WEEK 7, Day 1, Monday, 14 February 2022


Observations from today’s readings and today’s S-WOD, Monday, 14 February 2022:

Genesis 43:2, 3 – And when they had eaten the grain that they had brought from Egypt, their father said to them, “Go again, buy us a little food.” But Judah said to him, “The man solemnly warned us, saying, ‘You shall not see my face unless your brother is with you.’

Jacob and his brothers did not go back to retrieve Simeon until they were out of food again and only when they had to go. This was a very selfish family.

Genesis 43:6 – “Israel said, ‘Why did you treat me so badly as to tell the man that you had another brother?’”

Israel (Jacob) blamed his sons for what happened and made it all about him. Jacob was a very self-centered, self-absorbed person who saw himself as the center of everything. Yet, God did not reject Him.

Genesis 43:32 – They served him by himself, and them by themselves, and the Egyptians who ate with him by themselves, because the Egyptians could not eat with the Hebrews, for that is an abomination to the Egyptians.

Prejudice is nothing new, but God’s word says that there are only two types of people, saved and unsaved. Nothing else matters.

Genesis 43:8-9 – And Judah said to Israel his father, “Send the boy with me, and we will arise and go, that we may live and not die, both we and you and also our little ones. I will be a pledge of his safety. From my hand you shall require him. If I do not bring him back to you and set him before you, then let me bear the blame forever.

“Jacob was afraid when money was found in the sacks of grain from Egypt (Gen. 42:35), but he did not fear divine retribution like his sons did (v. 28b). Scholars suggest he was afraid his sons had planned some kind of a coup d’etat. His favorite son Joseph disappeared after looking for these brothers (chap. 37), and now they wanted to take his beloved Benjamin, Rachel’s other son (35:24), into the desert. Moreover, Jacob’s sons returned from Egypt with money, but no Simeon. Jacob likely surmised that the brothers sold Simeon into slavery and suspected his sons would remove Benjamin, who like Joseph, would not champion any attempt to supplant their father.

Jacob’s focus on himself supports this contention. He was indifferent to his sons by Leah, claiming Benjamin was the only son he had left after Joseph’s demise (42:38). He was refusing to live in the present, preferring to dwell inordinately on the memory of Rachel, his favorite wife. Today’s passage tells us Jacob saw their attempt to save themselves from the pharaoh’s court as a personal affront (43:6). He cared little for the safety of any son Rachel did not bear.

However, Genesis 43 also informs us that the famine’s severity and Judah’s selfless pledge prevented him from holding Benjamin back (v. 1). Judah steps forward as the leader of the clan and refuses to go back to Egypt without his youngest brother. Twice he tells his father that they have been “warned” not to return without Benjamin, and so if all of the brothers do not go into the land of the Nile, none of them can go (vv. 4–5). Judah is the oldest son still in Jacob’s favor (29:31–35; 34:30; 35:22) and the logical choice to head the expedition.

Yet Judah’s age is not his most important qualification to lead the others. Seeing that his father’s concern to preserve Benjamin alive must be satisfied, he steps forward and makes himself the guarantee of his brother’s safety (43:8–10). This is a risky and chivalrous move for Judah to make, for he is putting his life on the line for his brother. It is model behavior for the righteous ruler, seen most prominently in the life of Jesus, Judah’s greatest son through King David (Matt. 1:1), who laid down His life for His brothers (John 10:11).

Judah’s actions show him to be far different from the man who rejected Tamar and sold Joseph into slavery (Gen. 37–38). Now he is a servant of the living God. Matthew Henry says Judah, to show his repentance, “would make some amends for the irreparable injury he had done him [Jacob] by doubling his care concerning Benjamin.” Those sorry for their sin try to make amends for the harm they have done. Is there somebody to whom you need to make amends?” (Ligonier Ministries)

Acts 3:19-21 – “Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out, that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, and that he may send the Christ appointed for you, Jesus.”

In today’s church, I don’t think it can be over emphasized that the Gospel message begins with the need for repentance. John the Baptist’s message began with a call to repentance. Jesus began His ministry with a call to repentance, and now we are reading about the early church leaders doing the same. But today, a direct confrontation of sin with a call for repentance is increasingly viewed as insensitive, unloving, or primitive and outdated.

Peter and John were about as blunt with the crowd as could be imagined – “You denied the Holy and Righteous One, and asked for a murderer to be granted to you, and you killed the Author of life, whom God raised from the dead. To this we are witnesses.” (Acts 3:14, 15) However, Peter and John’s harsh words were not intended to condemn but rather to convict the audience of their need for repentance and salvation through Jesus – “Repent therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out, that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, and that he may send the Christ appointed for you, Jesus.” (Acts 3:19, 20)

The Gospel message is a two-edged sword that cuts and heals, that reveals both God’s judgment and God’s offer of grace and salvation. Consider the below from Steve Lawson:

“The preaching of divine wrath serves as a black velvet backdrop that causes the diamond of God’s mercy to shine brighter than ten thousand suns. It is upon the dark canvas of divine wrath that the splendor of His saving grace most fully radiates. Preaching the wrath of God most brilliantly showcases His gracious mercy toward sinners. Like trumpeters on the castle wall warning of coming disaster, preachers must proclaim the full counsel of God. Those who stand in pulpits must preach the whole body of truth in the Scriptures, which includes both sovereign wrath and supreme love. They cannot pick and choose what they want to preach. Addressing the wrath of God is never optional for a faithful preacher—it is a divine mandate. Tragically, preaching that deals with God’s impending judgment is absent from many contemporary pulpits. Preachers have become apologetic regarding the wrath of God, if not altogether silent. In order to magnify the love of God, many argue, the preacher must downplay His wrath. But to omit God’s wrath is to obscure His amazing love. Strangely enough, it is merciless to withhold the declaration of divine vengeance…. Every preacher must declare the wrath of God or marginalize His holiness, love, and righteousness. Because God is holy, He is separated from all sin and utterly opposed to every sinner. Because God is love, He delights in purity and must, of necessity, hate all that is unholy. Because God is righteous, He must punish the sin that violates His holiness…. Ironically, Jesus had more to say about divine wrath than anyone else in the Bible. Our Lord spoke about God’s wrath more than He spoke of God’s love. Jesus warned about “fiery hell” (Matt. 5:22) and eternal “destruction” (7:13) where there is “weeping and gnashing of teeth” (8:12). Simply put, Jesus was a hellfire and damnation preacher. Men in pulpits would do well to follow the example of Christ in their preaching…. Christ suffered the wrath of God for all who would call upon Him. If there is no divine wrath, there is no need for the cross, much less for the salvation of lost souls. From what would sinners need to be saved? It is only when we recognize the reality of God’s wrath against those deserving of judgment that we find the cross to be such glorious news. Too many pulpiteers today boast in having a cross-centered ministry but rarely, if ever, preach divine wrath. This is a violation of the cross itself…. The Apostle Paul warns unbelievers of the “God who inflicts wrath” (Rom. 3:5) and declares that only Jesus can “deliver us from the wrath to come” (1 Thess. 1:10). Peter writes about “the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly” (2 Pet. 3:7). Jude addresses the “punishment of eternal fire” (Jude 7). John describes “the wrath of the Lamb” (Rev. 6:16). Clearly, the New Testament writers recognized the necessity of preaching God’s wrath. Preachers must not shrink away from proclaiming the righteous anger of God toward hell-deserving sinners. God has fixed a day in which He will judge the world in righteousness (Acts 17:31). That day is looming on the horizon. Like the prophets and Apostles, and even Christ Himself, we too must warn unbelievers of this coming dreadful day and compel them to flee to Christ, who alone is mighty to save.”

Now, consider these observations from John MacArthur:

“According to recent polls, some 81 percent of adult Americans believe in heaven, and fully 80 percent expect to go there when they die. By comparison, about 61 percent believe in hell, but less than 1 percent think it’s likely they will go there. In other words, a slight majority of Americans still believe hell exists, but genuine fear of hell is almost nonexistent. Even the most conservative evangelicals don’t seem to take hell very seriously anymore. For decades, many evangelicals have downplayed inconvenient biblical truths, neglecting any theme that seems to require somber reflection. Doctrines such as human depravity, divine wrath, the exceeding sinfulness of sin, and the reality of eternal judgment have disappeared from the evangelical message…. Hell’s fall from fashion indicates how key portions of Christian theology have been influenced by a secular society that stresses individualism over authority and the human psyche over moral absolutes. The rise of psychology, the philosophy of existentialism, and the consumer culture have all dumped buckets of water on hell…. Churches are under enormous pressure to be consumer-oriented. Churches today feel the need to be appealing rather than demanding…. Once pop evangelism went into market analysis, hell was just dropped. When churches go door to door and conduct a market analysis … they hear, “I want better parking spaces. I want guitars at services. I want to have my car greased while I’m in church.”… Only a few leading voices in the evangelical movement have lobbied boldly for a more orthodox approach to the doctrine of hell. They seem to be outnumbered by those who think the disappearance of hell is a positive development…. It is a serious mistake to imagine that we improve Scripture or enhance its effectiveness by blunting its sharp edges. Scripture is a sword, not a cotton swab, and it needs to be fully unsheathed before it can be put to its intended use…. The gospel is supposed to be an affront to fleshly pride, offensive to human sensibilities, foolishness in the eyes of worldly wisdom, and contrary to all carnal judgments.

No Christian teaching exemplifies those characteristics more powerfully than the doctrine of hell. It is an appalling truth. We rightly recoil at the thought of it. The doctrine of hell thus stands as a warning and a reminder of what a loathsome reality sin is. No reasonable or godly person delights in the reality of eternal damnation. God Himself says, “As I live, declares the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked” (Ezek. 33:11). We do no one any favors by downplaying the truth of God’s wrath or neglecting to mention the severity of His judgment…. We certainly don’t eliminate the threat of hell by refusing to speak or think of it. If we truly believe what the Bible teaches about the eternal fate of unbelievers, it is in no sense “loving” to remain silent and refuse to sound the appropriate alarm. What, after all, is the good news we proclaim in the gospel? It is not an announcement that no one really needs to fear God or fret about the possibility of hell. As a matter of fact, there would be no glad tidings at all if God merely intended to capitulate to the stubborn will of man and forgo the demands of His perfect righteousness. The good news is even better than most believers understand: God made a way for His righteousness and His love to be fully reconciled. In His incarnation, Christ fulfilled all righteousness (satisfying, not nullifying, the demands of His law). In His death on the cross, He paid the price of His people’s sin in full (assuring the triumph of perfect justice). And in His resurrection from the dead, He put a powerful exclamation mark on His own perfect, finished work of atonement (thus sealing the promise of justification forever for those who trust Him as Lord and Savior). That is the message we must declare to a worldly culture utterly lacking any real fear of God. We cannot do it faithfully or effectively if from the very outset we have omitted the harsh truth Scripture declares about “the fury of the wrath of God the Almighty” (Rev. 19:15).

True love speaks the truth in love.

“Cross” Fit S-WOD (Spiritual Workout of the Day) — 14 Feb 22: Make a list of those people close to you who need to hear the Gospel. Pray for those on the list, and ask God to reveal to you an opportunity to share the Gospel with them.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this:
search previous next tag category expand menu location phone mail time cart zoom edit close