What do you think about the theory that Paul took his name from Sergius Paulus, his first

 Gentile convert?

It is certainly possible since Romans sometimes adopted the name of an influential patron, but you would

expect the new name to be introduced after the conversion, not before. It is more likely that Saul already

the  Greek name Paul but now uses it exclusively since he will be traveling mainly in Gentile

territory. The common idea that Paul was his Christian name and Saul his Jewish name is unlikely.

ACTS 10:36-42

Q: Why is Dorcas returned to life? Christians are to look at the world as some sort of an awful sentence before they are able to ascend to perfect fellowship with God, why would we take someone back from paradise and put them back on earth? This would only make sense if she were not saved, and this was giving her another chance.

Even Jesus did the same thing with Lazarus and others, probably out of feelings for the bereaved and to bolster faith and for evangelistic reasons. The end result of the miracle is in the last verse.

ACTS 8:14-16

 

Q: The Samaritans have not received the Holy Spirit because they were only baptized in the

 name of Jesus? Was this an error on Philip’s part in how he was baptizing people?

 

Two-part conversion is not a general pattern in Acts, only here and with Gentile converts later. In both

 cases the apostles needed to be physically present to witness the validity of the conversion of these two

 non-Jewish groups (by giving of the Holy Spirit). 

 Philip did not necessarily leave out any magic words; it may mean that God had not baptized them 

 the Holy Spirit at that time. This is somewhat similar to the Apostles getting the Holy Spirit from Jesus

 but having to wait until the Day of Pentacost for the descent of the Spirit in power upon them.

 

ACTS 8:3

 Q: It has been said that Saul was responsible for the death of about 5,000 Christians. Is that number accurate?

There is not even the slightest evidence that he was responsible for any death except possibly Stephen's,

 whose martyrdom is so important that over one chapter of Acts is devoted to it. The persecution under 

Saul,  according to Acts, was limited to his arresting Christians and driving them out of town. Jews under

 Roman rule were not allowed to enforce the death penalty except in extraordinary cases. Therefore it only

 happened in the rare case of mob action. In fact, the somewhat  later stoning of James (Jesus’ brother)

 was so rare that the Jewish historian Josephus even remarks on it  and says that many Jews later felt that

 the killing of such a righteous man was the cause of the fall of  Jerusalem in AD 70. There is no mention

 of the killing of 5,000 righteous men in Acts, Paul’s letters, or Jewish or Roman sources.

ACTS 6-7

 

Q: Stephen takes a really long time to get to the point in his story. He basically retells the whole

 story of the Jewish people since the flood. This is somewhat similar to what Matthew does at the

 beginning of his gospel where he is trying to validate Jesus’ lineage. Why be so didactic about this?

 

Stephen is not only didactic, but purposely antagonistic. These are the words of the Holy Spirit to

accomplish His will—dispersion of the believers and the possible planting of a seed in Saul's mind that

would take root later.

 

ACTS 5:3-4

Q: Isn't it true that the question in verse 3 (“Why has Satan filled your heart?”) is fully explained by its parallel in verse 4 (“You have contrived this deed in your heart”)? And wouldn't that indicate that the other references to “Satan” in the Bible merely refer to the human heart, not some supernatural being?

I agree that these two questions are meant to be seen in parallel with each other. And actually, these verses occur within the larger literary frame shown below:

A. Why has Satan filled your heart

    B. to lie to the Holy Spirit

            C. While it remained unsold,

                D. did it not remain your own

            C'. After it was sold

               D'. were not the proceeds at your disposal

A'. How is it that you have contrived this deed in your heart

    B'. you did not lie to us, but to God

However, just because the phrases are placed in poetic parallelism to one another, does not mean that each pair says exactly the same thing. This is rarely the case in Hebrew poetry or in the exalted prose of this passage. Thus, B and B' say practically the same thing, but B' expands the concept somewhat by bringing in the Second Person of the Trinity. This is quite common in Hebrew poetry where the second line adds to the first so that both lines need to be taken together to get the whole picture. We see even more of a departure from strict parallelism in CD vs. C'D'. A similar concept is being presented in each pair, but C'D' moves forward in time to explain how the same principle applies even there.

So the question is, does the pair AA' act more like BB' in describing basically the same thing, but with B' clarifying or expanding on the idea of B? Or is AA' closer to CD-C'D', in which case A describes the first phase of the temptation (an external force suggesting the action) followed by A' (Ananias acting on this suggestion due to the evil inclination of his heart). In either case, but especially in the latter, it is unjustified to reduce these verses to the simple equation: Satan = evil human inclinations.

And that equation certainly can't extrapolated to reduce all references to Satan in the Bible to evil

 human inclinations only. Attempts to do that would fail especially in the case of the opening lines of

 the Book of Job. Whose evil inclinations are being referred to in that case? God's?

 

CHRIST'S SEVEN LAST WORDS ON THE CROSS

 Seven Last Words of Christ:

Our Model for Surviving Suffering

“Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.” (Luke 23:34)

This sentence is missing from most of the early manuscripts, so that many scholars feel it was not in Luke's original. However, the theme of human ignorance is prominent elsewhere in Luke's writings (Acts 3:17; 13:27; 17:30). As to why some manuscripts might have purposely omitted this saying, the only suggested reason is that some scribes may have been felt it to be an unanswered prayer in light of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. In either case, most scholars feel it represents a genuine saying of Jesus, whether or not it originally belonged in Luke's Gospel.

The other confusing point is the ambiguous reference to “they.” It is doubtful that Jesus was specifically referring to the Roman soldiers. It is more probable that he had the Jewish and Roman authorities in mind. Ellis (The Gospel of Luke) makes the interesting suggestion that Jesus was in fact referring to sinful humanity, and that his death on the cross answered this prayer by making forgiveness available to all.

Interestingly, Stephen's last words as he was being stoned echo three of Jesus' last words: “While they were stoning Stephen, he prayed, 'Lord, Jesus, receive my spirit.' Then he knelt down and cried out in a loud voice, 'Lord, do not hold this sin against them.'” This demonstrates great Stephen's willingness to not only learn from his Master, but also to follow in His footsteps.

Lesson: We should handle suffering with a lack of bitterness and deal with eternal issues instead.

“ Today you will be with me in Paradise” (Luke 23:39-43)

There is an obvious contrast here between man's justice and God's grace. It is also a real life example of one of the lessons found in the parable of the laborers in the vineyard found in Matthew 20:1-16. God's eternal reward is to everyone who comes to Him, at no matter at what point in their life.

The word translated as “paradise” is a Persian loan word meaning a pleasure garden. This should not be confused with heaven itself. It is the probable equivalent of the “third heaven” (II Corinthians 12:2-4) or “the bosom of Abraham” (Luke 16): the place for the intermediate state of the righteous dead. In that way, there is no contradiction between Jesus' words here and his comment somewhat later to Mary in John 20:17 that he had not yet ascended to the Father.

Lesson: It is never too late in your life to accept God's grace or to minister to others.

“Dear woman, here is your son...Here is your Mother.” (John 19:25b-27)

Just as Christ suffered on the cross for the whole world, he also cared for individualS at the same time. We shouldn't sacrifice family responsibilities in the name of a “greater ministry.”

These words indicate that Joseph was dead at the time, which fits into the traditional view that he was much older than Mary. But why would he give the responsibility to John? By piecing together statements in Mark 15:40 and Matthew 27:56, we can deduce that John was actually a cousin of Jesus. But, of course, there were closer relatives, namely Jesus' half-brothers. However, at the time, “even his own brothers did not believe him.” (John 7:5) And remember that Jesus defined his eternal family in such a way as to exclude non-believers. (Mark 3:35)

Lesson: Take care of, or delegate, your normal responsibilities when you are overwhelmed with suffering. Think of others' needs, not just those of yourself.

“My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Matthew 27:46)

A. Existentialist Interpretation: A man who thought he had a special relationship with God is now hanging on a cross deserted and confused, crying out in agony. This is an example of our state in life. If there is a God, He has deserted us. Therefore we have to do the best we can without Him.

Problems with this interpretation – (1) It leaves out the prologue; Christ knew it was coming, and (2) it leaves out the epilogue; God did not at all desert him.

B. Traditional Interpretation:

    (1) Paul said that Christ bore the sins of the world when he was on the cross.

    (2) God cannot co-exist with sin or even look on it.

    (3) God turned His back on Christ for the first time in their relationship.

The implications from this view are that we should be joyful and thankful that we no longer have a severed relationship with God.

Problems with this interpretation – (1) It nowhere in the Bible states that God turned his back on Christ, (2) it is doubtful that Christ would be so uncomprehending if that event happened, (3) and it is based on an incorrect interpretation of one OT text, Habakkuk 1:13a, which says, "Your eyes are too pure to behold evil, and you cannot look on wrongdoing." However, the second part of this verse asks, "Why do you look on the treacherous, and are silent when the wicked swallow those more righteous than they?" Obviously, there is a contradiction here unless the first part of the verse implies that God is too pure to keep on looking at evil without doing something about it.

C. Modern Interpretation:

These words are the first lines of Psalm 22, which Jesus was alluding to as a whole. Remember that (1) it was common to refer to whole books of the Bible by their first words and (2) most people died during crucifixion by suffocation from not being able to get a breath; Jesus only gasped out a few words at a time while on the cross.

When one reads the whole Psalm, a completely different picture of Jesus' words emerges. See especially verses 7-8, 14-18, 23-24, 27, and 30-31.

Lesson: Be honest in your feelings toward God. Don't deny the pain you are suffering.

“I thirst.” (John 19:28)

These two simple words illustrate the great depths of Scripture and its possible multiple meanings.

The following verses involve someone giving him vinegar (which should be understood as cheap wine) on a sprig of hyssop (which in the Passover ceremony stood for humility). Alternatively, the Greek word may mean “javelin” instead of “hyssop.” Textual traditions vary on this point. Other gospels say that the wine was mixed with myrrh, possibly to help numb the pain. And remember that Jesus had said not long before this time that he wouldn't drink the cup until the Kingdom came.

Jesus alludes to Psalm 69:3 in which the Psalmist asks for deliverance from his enemies. However, it ends in total triumph (see vv. 29-36). The most interesting parallel is found in v. 21: “They gave me poison for food, and for my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink.” It has been doubted that Jesus is referring to this verse since that occasion was an act of an enemy while those offering a drink to Jesus were apparently doing it out of kindness. However, the purpose of the drink may have been an act of cruelty in order to prolong his pain.

Another close parallel from the Psalms is found in Psalm 22:15: “My strength is dried up like a potsherd and my tongue cleaves to my jaws.” Whichever is the intended reference, it served to signal the fulfillment of yet another OT prophecy while Christ was on the cross.

If one looks for the symbolic meaning behind “cup,” consider John 18:11: “I must drink the cup (of suffering and death) the Father has given me.”

For an ironic meaning here: Jesus, the source of living water (John 7:38), must die before living water can be given to the believers. In the next scene on the cross, water pours from his corpse (19:34)

Literal meaning: Jesus was thirsty and needed to wet his lips before his final words could be said “with a loud voice (according to the Synoptic accounts)” so that all could hear him.

The previous saying (according to the Synoptics) of being forsaken reminds us of Christ's closeness with the Father, i.e., his divinity. “I thirst” reminds us of his humanity. It is interesting that the major heresies in the early church involved the denial of one or the other. Other statements in the NT remind us of Jesus' humanity: “He wept,” his righteous anger (“How long do I have to put up with you?), “He was tempted in all ways as we are,” and his lack of knowledge (“Of that time, only the Father knows...”). Both natures were necessary for Christ to accomplish his work on the cross. See Hebrews 2:14-18.

Which one interpretation of “I am thirsty” is correct? Since none really contradicts another, there is no reason that these two Greek words in Scripture can't carry all the implications mentioned above.

Lesson: Allow others to minister to your needs and recognize that you need to take care of yourself physically. Remember Elijah in his time of distress after the Mt. Carmel episode. Also read Job 2:8.

“Father, into your hands I commit my spirit.” (Luke 23:46)

This is the third saying on the cross that quotes from or alludes to a psalm (31:5 in this case). They are all psalms of one in distress.

Interestingly, there is a contrast here with the five previous times in Luke's Gospel where it says Jesus was or will be “delivered into the hands of sinful men.” See 9:44; 18:32; 20:19; 22:53; and 24:7.

What does this verse say about Christ?

    1. He exhibited calm restfulness.

    2. He was conscious of the closest communion with the Father.

    3. He “gave up his spirit.” This is expressed more clearly in the other gospels. He purposely and             voluntarily gave up his life.

The fact that we as believers can show the same attitude is seen in Stephen's words in Acts 7:59: “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.”

Lesson: Suffering does not last forever. Don't listen to those such as Job's wife in Job 2:9. Take to heart the teaching in I Peter 4:19: “Therefore, let those suffering in accordance with God's will entrust themselves to a faithful Creator, while continuing to do good.

“It is finished (completed).” (John 19:30)

Translations such as “finished” or “gave up the spirit” give the misleading impression that Jesus was discouraged, “done for,” “had had it.” But actually the Greek word teleo means completed, perfected, or accomplished. The question is, “What was finished?”

Look at the two other places in John's Gospel where the word “finished” appears:

    John 4:34: “My food is to do the will of the him who sent me and to complete his work.”

    John 17:4: “I glorified you on earth by finishing the work you gave me to do.”

There is an interesting hierarchy of “works” in John's Gospel:

    Jesus' works are greater than those of John the Baptist (John 5:36).

    Our works are greater than those of Jesus (John 14:12).

This last statement is a puzzling one and is usually interpreted in terms of the scope of modern evangelism rather than any qualitative superiority of our works compared to those of Jesus. Luke 10:24 says that even the least of believers is greater than John the Baptist. And that is because our works are powered by the Holy Spirit. Both that gift and the forgiveness of sins happen because of Christ's death on the cross and were not available up to that time. But we now get to share in the fulfillment of God's saving purposes for the world.

Some NT passages may help reconcile the view that Christ accomplished it all on the cross while we are still to accomplish much for the kingdom today.

Philippians 1:6; 2:12-13; Hebrews 12:1-2.

Lesson: Our sufferings complete God's purposes.

PHILIPPIANS 2

Philippians 2

Philippians 2 is a lesson on Jesus becoming downwardly mobile. It is no coincidence that Jesus' teachings emphasize that this is to be the model for us, humbling oneself: “He who would be greatest must be servant of all,” “You must become as a little child,” and “The first shall be last and the last shall be first.”

But that's not how we usually keep score.

On the job: salary, title, size of office, and number of people reporting to you. In the company I worked for, the number of pictures you were allowed on your wall and number of windows in your office were determined strictly by your rank. Any of these were used as strong motivators.

School: GPA, SAT score, college attended and degrees attained

Family life: how your kids are turning out, what kind of a home you have, what neighborhood you live in. There is a large retirement community in our town, and I have been told that the first question a new acquaintance will ask someone there is what model house they have. In this way, they can rapidly size up your income.

Unfortunately, the situation is sometimes no better in our church life: for teachers it might be the size of their Sunday school class, whether they are a deacon or an elder or a committee chairperson, faithfulness in attendance or serving in the choir. Who demonstrates the most spirituality in prayer, who is the most knowledgeable in Bible study, etc.

Let's look at how Paul considered these ways of keeping score in one's spiritual life (The Corinthian church is a great negative example of this tendency).

I Corinthians 1:11-12 “I belong to Paul, etc.” We usually think of these verses only in terms of conflict between groups, but these verses reveal another type of score keeping: bragging about who your spiritual leader is. I Corinthians 3:21a confirms this interpretation: “So let no one boast about human leaders.” This is practicing second-hand spirituality.

I Corinthians 12-14 was obviously prompted by those who valued some gifts higher than others and bragged about it. However, all of them come from God, not ourselves. And God honors the less visible gifts higher than the more visible ones.

II Corinthians 10:11; 11:7 In these verses, Paul sarcastically makes fun of “Super apostles.” We can see how they kept score from two passages: who was the best in sermon delivery, who had the most imposing presence as a leader, and who charged the most for his services.

II Corinthians 11:16-23 Paul reluctantly demonstrates that he can play the same game as these “Super- apostles” who were claiming that they were superior to Paul. To do this, he runs through a list of different types of human score-keeping.

However, the strongest words in the Bible concerning our score keeping methods are found in Philippians 3:7-8:

Count your gains as loss – imagine multiplying all our accomplishments by -1. (salary, net worth, IQ, etc.)

Count your gains as dung. When we start competing according to our culture's standards, we are really bragging about who has the biggest pile of manure.

So how should and shouldn't we keep score?

II Corinthians 10:12 Stop comparing ourselves with others. That only leaves us and God.

II Corinthians 10:17-18 Boast in the Lord.

II Corinthians 12:9-10 Boast in your weakness

How can we boast in our weakness? And what does it mean to boast in the Lord?

NUMBERS 27: WOMEN IN THE BIBLE

Starting out with a question: which part of the OT is Numbers located in?

The Primary History

Hebrew Bible Genesis–Deuteronomy Joshua–II Kings

(Pentateuch) (Former Prophets)

Noth Genesis–Numbers Deuteronomy–II Kings

(Tetrateuch) (Deuteronomistic History)

Wellhausen Genesis–Joshua Judges–II Kings

(Hexateuch) (Collected Traditions)

And the rest of what has been called the Primary History of Israel is called the Former Prophets by the Jews. That division wasn't good enough for the critical Bible scholars in late 19^th and early 20^th century Germany. Noth, for example, moved Deuteronomy out of the Pentateuch to leave only a Tetrateuch, while Wellhausen added one book to the Pentateuch to make a Hexateuch.

Not to be outdone by two Germans, I looked at the Primary History from a structural point of view to see if any of these books were in close parallel to one another, and came up with a

  Hendecateuch: Structure for the Primary History

IA. Prelude (Gen. 1-11)

IB. Covenant Relationship Defined (Gen. 12-50)

IC. In the Wilderness: Part I (Exodus)

ID. The Law (Leviticus)

IC'. In the Wilderness: Part II (Numbers)

IB'. Covenant Relationship Ratified (Deut. 1-30)

Center: Deuteronomy 31-34

IIB. Conquering the Land (Joshua)

IIC. Possessing the Land: A Mixed History (Judges)

IID. Transition of Leadership (I Samuel)

IIC'. Possessing the Land: A Mixed History (II Samuel-I Kings)

IIB'. Losing the Land (II Kings 1:1-23:25)

IA'. Conclusion: Leaving the Promised Land (II Kings 23:26-25:30)

I obviously love these literary arrangements found throughout the Bible for four reasons. In the first place, they point out the inherent order God has put into Scripture. I won't bore you with all the reasoning behind this proposed organization, but note that the early history in Gen. 1-11 serves as a prelude to the formation of the Jewish nation while the last chapters of Deuteronomy recap that history. The rest of Genesis and Deuteronomy deal with the covenant relationship God established with his chosen people; Exodus and Numbers can be read as a continuous story of the journey from Egypt to Caanan and these two books contain almost exactly the same number of words; and finally, Leviticus stands apart from the rest of the Pentateuch as being almost wholly a law book not a narrative.

And you can see that Noth was not completely off-base in considering Deuteronomy with the following history books since at least the last 5 chapters prepare us for the events in the Promised Land.

The Book of Numbers: Chuck Swindoll's Table of Contents

Commands (chs.1-9) Rebellion (chs.10-14) Punishment (chs.15-36)

Structural Divisions

I. Order (Chapters 1-10)

II. Rebellion (Chapters 11-25)

I'. New Order (Chapters 26-36)

That brings us up to the Book of Numbers. Earlier, our regular Sunday school teacher presented Swindoll's table of contents for this book, and it is a logical one. God gives commands to the people but they constantly disobey so they are punished. But often the events in the Bible are not given in a logical order. And if you compare several commentaries on Numbers with one another, you will find that they all have different ways of dividing up the major sections in the book. That brings up the second valuable thing about literary structures: they help determine the intended divisions in the Scripture. The justification for the three-fold division I propose in this slide is confirmed by the fact that there is internal symmetry within each of the three groupings. This contradicts the many scholars who don't see a lot of order in the book.

Slide “It presents us with a variety of genres...that seem to interrupt each other and whose connections to each other are neither explicitly stated nor easily seen.”

“...notoriously defiant of structural analysis.”

“It is almost a consensus that the Book of Numbers leaves much to be desired, and that much is puzzling in the presentation of its material.”

“Many interpreters complain that the book has no coherent organizational scheme or outline.”

And these comments are from evangelical scholars. I think they are missing the point because they are looking for the wrong type of order in the Bible. Let's look at the last third of the Book of Numbers, for example, since that is where today's lesson is found.

                                                           The Structure of Section III

A. The Tribes Numbered (26:1-56)

B. Levites Numbered (26:57-65)

C. Inheritance Laws for Daughters of Zelophehad (27:1-11)

 

D. End of Moses' Leadership (27:12-23)

E. Final Legislation Before Crossing Jordan (ch. 28-29)

F. Women's Vows (ch. 30)

E'. Final Narratives Before Crossing Jordan (ch. 31-32)

D'. Summary of Moses' Leadership (33:1-49)

A'. The Tribes' Inheritance (33:50-34:29)

B'. Levites' Inheritance and Cities of Refuge (ch. 35)

C'. Inheritance Laws for Daughters of Zelophehad (ch. 36)

You can see why many scholars are rightly confused since each lettered section represents a different story and the text seems to haphazardly jump around from one subject to another and then repeat itself. This sort of arrangement not only demonstrates that there is perfect order in the text, but (and this is the third important thing we can get from such an analysis) it also shows that sometimes the appropriate context for understanding a portion of Scripture is located several chapters later. Just look at our passage for today in bold. The last half of chapter 27 should really be read in conjunction with chapter 33 since they both deal with the same subject.

So all that introduces our passage of the week, but I will warn you that I am only going to briefly discuss it in order to concentrate on some more important verses in that same chapter instead.

Moses spoke to the LORD, saying, “Let the LORD, the God of the spirits of all flesh, appoint someone over the congregation who shall go out before them and come in before them, who shall lead them out and bring them in, so that the congregation of the LORD may not be like sheep without a shepherd.” Numbers 27:15-17

So the LORD said to Moses, “Take Joshua son of Nun, a man in whom is the spirit, and lay your hand upon him; have him stand before Eleazar the priest and all the congregation, and commission him in their sight. You shall give him some of your authority, so that all the congregation of the Israelites may obey.” Numbers 27:18-20

The cover of our weekly study guide has a picture of baton passing during a relay race. And many races have been lost at this key point. I prefer this picture. Notice that the runner receiving the baton is not standing still. He is already up to speed by the time of the hand-off. Joshua, for example, had almost 40 years working as Moses' assistant before he was handed the baton. And the process didn't stop there. Look at the subsequent leaders mentioned in the Book of Joshua and the overlap between them.

Leadership in the Book of Joshua

Joshua, son of Nun          Eleazar          Phinehas

1:1

            2:1

            2:23

            6:6

---------------------------

14:1                                      14:1

            17:4                                      17:4

            19:49                                     -----

            19:51                                   19:51

            21:1                                     21:1

--------------------------

                                                        22:13                 22:13

                                                        -----                   22:30

                                                        22:31                 22:31

                                                        22:32                 22:32

                                                                                  Judges 20:28

It is the very picture of a relay race. That is why mentoring of the subsequent generation of leaders in the church is so important. At a previous church where I led an adult Sunday school class, I began a process of team teaching where different class members could try out their hand at teaching. Many of them went on later to teach their own classes at that church and other churches. And you probably know that in our own church where various committees help conduct the day-to-day business, there is a strong attempt to maintain a continuity of both membership and leadership so that the committees don't end up re-inventing the wheel each year. And of course each of us is called to pass the Word on to others in our circle of influence, especially our children and grandchildren.

As important as this theme is in Numbers 27, there is another sometimes neglected theme in that chapter that is just as important so I would like to spend the rest of the class time on it. Let's look again at the structure of this portion of Numbers.

The Structure of Section III

A. The Tribes Numbered (26:1-56)

B. Levites Numbered (26:57-65)

C. Inheritance Laws for Daughters of Zelophehad (27:1-11)

D. End of Moses' Leadership (27:12-23)

E. Final Legislation Before Crossing Jordan (ch. 28-29)

F. Women's Vows (ch. 30)

E'. Final Narratives Before Crossing Jordan (ch. 31-32)

D'. Summary of Moses' Leadership (33:1-49)

A'. The Tribes' Inheritance (33:50-34:29)

B'. Levites' Inheritance and Cities of Refuge (ch. 35)

C'. Inheritance Laws for Daughters of Zelophehad (ch. 36)

The final way in which literary structures are important is in helping us to identify the key points the author is stressing. In this case, the structure actually points to three key passages of emphasis. In the very center of these eleven chapters is a whole chapter devoted to women's vows. From both the OT and NT we learn that vows made to God are to be taken very seriously and once made, the person can't go back on his vow. A problem arose in the patriarchal society of the time when a woman living in her father's house or a married woman made a vow (such as sacrificing an animal on the altar) but her father or husband prevented her from carrying it out. In response to this situation, God proclaimed a law excusing such women from their vows under those conditions without coming under any condemnation. However, any women living on their own were expected to carry out their vows to God without exception just like the men.

The climaxes of the two parallel ABC series are also natural places where important teachings are located. Both of these involve property rights for women and the first is in Numbers 27, our chapter for today.

Then the daughters of Zelophehad came forward...They stood before Moses, Eleazar the priest, the leaders, and all the congregation, at the entrance of the tent of meeting, and they said, “Our father died in the wilderness...Why should the name of our father be taken away from his clan because he had no son? Give to us a possession among our father's brothers.” Numbers 27:1-4

Can you image the amount of nerve it took for these five young, single women to go before all those people with their request. But Moses doesn't just dismiss their complaints.

Moses brought their case before the LORD. And the LORD spoke to Moses, saying: The daughters of Zelophehad are right in what they are saying; you shall indeed let them possess an inheritance among their father's brothers and pass the inheritance of their father on to them......It shall be for the Israelites a statute and ordinance, as the LORD commanded Moses.

So it actually established a legal precedent for the nation. That isn't the end of the story, however. It is continued nine chapters later when the girls' uncles complain to Moses: “The LORD commanded my lord to give the land for inheritance by lot to the Israelites; and my lord was commanded by the LORD to give the inheritance of our brother Zelophehad to his daughters. But if they are married into another Israelite tribe, then their inheritance will be taken from the inheritance of our ancestors and added to the inheritance of the tribe into which they marry; so it will be taken away from the allotted portion of our inheritance.” Numbers 36:2-3

Moses replies: “This is what the LORD commands concerning the daughters of Zelophehad, 'Let them marry whom they think best; only it must be into a clan of their father's tribe that they are married, so that no inheritance of the Israelites shall be transferred from one tribe to another.” Numbers 36:6-7

And the five sisters readily agree to the compromise.

“...the character of the daughters is highlighted. They are properly bold, in contrast to the cowardice of the ten spies. But they are also properly obedient, willing to limit their choices and options in service to the larger tribe...This boldness mixed with obedience safeguards the inheritance of the social reality that the land represents.” (David L. Stubbs, Numbers, pp. 248-249)

This brings up the issue of the Christian view of women today, a topic that has become rather hot since last October. During a panel discussion John MacArthur was asked what he thought of Beth Moore in two words. His comment was “Go home.” Later a number of evangelical leaders asked him to clarify his words, hoping that he would be a little less confrontational. Unfortunately, MacArthur's clarification ran as follows: “Women need to get themselves under control and realize they are not to speak in a church.”  Actually, some of the best comments I have heard in class discussions have come from the women in the class.

Unfortunately, this controversy only adds ammunition to atheists who brand the Bible as being anti-women. So I thought it might be useful to review some of the women highlighted in the Bible, and do it in the form of a quiz.

Women in the Old Testament

Who was created in God's own image: man or woman? (Genesis 1:27)

Who turned the LORD's wrath away from Moses? (Exodus 4:24-26) Zipporah

Who was the third prophet listed in the Bible, after Abraham and Aaron? Miriam

Who was the first song composer named in the Bible? (Exodus 15:20-21) Miriam (Selene knows)

Who is the only person to be judge over Israel, a prophet, and a co-general of the army” Deborah

Who co-wrote the fifth chapter of Judges? Deborah

The Book of Judges is especially known for stories in which women are oppressed, as the Christian feminist Phyllis Trible points out in her book Texts of Terror. But keep in mind that the purpose of Judges is to demonstrate in a series of repeated cycles the constant failures of God's people to live up to His commands. But in addition to these cycles, there is an overall downward trend as one proceeds through Judges. That can be illustrated in several ways, but the most obvious one is seen in the way women are portrayed.

Decline in the Time of Judges

Achsah requests and gets more land from Caleb (1:11-15): another bold woman asking for her fair rights and getting them.

Deborah judges over Israel (chs. 4-5)

Jael kills the commander of the Canaanite army by driving a tent peg through his ear when he is sleeping. (chs. 4-5)

A woman of Thebez kills the evil ruler Abimelech by dropping a millstone on his head from the top of a tower (9:50-54) These are all treated as heroes in the Bible who take forceful action when necessary.

Jephthah's daughter suffers because of her father's rash vow (11:34-40)

Samson's wife becomes a pawn between Samson and the Philistines and is treated poorly by both sides. (Judges 14-15)

A Levite throws his concubine outdoors to a gang of Benjamites in order to save himself, they rape her all night long, she dies, and then the Levite cuts her body up into 12 pieces (ch.19)

Benjamites are given permission to kidnap the women of Shiloh and force them into marriage (ch. 21)

Back to the quiz: Which two books in the Bible have a woman as the main character? Ruth and Esther

Which book spends over half its time describing the inner thoughts of a woman? Song of Solomon

Who convinced David to pay attention to the nation's concerns when he was depressed after Saul's death? Wise woman of Tekoa (2 Samuel 14:1-24)

Who saved the people of the city of Abel from being destroyed? A wise woman (2 Samuel 20) This was when David's forces were trying to capture David's enemy Sheba who had fled there. She convinced David to stop and the people of the city to hand over Sheba's head to them instead.

Which prophet did righteous King Josiah consult? Huldah (2 Kings 22)

The Book of Proverbs has been accused of dealing strictly with advice given by a father to his son. But look at how it is organized. You can see from the highlighted sections the equal prominence given here to men and women. And the first half of Chapter 31 was even written by a woman, Lemuel's mother.

The Structure of Proverbs

I. Concerning Wisdom and Wise Men (1:1-7)

    II. Warnings from a Father (1:8-3:36)

        III. The Two Ways (4:1-7:27)

            IV. Two Invitations (8:1-9:18)

                V. Four Books of Proverbs

            IV'. Skeptic Answered (30:1-6)

        III'. Agur’s Proverbs (30:7-33)

    II'. Warnings from a Mother (31:1-9)

I'. Concerning Wisdom and the Wise Woman (31:10-31)

Women in the New Testament

How many women are listed in Jesus' genealogy? 5 (Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, Bathsheba, Mary)

Who was the first Christian? We will see if you were paying attention during Hugh's last lesson. Mary, mother of Jesus (also according to the cover story of Nov. CT).

Who, according to Luther, preached the first Christian sermon? Elizabeth (Luke 1:39-45)

Who was commended by Jesus for choosing the better portion? Mary, sister of Martha (Luke 10:38-42) because she wanted to learn at the feet of Jesus. This was a rather revolutionary thing for Jesus to say considering the conventional wisdom of the ancient rabbis at the time.

“It is said, ‘Gather the men, women and children’—since the men come to learn Torah and the women come to hear, why do the children come?” Rabbi Eleazar ben Azariah (1^st cent. AD)

“Anyone who teaches his daughter Torah teaches her sexual license.” Eliezer ben Hyrcanus (1st-2^nd cent. AD)

“Women’s wisdom is solely in the spindle.” “The words of the Torah should be burned rather than entrusted to women” Jerusalem Talmud (350-400 AD)

A year ago, an Israeli Supreme Court ruling ordered a halt at last to women entering the Western Wall plaza being frisked for ritual items such as Torah scrolls. In response, the ultra-Orthodox Party has proposed a bill classifying the entire area as a holy site governed by Israel's rabbinic courts.

Who was pointed out by Jesus as a superior example of giving? (Mark 12:42) The widow and her mite

What female did Jesus compare himself to? (Matt. 23:37) “Jerusalem, Jerusalem...How often have I desired to gather your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you were not willing.”

Who stayed with Jesus when he was on the cross? John, his mother Mary, her sister, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joseph, the mother of the sons of Zebedee, Salome

Who were the first witnesses of the resurrection? Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Joseph, Mary the wife of Clopas, Joanna, and Salome

Where did the early church first meet? The house of Mary, the mother of Mark (Acts 12:12)

Were there women prophets in the NT? (Anna in Luke 2:36; It was a fulfillment of Joel's words quoted at Pentacost – Acts 2:18; Philip's four daughters in Acts 21:9; Paul says it was a regular occurrence in the early church – I Cor. 11:4-5)

Who corrected the prominent preacher Apollos' faulty theology? (Acts 18:26) Priscilla and Aquila

What titles does Paul give Phoebe in Romans 16:2? A deacon in the church and a benefactor of Paul

What is Junia's distinction? (Romans 16:7) She was a prominent apostle.

What is the church called in Revelation? The bride of Christ (Rev. 19-22; Eph. 5:25-27)

One last question. Does this quote remind you of any teaching in the NT? “Praise God who has created me a human and not beast, a man and not a woman, an Israelite and not a gentile, circumcised and not uncircumcised, free and not slave.” Rabbi Judah (2^nd cent. AD)

Variations of this prayer are still recited by Orthodox Jewish men today.

Some scholars have suggested that the Apostle Paul was alluding to an earlier version of this blessing when he declared, “There is no longer Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, neither male nor female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus.” Alternatively, Rabbi Judah may have been reacting to Paul’s words to contradict what Paul had said.

I think that the final proof of Christians' view of women comes from the November National Geographic issue of last year. They ranked 167 nations as far as women's status is concerned. They used criteria such as equal employment, access to education, freedom from violence, and strong legal rights. It is no surprise that the top 30 nations almost all had a strong Christian heritage while the bottom 60 were overwhelmingly Muslim or Hindu countries.