Moses Died; Christ Lives

Posted on December 15, 2025 by ehurst

We had a good discussion on our weekly conference call with the Kiln of the Soul faith community (we use MS Teams). One of the things that came up yesterday was regarding the Decalogue (Ten Commandments). They are the soul of the Covenant of Moses. Paul taught that we must examine the Covenant of Moses in order to understand what is required of us today in following Christ. At the same time, he said we are not constrained by it.

Jesus corrected the false impressions people had about what Moses actually required. In the process, He pointed out how Moses was limited to its context: that people, that time, that place. So, for example, Jesus said that Moses made divorce and polygamy too easy because Hebrew men were horn dogs. They were generally incapable of what God intended in the first place via faithful monogamy.

In the end, the Covenant of Moses died on the Cross. The mission inherent in the Old Covenant was passed on to a New Covenant that ignores national identity. It’s not Israel the nation, but Israel the mission of divine revelation. The Ten Commandments are not for us as followers of Christ.

Indeed, the Decalogue never applied to Gentiles in the first place. If we need to cite a law code, it’s Noah. It’s not as simple as a point-by-point comparison of Noah versus Moses. Both assumed a tribal lifestyle and there is some obvious overlap. However, Noah is far more generic, and can be applied to the individual without a covenant identity, whereas Moses cannot.

Tribal social structure is one thing; a covenant community is much more than that.

I did a series here discussing the implications of the Ten Commandments for us as Christians (intro, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and conclusion). And we have endless studies in the Seven Noachide Laws and the covenant in general in the archives on this blog. For a quick reference, see this post, where the seven laws are listed.

Notice a couple of things: Lying is not prohibited in Noah. We know that lying is a sin, but the Hebrew concept of lying bears little resemblance to the western legal imagery. A more accurate rendering of “thou shalt not bear false witness” is based on the motive of afflicting your covenant brothers and sisters for no good reason. Simply using words to convey inaccurate data is not the point. Noah doesn’t mention this because it excludes the concept of a covenant community.

Giving false data to people is not inherently wrong. It may be foolish to deceive, but it’s a tactical issue, not a moral one. We’ve discussed before how basic civility requires that you discern whether someone you encounter deserves an honest report. Did you forget “pearls before swine”? How about privacy — “It’s none of your business”? And then there’s diplomacy in which we candy-coat or ignore unpleasant facts to avoid conflict. What does God say you owe the person before you? If they aren’t spiritual family or allies, it might be appropriate to treat them as swine: Give them what it takes to pacify so they don’t attack you.

How about “honor your father and mother”? The Hebrew concept for “honor” here is to “make ponderous” in the sense of important, a big deal. In ancient Israel, that naturally included obedience as part of reverence. However, as you move into adulthood, it would mean acting even better than your parents taught you. Make people believe that your parents “raised you right”.

That’s missing from Noah. That’s because honoring your parents outside of the covenant nation might mean something quite different. For a believer who is forsaking their pagan heritage, you would naturally become disobedient to your parents. It’s no different here in America, where a churchly upbringing might be quite far from a genuine biblical orientation. I can assure you that I have greatly departed from my own father’s ways and reject my mother’s religion. While I don’t dishonor my parents, the concept of “honoring” them simply does not apply because I’m more concerned with honoring Christ.

Churches have abused the Ten Commandments to burden their members in particular, and the world in general, with moral demands that are not actually Christian. We can learn a great deal from Moses, but it simply does not apply to us who walk in Christ.

Posted in teaching | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Poking God in the Eye

Posted on December 13, 2025 by ehurst

Re: Naked Bible 115: Ezekiel 6; supplementary papers on High Places and Idols

Basic principle: God will get what He wants. He made it painfully obvious from the very start that He would have a human family to represent Him in this world. Whether or not the descendants of Israel will be involved depends on their willingness to embrace faithful adherence to His Covenant. The Covenant of Christ assumes this as the foundation; it need not have been restated at the Last Seder because it was the fundamental law from the beginning of divine revelation back in the Garden of Eden. At the very least it became painfully obvious when God told Abraham to sacrifice Isaac. Even if you feel you are being jerked around, you must remain loyal and act on what He says. It has not changed; His sovereignty is absolute.

The Covenant with the Nation of Israel was conditional for them. There were ample warnings of what would happen if they strayed. Both the blessings and the curses were manifested in OT History. Eventually, they were kicked out of the land and into exile. Once they were there, Ezekiel declared to them why this had to happen. The problem was idolatry; Israel did not stay faithful to Jehovah alone as He very plainly insisted.

The linked podcast turns into a study of two issues that lack clarity for most western Christians: high places and the idolatry that took place at them.

The term typically translated as “high places” (Hebrew: bamot pl. and bama sing.) was a generic term referring to places that had been modified for use in ritual devotion. It wasn’t always pagan. There was a period of time prior to the Monarchy when it was appropriate to seek Jehovah at high places devoted solely to His name. It was during David’s reign that a singular location was selected as the place where Jehovah would “put His name”. This made all those high places obsolete. Thus, a primary activity of any King of Israel/Judah would be to destroy those places regardless who was worshiped there.

Thus, in the OT narrative in the Book of Judges, the Tabernacle was not the sole place to seek Jehovah. From the time of the Patriarchs, those who worshiped Jehovah might put up an altar wherever they lived. Nothing in the narrative condemns this up through the time of David. However, once the Temple was built, it was declared the only location. The problem Ezekiel points to is that even Solomon himself then went back and constructed high places for his wives to worship foreign deities.

Thus, prophets keep prodding the succeeding kings to take down the high places because there was no good reason for any of them. In the end, King Josiah finally obeyed this command, destroying the high places still left over from Solomon’s reign, along with the shrines of Jeroboam.

In passing, Heiser notes that the Hebrew term (qaṭ•ṭə•rîm) is typically translated as “incense altars”. However, it’s more likely referring to the structures built to protect the pagan shrines. He chases down the etymology of the Hebrew word, if you are interested, but most English translations get this wrong.

Equally controversial is the term Ezekiel uses (ḡil•lū•lîm) usually translated as “idols” because of the context, but the etymology is uncertain despite what you might read from the usual layman study sources. Most of those sources guess that there is a Hebrew word (galol “stele”) behind it that no one has found anywhere, to be honest, neither in Hebrew nor any other Semitic language. Some have wondered if it is one of those words where the Hebrews switched up some letters from a shaming word and combined the two to make a propaganda term. For example, the name Ishbaal (“man of Baal”) was changed to Ishboseth (“man of shame”) in the Scripture text to shame the name of Baal. Jewish scholars insist gillulim comes from a combination of words, one of which refers to feces.

Ezekiel is notorious for that kind of blunt, and sometimes even obscene, language.

The big thing about idolatry is not so much that random people here and there go after false gods. Ezekiel and the other prophets specifically condemn what Heiser calls “state-sponsored” idolatry. This is the stuff the kings ignored or even supported. Heiser refers to an article by Jacob Milgrom that I found on Z-Library if you are interested.* The article notes that after the Northern Kingdom was exiled, the prophets became even more insistent about idolatry. The reason is that there was simply no longer any excuse.

Samaria didn’t have the Temple; Judah did, along with the Davidic Dynasty. The big problem is that the population during 700s and 600s BC didn’t find things like worship of Moloch or communication with the dead against the Covenant. They could go to the Temple along with those other things and there was no problem. This was a serious mistake the prophets sought to correct. The leadership of Judah felt that they had God backed into a corner. He couldn’t destroy Jerusalem without damaging His reputation; the Temple and Davidic Dynasty were there.

Ezekiel reminds his audience in Babylonian Exile that the only God ever cared about was loyalty. The people in and around Jerusalem didn’t hide their idolatry because the leadership didn’t make it a priority to squelch it. Thus, during the reign of Manasseh, he completely reverses all the work of Hezekiah. Manasseh didn’t just let stuff go bad; he paid for pagan idolatry shrines to be built and maintained in the Temple courts. What people did in private was bad enough, but not enough by itself to bring God’s wrath. Rather, it was the leadership of the nation that broke everything. Worst of all, they did all of this knowingly, poking God in the eye.

* “The Nature and Extent of Idolatry in Eighth-Seventh Century Judah” by Jacob Milgrom; Hebrew Union College Annual, Vol. 69 (1998), pp. 1-13

Posted in bible | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Poking God in the Eye

The One Thing They Don’t Have

Posted on December 10, 2025 by ehurst

It has been tough for me; I have no doubt it’s tough for a lot of others.

Perhaps the hardest thing for a believer from a western background is to embrace the primacy of peace with God over everything else mentioned in Scripture. It is the ultimate prize. It’s the one thing you can obtain in this life that you can take with you when you leave this life. Thus, it’s only natural you should realize that if you have nothing else in this life, shalom is more than enough by itself.

This is why we can put up with misfortune and testing. This is how we can watch sinners prosper materially, because we know they are going to Hell. Not with a sneer, but with tears of joy we realize they don’t know what they are missing.

Why did God send the Patriarchs into Egypt? Because the alternative was even worse. Why did He let them endure slavery? It guaranteed they would be dependent on Him alone. It was in their best interest. Why did they endure the harsh testing of slavery? Because it was critical that He should humble Egypt and elevate His chosen nation by His hand alone, not by any deeds they might do. Why did He force them to wander in the Wilderness? Because the generation of the Exodus was too whiny and unable to conquer Palestine. It took a fresh generation to be ready for the battles.

All of the things He did for them by His own hand — they kept rejecting His peace in favor of a bowl of pottage. They took after Esau, who was rejected. Recount the Wilderness Temptations Jesus faced with the Devil. Those were things the people of Israel kept chasing, not peace with God. All the wanted was pampering: bread in the wilderness, miraculous powers to wow everyone, and political rule over the human race. They expected God to exempt them from the consequences of the Fall. They didn’t want peace with God, but demanded He give those worldly symbols as the price of their cooperation. Those things the Devil offered? Biblical scholarship knows them as the False Messianic Expectations.

But because of their rejection of shalom, it is now offered to us on very generous terms. Just submit to Jesus as your feudal master. Granted, that Covenant often does bring some measure of material prosperity, some authority to keep away threats, and a bit of leverage with people outside the Covenant. But the primary focus is not that stuff, but peace with God. That’s the one thing no human agency can give or take away from us.

Don’t resent what others have. Pity them when they don’t have shalom.

Posted in sanity | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Humiliation Has Its Place

Posted on December 7, 2025 by ehurst

We are encouraged to approach every task with humility and open dependence on God. The Lord gets what He wants and no one has standing to object to His wishes. He doesn’t always tell us His plans because our foreknowledge could provoke us to mess it up. Sometimes, the real mission is to demonstrate how a servant of God handles surprises. If you are humble before Him, you are always in a good position to face failures.

His mission for you is to try; success is in His hands. And you make the attempt based on His calling and commission, not your own wisdom. Some may say you look the fool when it fails, but the real folly is thinking that human success matters. The Bible repeatedly warns against trying to help fools understand. It’s fools who always make the most noise about things that don’t matter.

The human lust for control of outcomes is easily the greatest folly of all. Scripture takes pains to make it clear that human outcomes have no value whatsoever. The only thing that matters is what God wants from any situation. We know that it’s all about His glory; it’s not about us at all. Therefore, the focus is always on procedure and process, not product. That’s the focus of divine revelation for mortal humans. We do things the right way, and let God worry about the results.

We must be careful to stay in the role God appoints for us and never presume to be more.

The other day, I ran across this video featuring John Kiriakou. Over the years since he first appeared on my radar (roughly twenty years ago), I’ve come to trust him for what he has to say about government in general. He was a solid CIA spy who drew the line at something that went very wrong at the agency — torture. In the video, he summarizes what happened, the stand he took, and the price he paid. What he reveals about the CIA is consistent with my experience, though I’m not at liberty to discuss all the particulars. When you consider where he’s coming from, there’s no reason to doubt his testimony.

One of the points Kiriakou raises is that torture never works. He’s referring to its use for interrogation. He’s right about that. There is simply too much clinical evidence that backs his contention.

However, we also know that information may not be the point. Kiriakou notes that a good CIA agent has sociopathic tendencies without being a full sociopath. But he doesn’t connect that with another issue we can sense in the furor over torture: Sometimes torture is used simply for the entertainment of the torturers. What happened at Abu Ghraib had little to do with obtaining information and everything to do with spite and the desire to humiliate. That’s what was so nasty about it.

In the full context of Scripture, that kind of motivation is blatantly Satanic. This is not merely the human lust to control the outcomes of interrogation, but a deeply wicked desire to cause suffering for the sheer pleasure of lording it over someone else.

So, what do we make of King David’s actions in 2 Samuel 8:2? His choices were clear and meaningful to Israelis and the surrounding nations. It was not torture, but grisly executions. It was not meant to make them suffer, but to assert a dominance according to God’s calling and commission. The symbolism of his acts won’t mean much to us. Keep in mind that David’s great-grandmother Ruth came from Moab. We know that Saul insanely persecuted David, who left his parents with Moab’s royal family to protect them. Tradition says the Moabites eventually betrayed David and murdered his parents, so this has a lot to do with David’s actions later. You cannot afford to leave out the full context in seeking to understand David’s actions.

Nothing in Scripture or tradition tags David’s actions as out of line. How else could he convince the surrounding kingdoms, not to mention the surviving Moabites, that Jehovah was superior to their filthy deities? It was not about David’s glory, but Jehovah’s. That’s how it was done in those days. How would we do it these days? I don’t believe we would or should operate that way today under Christ.

How many ordinary Americans would say that some people deserve to be humiliated? That some deserve a slow and painful death for their awful crimes? I’m sure you could get most people to offer a list of what crimes warrant such treatment. But I’m equally sure you won’t get nearly as many people who would approve of torment for the sick pleasure of seeing people suffer. That’s not the kind humiliation we would approve of these days, and it certainly should be illegal. Even those guilty of executing such torment deserve better treatment than that.

The real question is not what they deserve, but what we must do in order to avoid falling off the cliff of moral wickedness. Let’s be clear: The American government is irredeemable. That’s part of Kiriakou’s point in that video. For example, his comments about how the US treats China is correct; it’s rooted in sheer stupidity. Nonetheless, there are things my government could ask me to do that I’m still quite willing to do simply because it’s consistent with my calling and commission. During his training, Kiriakou suggested he would be willing to burgle foreign government offices in pursuit of information that might help the US government understand their policies. I see no problem with that.

But this is not a reflection of sociopathic tendencies; it’s recognizing the difference between my tribe versus an outside tribe. The Bible is all about tribalism as part of God’s requirements for humans in this world. America is my tribe in a very limited sense. The average American has little grasp of God’s priorities and doesn’t care; they read their own priorities back into the Bible. Even when you point out the vast difference between traditional American values versus those revealed in the Bible, using a full load of scholarship to prove it, Americans typically insist on clinging to their false image of God.

America was founded on rejecting God’s priorities. In the drift since then, she has gotten only farther from revelation. Today, our US government commits atrocities and supports Israel committing even worse atrocities. Kiriakou protested the shift in government policy that violates his values, but I won’t bother. Protest and activism are pointless, though denunciation is clearly warranted.

It’s not as if I imagine I have standing to reject America’s social and political system, but that I cannot serve God without making some distinctions. America need not worry about me, but must face the humiliation of God’s wrath — coming soon.

Posted in teaching | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Uniquely Wrong

Posted on December 6, 2025 by ehurst

I’ve been asked to provide a broader scriptural background for my teaching about Jews. I’ll try to summarize critical parts of the Bible for this.

You may recall the story of King Josiah. He succeeded to the throne after Manasseh’s long paganized reign and the short, paganized reign of his father, Amon. Josiah was just the opposite of those two, having a strong zeal for Jehovah. He ordered repairs to the Temple. During the process, they stumbled across one or more of the Books of Moses, which had not been seen in at least half a century. When it was read before Josiah, he tore his robe in shock and penitence. Unsure if the text was genuine, he commanded a prophet be consulted.

That turned out to be Huldah, a prophetess. She declared (2 Kings 22:14-20) that it was the Word of God, and that the warnings God declared therein were going to fall on Judah. However, Josiah would not see the wrath first hand. Instead, it came after he died in battle.

Babylon was the agent of that wrath. We have the prophecies of Jeremiah and Ezekiel, among others, fully and eloquently declaring God’s wrath as justified by the sins of the nation. Both prophets lament the hardness of heart amply displayed by the people’s actions, rejecting the warnings.

Fast forward to Stephen in his defense before the Sanhedrin (Acts 7). He recounts the long history of Israel, ignoring the grand privilege of being the one and only Chosen Nation of Jehovah, rescued from the fate of all the other nations turned over to the Divine Council at Babylon. Every step of the way, the people kept fighting God’s plans for them, not least starting at the foot of Mount Sinai with the Golden Calf. Who can comprehend the heartbreak Moses endured with the nation during the exodus?

Stephen briefly refers to the messy path of the Conquest, the rise of the Davidic Dynasty, and how Israel never quite understood that the Temple was purely symbolic. Jeremiah noted that it was the existence of the Temple that made them so arrogant, suggesting they had Jehovah over a barrel, since His house was in Jerusalem. How could He destroy His own home?

Then Stephen lowers the boom: The Sanhedrin were no better than Israel during the worst periods of her history. They kept pushing away the Holy Spirit and rejecting God’s will for their own fleshly desires. Here they were, rejecting His own Son as their promised Messiah. They didn’t even know God anymore. It was like the Sin of Jeroboam again, raising up an image of some false deity more to their liking and calling it “Jehovah”.

In Matthew 11, John the Baptist sent a pair of his disciples to Jesus. His cousin John was in prison by then, knowing he would die soon, and wanted reassurance it would come for the right reason. Had John ministered in vain? By no means; Jesus pointed out how He fulfilled the prophecies about the Messiah. Then, He turned around and praised John to the crowd near Him.

Yet, the Jewish leadership said John had a demon and Jesus was a sinner. Jesus chose a trio of towns near His current residence – Chorazin, Capernaum and Bethsaida. They symbolized the Jewish rejection of Jesus’ answer to the same question John had asked. Had Jesus been sent to the Gentiles first, like Tyre and Sidon, they would have embraced His miracles and repented immediately. Even Sodom would have responded more readily to the gospel message.

In John 8, Jesus warned the Pharisees how wrong they were about everything. They didn’t have a clue about the God who had chosen them. Instead, they had made the Devil their father (verse 44). They had left the Covenant of Moses in the dust long ago, substituting their own fleshly desires in its place. In Revelation 2:8-9 and 3:7-9, John says they were the synagogue of Satan. The religion of Judaism/Talmudism is simply the doctrine of the Pharisees carried forward.

The Covenant of Moses was nailed to the Cross. It was finished. God moved all His operations over to the Kingdom of His Son. Now, Jews must renounce their heritage, same as the Gentiles, in order to enter the Covenant of Christ. Paul insists they have one advantage: It was their home first. If they truly submit to the Messiah, they are welcomed as long-lost family. We cannot justify any bitterness toward them once they enter. By the same token, neither can they justify contempt for us Gentiles who submit to Christ as Lord.

Many Christian scholars have dug through the Talmud. There is a mountain of evidence that Judaism asserts that Gentiles are less than human. Oddly enough, secular/atheistic Jewish people still hold to that one doctrine. As far as they are concerned, the only way a Gentile deserves to live is as a slave of Jews. Their accusations of “anti-Semitism” refer simply to our failure to prostrate ourselves at their feet. Rare is the person of Jewish heritage who is humble enough to hold themselves accountable to the same standards they hold forth for Gentiles.

We will not worship them, but we will welcome them home. Until they humble themselves under Christ’s reign, we will watch and declare their wicked plans for the rest of the world and their spite for Christian faith in particular.

Posted in teaching | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Uniquely Wrong

Not Flying Saucers

Posted on November 29, 2025 by ehurst

Ref: Naked Bible 112: Ezekiel 1 & Ezekiel 1 PDF

I assure you that this really does require the companion PDF from Heiser. This is an academic study on the imagery of the Ancient Near East (ANE) in general and the Hebrews in particular. The supplementary PDF includes images from Mesopotamian archaeology to help the reader understand where Ezekiel’s imagery comes from. This addresses one of Heiser’s hobby horses – Zecharia Sitchen and his ilk. The Hebrew prophets did not describe literally what they saw in visions, as westerners might do; they described their visions in ritual terminology and imagery. As a fan of antiquities (cultural artifacts and symbols found in archaeology), this is a big thing for me, as well.

First, we note that the vision in Ezekiel 1 is the same basic vision as in Chapter 10. The differences have to do with Ezekiel’s visual orientation and some other factors. For example, the list of the figures’ faces who were moving the chariot are in a different order. Each face is always oriented on the same cardinal points of the compass. There are four faces on the figures, and you’ll need to refer to the pictures in the supplement: a human face on the south, a lion on the west, an eagle on the north, and a cherub/bull on the west. In the first vision, Ezekiel is facing north, so the southern face is what he sees first. In the second vision, Ezekiel eventually moves around to the doorway of the Temple (8:16) which is oriented to the east, so he’s facing west and the eastern face of the figures floating above the doorway is what he sees first.

It’s not that hard, folks.

The chapter opens with Ezekiel declaring when his visions began. His remark about the thirtieth year is most likely his own age. Verses 2-3 were added by some editor who explains when that thirtieth year was, which we calculate to be about 593 BC.

The imagery of four faces, human bodies with wings, and bovine legs and hooves were common in Babylon itself, not to mention among the Hebrews, given the description of the Tabernacle furnishings from Moses and from Solomon’s Temple. What Ezekiel sees is the divine courts of God, the Heavenly Temple from which Moses took his design of the Tabernacle. Several significant figures in Scripture were known to have been granted visions of the divine courts in Heaven. This is where the Elohim Council would be seen gathered in God’s Presence. Those who read this prophecy are supposed to understand that. There in Babylon, the same God ruled over all things.

Much the same can be said of the storm imagery in verse 4. There’s nothing new here; Moses met God in stormy clouds on Mount Sinai. It’s a common ritual image for God to be encountered in a storm to steal the thunder of various pagan storm deities. This is not gleaming metal and roaring engines of a flying saucer.

The next section describes the flying throne borne by the cherubim. While images across the ANE vary some, the Bible seems consistent in suggesting that cherubim resembled hybrid human-bulls by default. Refer again to the supplement for pictures that will help to clarify. Those images come from Mesopotamian archaeology, so they were common to both Babylonian and Hebrew rituals. Both Abraham and Jethro carried a Mesopotamian background in their worship of Jehovah.

The description of the Tabernacle has two cherubim on the Mercy Seat and two more on either side of the Ark – four in total. Thus, Ezekiel sees four in his vision. They were envisioned as bodyguards primarily for kings and deities in the ANE. In this case, they also carry the throne of God. However, the throne happens to be in a chariot. You’ll find lots of wheel imagery in the Tabernacle/Temple, in Ezekiel, Daniel, etc. It’s the symbol of mobility, and the wheels Ezekiel saw were capable of swiveling as needed. However, the propulsion was the cherubim.

As Heiser warns, don’t impose a literal meaning to the imagery by suggesting what that might look like to us. Everyone reading this book, Hebrew or Babylonian, would have understood the imagery as the throne of Jehovah. It echoes what Moses and the elders saw on Mount Sinai (Exodus 24). All the symbolism of what they saw of a humanoid figure dressed in a certain way was common across the ANE.

And if that throne imagery happens to include a rainbow, it’s not just decoration. It hearkens back to the Code of Noah, the default law of God for all of humanity (Gentiles, the Nations, etc.). It should also bring to mind the Second Rebellion of the Watchers and the Nephilim being crushed and in prison in the Abyss (AKA, Tartarus, Hades, etc.). God is faithful; He is not a negligent ruler, though His time frame is not like ours. We are obliged to meet Him on His terms. This is the God of Israel who is also the God of all Creation.

And the source of luminescence in this vision of Ezekiel is the same from Genesis to Revelation: God’s own Presence. The only reason the throne glows is because of Him, the source of all light (AKA, truth).

A main point of all this is to remind readers that what seems boring to us in reading a detailed description of this imagery wherever it appears in the Bible is critically important. You want to understand John’s Revelation? It’s all here in Ezekiel, Daniel, Moses, etc. For example, do you recall that Solomon’s Temple had a chariot in it (1 Chronicles 28:11-18; 1 Kings 7:13-36)? That Temple still stood at the time Ezekiel prophesied, so he borrows from all the imagery that Judeans would recognize.

A secondary point is that astrology did have an influence in Hebrew culture and in the Bible. Not the garbage today that claims to be astrology, but the science of the ancients. They did not distinguish astronomy from astrology. For the Hebrews in particular, the only reason for studying the lights in the sky was because God sometimes chose to speak that way. Remember the Magi? We cannot bind God from using such things as astrological observations or the common imagery of the ANE just because we find it superstitious froo-froo. God speaks as He chooses, not as we demand.

The message of Ezekiel to the Jews in Babylonian exile is that Jehovah is still God. They are in a bad situation, but that’s their own fault, not God’s. He’s still on His throne. In due time, He will give them a chance to recover what they lost from His covenant promises. How far they can accomplish that is up to them in their faithfulness.

Posted in bible | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Not Flying Saucers

Prayer Fatigue

Posted on November 24, 2025 by ehurst

Somehow, I’m pretty sure people in the Ancient Near East (ANE) didn’t suffer from prayer fatigue. The point of difference here is epistemological. That is, it has to do with the differences in basic assumptions about life and reality in general. Those people were used to the idea of supplicating superiors for the necessities of life, based on the assumptions that the supplicant was only serving the superior’s agenda in the first place.

The core failure for us is our deep conditioning in favor of individualism. We have an instinct to wonder how God feels about things in terms of how we feel about them. Does God get bored as easily as we do? Such a question would never occur to someone in the ANE. For the ANE mind, it was all about the protocols of service. How you felt about things didn’t matter. The necessities of existing in a feudal universe trumped everything.

The ANE mind would start from the basic assumption of duty to the Sovereign. What did He say He wanted? “Call on me.” The core issue is the Sovereign’s reputation, the utter necessity of creating an awareness of His greatness (i.e. glory). Surely that simple command comes with a very expanded set of implications. The whole point is confessing and operating on the foundation of our dependence. This is anathema in the West, but was never questioned in the ANE. It simply would never occur to them that life independent of the Sovereign was even possible, and they would point to demonstrations to the contrary.

The only question was the identity of your sovereign.

Does God know what you need? Silly question; of course He does. He designed us and made us. Why does He still require us to call on Him for those things? It’s protocol. For our own sakes, we must renew in our minds our utter dependence on Him. Maybe you don’t need to present a detailed list of requests, but the fundamental truth of our dependence on Him must be emphasized over and over, all day long. No, it won’t hurt to mention the specific items that come to mind, if you can discern that it helps your flesh stay in submission to Him.

There will come those times when certain specifics do take a central place. In the context, it would be quite moving to remind ourselves that the issue of the moment is to trust Him for His promises. The emotions aren’t necessary; they should be a byproduct of faith. It’s all too easy to find examples of people whipping up emotion in the same way they put on the correct uniform for the occasion. I know I don’t worship that way; it strikes me as fakery because of my western background. I can’t change that, but at the same time, I know that ANE cultures would do this to some degree, simply putting on the appropriate expression for the context.

We cannot remake ourselves; only God can do that. This brings us to a final point: Prayer must follow convictions. I cannot make prayer real for you, especially in writing. Maybe if you stood next to me as I prayed aloud, you might catch something very real, but the whole point here is to help you explore things that might not occur to you. Yes, I do have a stage presence; that’s part of my calling. Still, a critical issue here is that you know your calling in Christ.

To pray for others is an act of mercy — even more so if they get to hear you offering prayers on their behalf. It’s powerful; it builds their faith, their sense of dependence. But it’s easy to get lost on the huge number of requests you might be handed. Yes, a lot of people are just playing a “me too” game. It turns out that lifting such people to God results in His glory, not necessarily their wishes coming true. I can’t change social habits with a wave of my hand.

On the one hand, I’ll suggest you keep a prayer list, whether on paper or electronically. On the other hand, your convictions will know when God says you can remove specific items from that list. It has little to do with the physical realities of whether the item has changed. It has everything to do with you obeying the leading of the Spirit in your own heart.

On the one hand, we would consider it rude to refuse a prayer request without having a prophetic word about the issue at hand. Yes, God can tell you right off He isn’t going to entertain intercession on some things. On the other hand, most such issues warrant only a single mention, and I’d suggest you pray about those things right then and there. Wait to see if the Lord brings it back to your mind. Some people have more time in their mission for praying over every little thing, while others get their praying in as they go throughout the day.

My prayer life is largely organic. Sometimes I feel a call to stop and concentrate on praying. Most of the day, I simply have an internal conversation with God that never stops. I sense His immediate Presence in a very real sense, as if He were sitting near me, walking by me, or even riding a bike beside me when I’m out training or traveling. I never lose the sense of Him being nearby. I depend on that for a sense of normalcy.

As with all things, the underlying rule is always a matter of conviction. This trumps all reality. This world is a lie; His Presence is the ultimate reality.

Posted in prayer | Tagged , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Going Down to a High Place

Posted on November 22, 2025 by ehurst

Ref: Naked Bible 110: Q&A 15

One of the questions addressed in this podcast episode is worth our attention. It addresses the narrative in 2 Kings 2:23-24 where Elisha encounters some boys who insult him and, after he curses them, they are mauled by bears. If you are interested in the scholarly footnotes, you can listen to the podcast or download the transcript here.

The first thing we run into is the perplexing statement that Elisha “goes down” from Gilgal to Bethel. This follows the scene where Elijah and Elisha cross the Jordan, in which the elder prophet slaps the water with his cloak and the river stops flowing. They cross on the dry bed. Elijah then is taken up alive in a flaming chariot, dropping his cloak in the process. Elisha comes back across the Jordan and performs the same miracle using Elijah’s cloak to stop the flow again.

The location is very near the rebuilt Jericho. The campsite Israel used during their initial act of conquest just north of the city mound is called Gilgal. It is from here that Elisha starts a long hike up the wadi toward Bethel, the route used when Joshua leads the attacks on Ai. This is the notorious site of the paganized shrine Jeroboam built to prevent the population of the Northern Kingdom going back down to worship at Jerusalem.

The shrine featured a golden calf, hearkening back to the sin of Israel at the foot of Mount Sinai. They referred to that idol as the visible mount ridden by the invisible Jehovah. Jeroboam did the same thing, referring to the shrine as a temple of Jehovah recast in the image of Baal. Nonetheless, when someone faithful to the Law of Moses, such as Elijah and Elisha, used the name “Jehovah” everyone knew the difference. Tone of voice and sarcasm worked in Hebrew same as English.

The shrine at Bethel also featured idols for other deities, so the whole place was regarded as filthy. Bethel stood atop a high hill just west of the central ridge highway running from Jerusalem northward into Samaria. It was literally and figuratively a “high place” in the sense of the pagan shrine. If Elisha was faithful to the true God of Israel, then the author of our biblical text could not resist referring to this long climb as “going down” because it led to a place of shameful defilement.

Once again, it’s standard Hebrew symbolism with a big dose of sarcasm. This was not a reference to literal geography, but spiritual geography. It wouldn’t matter where you started, anytime you headed toward Bethel you were “going down” to a filthy pagan shrine, a node of deep spiritual darkness staining the ground of the Promised Land. It is polemical, even propaganda, if you will, but coming from the Jehovah’s side of things.

This contrasts with the common reference of idolaters “going up” to Bethel’s shrine to worship. We have two competing systems of religion at work here. This shows up throughout the narrative running from Deuteronomy through 2 Kings. That whole section of the Bible seems to have been produced in its final form by the same bunch of editors who were thoroughly nationalist in favor of David’s dynasty and the Law of Moses. Elijah is a mirror image of Moses, while Elisha is like Joshua. Thus, the narratives of these books are filled with this sort of symbolic reference.

Now, the reference to boys means literally kiddos under 12. However, it is also used figuratively of any male who is not yet married and head of his own household. In particular, the term is used for royal or noble sons who are still residing in his father’s home. That word was used to label David at the battle with Goliath. He was not a kid, but a young adult with few opportunities to distinguish himself as the youngest of eight brothers. The term also referred to Rehoboam’s youthful noble advisors, his peers when he first took the throne.

These fellows who confronted Elisha on the wadi road were most likely associated with the royal household of the Northern Kingdom, perhaps including priestly sons, as well. Who would be surprised if such a gang was quite partisan in favor of the royal household? The ideological zeal of young men up through age 30 is still a trope today that shows up in books, TV and movie shows.

Notice that they number 42, the same body count we get from Jehu’s slaughter of the royal sons of the House of Omri a few chapters later in the same narrative. The symbolism of the number is related to any very dark time. Thus, it’s the number of months in a time of tribulation (3.5 years). This incident with Elisha is portrayed like a divine decree.

Calling Elisha “baldy” is the mocking contrast to the hairy Elijah, his teacher. One was fuzzy and the other baldy, but both were notorious for harassing the ruling clans of the Northern Kingdom. Both were worthy of ridicule. This was the whole point of these young men. It’s the polar opposite of Elisha’s reception with the Sons of the Prophets down in Jericho earlier.

Also, in typical Hebrew fashion, demanding twice that Elisha “go up” and join himself to the royal cult is an expression of emphasis. The concept of doubling something in Hebrew language often signals such. The divine response was that two bears carried out the punishment, an emphatic statement from God that these boys were way out of line.

Technically speaking, because the bears performed this slaughter at the word of Elisha, he could be held accountable for murder. And it wasn’t just any young men, but a substantial portion of the ruling clans of the Northern Kingdom. Elisha is just God’s first attack aiming to dismantle the Omride Dynasty. It’s not a random act of Elisha getting angry.

Posted in bible | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Going Down to a High Place

Obeying the Law of Christ

Posted on November 20, 2025 by ehurst

Following Christ is not just a religion.

We have long noted that Judaism is also not just a religion. Recently we were reminded of this in the words of Sarah Hurwitz. At a meeting of Jewish Federations of North America General Assembly, she said: “We’re a nation. Civilization. Tribe. Peoplehood. But most of all we’re a family.”

If you bothered to understand Islam, you’d find it’s the same thing. To be a Muslim is to embrace a whole identity. It’s not just a religion but a way of life that changes your entire human existence. This is a major complaint westerners have with both Judaism and Islam, that these people refuse to assimilate.

Yet, this is precisely what following Christ is supposed to be. We should totally dis-assimiliate from the society around us in every way.

Western Civilization is notorious for compartmentalization of the human soul. There’s politics, economics, science, education, business, entertainment, etc. All of these are supposed to be handled as separate subjects of study, and that includes your faith. Each has its own rules and boundaries, and you shouldn’t confuse them in your decisions.

This is why so few western Christians are actually following Christ. Jesus stated flatly that following Him wasn’t the most important thing — it was the only thing. Once you submit to Him as Lord, He owns every particle of your being. Granted, He taught that it could take the rest of your life bringing the various parts of yourself under His authority, but that was the goal.

White people in particular are very bad at this. The fundamental law of following Christ is making your fellow Christians a tribe, your brothers and sisters. We excel at the rhetoric, but utterly fail at the execution. When was the last time you went to the home of someone in your church and shared a meal? When was the last time you went with them to any event outside of the church house? The Christian ideal in the New Testament was living in each other’s armpits.

If you spend every waking hour in the company of your covenant community, it should still feel like it’s not enough time together. We should all long for the time we could share a single residence, day and night. That’s what tribalism means, and it’s a natural feature of biblical covenant faith. It’s behind the meaning of what Christ said to His disciples at the Last Seder: “Love each other as I have loved you.”

Have we forgotten this refers to the way they spent the previous three years following Him around? They walked together, ate together and stayed in the same quarters wherever Jesus wandered. He tolerated their foibles and petty disputes and still wanted them with Him.

We aren’t obeying the Law of Christ very well.

Posted in teaching | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Obeying the Law of Christ

Alliance with Hell

Posted on November 18, 2025 by ehurst

We are obliged to do what we can to learn the Hebrew outlook in reading the Bible. While there is plenty of Scripture that remains a matter of debate, some things are quite clear.

The Law of Moses mentions Gentiles living among the people of Israel. We know that the nation of Israel was an eastern feudal-tribal society. Given that, what would be required of these Gentiles? The record is clear: They adhered to the Law of Noah. These Gentiles were feudal dependents, tolerated on the grounds that they agreed to live by the Code of Noah.

This also applied to any group of people who surrendered in battle. Once they laid down their weapons, they were subjected to the Code of Noah as terms of surrender. Thus, we have several tribes living under King David — Jebusites, for example — whose property rights were guarded by the king. David paid a hefty cash sum to the Jebusite Arauna/Ornan for a threshing floor on the ridge above what was then David’s fortress. It was later the site of the Temple.

Further, King David had no trouble feeding a starving Egyptian slave left behind by a fleeing enemy. This slave was treated well simply on the basis of a provisional surrender. He was hardly a threat, and wholly without inclination to cause David any trouble (1 Samuel 30:7-17).

The difference between Moses and Noah made these observant Gentiles second-class residents. They were not granted all same privileges. Nonetheless, in regard to general treatment, Israelis were required to treat these observant Gentiles with a measure of respect as allies. This is reflected in Leviticus 19, among other passages.

It’s a general discussion of what is necessary to keep peace with Jehovah. This passage seeks to instill a sense of honor and high social trust. When you get to verses 33 and following, you can read a very blunt requirement that observant Gentiles be included in this social structure. Don’t harass them; don’t treat them as captive enemies.

It’s a fundamental principle of divine revelation: We are supposed to seek peaceful coexistence. There are plenty of people who are threats, and the Bible is loaded with rules on handling them. But it shouldn’t require a lot of complicated instructions for someone who is not your enemy.

When Palestinian women, children and old people surrender and queue up at feeding sites, they are not Israel’s enemies. There is no excuse for what the IDF is doing today in Gaza.

As a part of the narrative interview with an America military retiree who worked in Gaza, the man recounted an order from the on-site IDF commander for snipers to shoot children who had been placed atop a wall to keep them from getting crushed by the desperate crowd jostling in line for food. This was consistent with the obvious design of the whole program to lure starving Gazans to the feeding sites precisely so they could be slaughtered.

The US government claims Israel as an ally. Given that Israel is so clearly defying God and serving Satan, does that make the US allies with Hell?

Posted in teaching | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Alliance with Hell