That first verse tells us that Balak was trying to manage
the situation to his advantage. He
allowed Balaam to see a fraction of the people, not get a true picture of the
adversary. Balaam knows better now than
to speak if the Lord has not spoken to him, it is literally a matter of life
and death. He goes apart to see what the
Lord will show him, no mention of who is this Lord of whom the prophet
speaks. When the sacrifices are done by
the king, Balaam comes and gives the word of the Lord concerning Israel, that now
the nation is not a nation but that it will be and that this is the Lord's
will. It would be folly and dangerous to
curse that which the Lord has blessed, greater folly still to come against the
nation. Why would the king want anything
other than the truth? He believed in the
power of the spoken words of the prophet to create reality. We live in a time when such nonsense is
taught in the church in the "Word faith" movement. Balaam knew that the truly prophetic was
simply speaking the words God gave him based on the vision God gave. He could accurately represent future reality
to the extent God gave him vision and words for what would be.
The parable of the tenants is plain for all to see its
meaning. Jesus tells the parable and
asks the crowd what will be the end of the story and without delay or doubt
they know the answer, “He will put those wretches to a miserable death and let
out the vineyard to other tenants who will give him the fruits in their
seasons.” The leaders knew immediately
that this parable was about them. Would
Jesus tell this parable about the church today?
What would He say of the church?
We are certainly guilty of many of the same things in the west as the
Pharisees were in Jesus' day. We set up
a celebrity pastor culture, raise barriers to entry into ministry, set our
sights on particular segments of the culture to appeal to rather than
attempting to reach all people with the Gospel, and I fear that we are failing
to give Him glory in all this. Are we
keeping the main thing the main thing or not?
Paul is clearly right, that I can delight in God's law while
at the same time living completely in contradiction to it. I can assent to the law, know it to be right,
while at the same time doing entirely the opposite. Can anyone argue that the world would be a
better place if no one hated anyone else but loved them? How about theft, adultery, no one bearing
false witness or coveting what anyone else has?
If we all had one God, particularly the one revealed in the Bible, would
there be a change in the way the world works?
If we all took one day each week and didn't work but instead
contemplated and worshipped that God would we be better or worse for the
experience? It isn't likely to happen is
it? Everyone won't play. The real question is whether we are willing
to do so. What would change if we
committed to God's plan? Our values and
attitudes might change dramatically and then our lives would change to reflect
the work of the Spirit.
No comments:
Post a Comment