So far, I have liked Nehemiah 8 best of all.

The wall around Jerusalem is build and the people are settling in. Nehemiah is governer.

The people "gathered as one man" What did they do?

They sent Ezra for "the Book of the Law of Moses that the LORD had commanded Israel." And he read it. He read from early morning until mid day. When he opened the book the people stood. When he prayed, the people lifted their hands and answered "Amen". When they worshipped, they bowed their heads. When the Word was read, their ears were attentive.

When they heard the Words of the Law, they wept.

The priests were there to help them understand and the Levites taught the people.

They read the Word and found that it was the time of the "Festival of Booths". For the first time since the Jews were exiled, they celebrated this holy time. God's people were again connected with the Law, the temple, with Jerusalem.
The "Second Temple Period" had begun.

Today?

I remember when I returned to God - about 16 years ago. Digging into the Word was again new. I grieved for a while, for the time that I had lost.

During those first months I learned from a wonderful Christian woman (a pastor's wife) that taught me a lot about life, about marriage, about God.

What drew me back? It wasn't good preaching, it wasn't "doing the right things", it wasn't hanging out with the right people.

It was the Word.

To be sure, it was the Word that was written in a very unusual place (we were on vacation). This "monument to women" had Scripture that I was familiar with from childhood and I knew that in order to do my job as a mother, I would have to return to God. NOW.

My son was 4, so that would have been 16 years ago.

I've "adjusted" since then. Studied a lot. I've had some very good leaders and good pastors. But in everything, the Word was central to my education.

😉

Lecture exam on respiratory and digestive systems...

I think that once I got to the point where I could see what I was studying, my lecture tests got a lot better.  I'm not as uptight about this one because I can't get an "A" in the class.  As long as I have to have a "B", I might was well be happy with getting a "B"

If you don't like reading a whole lot of numbers, you can skip reading Nehemiah 7.

The beginning of the chapter it says that the Lord laid it upon Nehemiah's heart to take a census and he obeyed.  Nehemiah found the book of genealogies and found the list of returned Jews that had been exiled under Nebuchadnezzar...

(This is a short post - let's just say that there were a lot of Jews.  And servants and horses and singers and...)

Chapter 8 deserves an entire post by itself  😉

After seeing Elena's latest post about me...I can't do pie (weight watchers and all that).

I make the offer to Elena to sit down for coffee, with her and her priest (or other counseling staff person). My schedule doesn't make it easy to schedule things so I need at least three weeks notice.

But that's the offer, let her priest read her blog, my blog.

(an edit below)

Elena's reply:

That's sweet Ellen.

I think we should just agree to disagree, realize that we are just not ever going to be a good fit as far as friendly adversaries go, wish each other well and just let it go.

Have a nice Thanksgiving.

Thank you for your gracious response. I wish you the best Thanksgiving as well.

If you desire to pursue reconciliation, my offer to sit down with you and your church authority remains on the table.

More from Elena:

Because it's time consuming and stupid. I don't particularly care to reconcile and I think she should be apologizing to me. You asked.

Out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks.   Since I was again referenced on Elena's blog, I'm again asking to meet with Elena and her priest - on her turf, under the authority she sits under.

If Elena truly believes that reconciliation is stupid and she doesn't care to reconcile (as she writes), I recommend a short passage.

A few weeks ago, John Kerry stepped in it by saying something to the effect that if you don't go to college and study hard, you'll end up in the military.

Uh...if Charles Rangel, the incoming chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee has his way, college, studying or anything else may not make a difference.

Who is pushing for a reinstatement of the draft?  Hint: it isn't the Republicans.  And it isn't just young men.

The article says that involuntary service would not just include the military:

"young people (would) commit themselves to a couple of years in service to this great republic, whether it's our seaports, our airports, in schools, in hospitals,"

And yet:

Rangel, a veteran of the Korean War who has unsuccessfully sponsored legislation on conscription in the past, said he will propose a measure early next year.

In 2003, he proposed a measure covering people age 18 to 26. This year, he offered a plan to mandate military service for men and women between age 18 and 42; it went nowhere in the Republican-led Congress.

(emphasis mine)

Nemiah, chapter 6. This is where it gets interesting and has parallels in "this week's news"

By this time, there was no breach left in the wall. The bad guys ("Sanballat and Tobiah and Geshem the Arab and the rest of our enemies") were still around; and they used tactics that are still around today.

1) Distraction.

"Come and let us meet together at Hakkephirim in the plain of Ono."

The bad guys were sounding like they wanted to "make nice" and get together. Nehemiah knew that "sounding like" didn't mean that these guys actually had any intention of meeting with him in order to get along.

Four times they sent this invitation and four times Nehemiah answered, "I am doing a great work and I cannot come down. Why should the work stop while I leave it and come down to you?"

2) The fifth time, they sent an "open letter" (yes, we do see this tactic today).

In the same way Sanballat for the fifth time sent his servant to me with an open letter in his hand. In it was written, "It is reported among the nations, and Geshem also says it, that you and the Jews intend to rebel; that is why you are building the wall. And according to these reports you wish to become their king. And you have also set up prophets to proclaim concerning you in Jerusalem, 'There is a king in Judah.' And now the king will hear of these reports. So now come and let us take counsel together."

Normally, these letter would have been sealed so that the person that the letter were meant for would see them before the recipient. Nehemiah was very specific: Sanballat sent his servant with an open letter. This was meant for "everybody" to see.

3) The world was meant to see these false accusations.

People who make false accusations generally don't care about what the accused actually says, much less care about what is meant. When they are called on their sin of false accusation, many times these false accusers respond with more accusations and/or claim victim status of their own. Nehemiah was clear about what he thought about the false accusations. I love his response (I think I'll remember it):

"No such things as you say have been done, for you are inventing them out of your own mind."

Why did Sanballat use this tactic? Nehemiah tells us, "For they all wanted to frighten us, thinking, "Their hands will drop from the work, and it will not be done."

4) Intimidation is still attempted today.

5) We read in verse 10 that Sanballat also had "hired guns" - false prophets who spoke lies, saying that they were from God, in order to put fear into Nehemiah.

Despite false accusations, despite people writing "open letters", despite lies spoken behind his back, despite "hired guns" ganging up on him - Nehemiah persevered.

The wall was rebuilt in 52 days. Fifty-two!

Keep in mind that Nehemiah didn't have cranes, bulldozers and power tools. I don't know how long Nehemiah's wall was, but Israel is planning a security fence around Jerusalem that would be 32 miles.

That is a big wall for men without gasoline or electricity to build in 52 days.

Does this apply today?

Absolutely!

I can apply it in a couple of different ways.

1) A few of us are familiar with the term "watchblogger". Bloggers that keep an eye on blogs who disagree with them - and then visit that blog for the express purpose of disagreement and/or keep to their own blog and post negatively about the blogs they are watching.

Yes. They are out there.

2) More to the point today is a topic I posted about a few days ago: Mark Driscoll. This is not part of the "blog world", but it has certainly been written about on blogs.

People have doctrinal disagreements. Deal with it - if you have a belief, there is somebody who has a belief that is just as strong as yours - but different.

In Seattle, we have a woman pastor. Earlier on her blog she clearly states that she believes that complementarian theology is oppressive to women, rather than being a Biblical creation order.

She states that she has an agenda and that she will not stop - to make a place for women in leadership in the church.

Like Sanballat, Madrid-Swetman wrote an "open letter" (published it on her blog). And folks are taking it and running with it. There is going to be a demonstration outside of Driscoll's church in early December.

People are planning of folks showing up for a show of "strength in numbers". My guess is that Driscoll won't be intimidated.

Are there more parallels? Accusations? Yes, there are.

Misogyny is one accusation. As one who has been falsely accused of hatred toward another person, seeing a brother in Christ accused of hatred by on who claims to be a Christian is glaring to me.

Make no mistake.

Nehemiah's critics wanted him silenced.

Watchbloggers want posts that disagree with them silenced.

Those who organized the protest want Driscoll silenced.

We're heading into the season when many single folks do a lot of introspection and lookig/hoping into the future.

Because of my passion for singles, and because of some of my own history, I've spent countless hours studying the Biblical issue of marriage, divorce, and remarriage in the church.

In the notes of the paper that I wrote, I said something to the effect of, even as a widowed person, I still need to know what it is that I believe about divorce and remarriage. If I intend to be single for the rest of my life, it's a non-issue. If I intend to date and possible remarry, I better know the boundries ahead of time. Whocan I date, who to consider, who can I marry?

There are Biblical reasons to divorce that leave a person free to remarry. Beyond that, what is a person to do - are they truly left to a lifetime of being alone? Or is there forgiveness and restoration in Christ?

Two resources that I use a lot are

Marriage, Divorce, & Remarriage By: Jay Adams - This is the book that many pastors, counselors and theologians consider to be the most biblical and the most helpful on the issue of marriage and divorce. The author examines the relevant passages in both the Old and New Testaments so that his readers can consider the many issues and interpretations that arise in trying to establish a consistently biblical position. As a result, you can see more clearly and accept more firmly the truth of Scripture.

Divorce and Remarriage in the Bible: The Social and Literary Context by David Instone-Brewer "Marriage in the ancient Near East was contractual, involving payments, agreed stipulations, and penalties..." [Note: I don't agree with some of Instone-Brewer's theology, but his historical information is very interesting.

Also, here is a shot article from Grace Community Church (John MacArthur)

This is a topic that takes lots of time, but every Bible-believing Christian needs to know and be convinced of what they believe on this topic.

In chapter 5 of Nehemiah we read about another of the problems that the Jews were having - with Jews.

Jews were lending Jews money - and charging such an interest rate during a time of famine that the "lendees" were having to sell their children into slavery.

Nehemiah told them: "The thing that you are doing is not good." Nehemiah stood up for those who were being taken advantage of financially.

It seems that it was about this time that Nehemiah was made governor in the land of Judah and the heading for this part of the chapter is "Nehemiah's Generousity". He did not take the food allowance, he did not "lord it over the people" and he acquired no property.

And still, he tells us that he "persevered in the work on this wall"...

So what?

We are not Jews, we are Christians. And we are part of the family of God.

Are there churches (or organizations) that take financial advantage of other Christians?  (I'm thinking of one "word-faith" church that requires members to turn in w-2's" each year so that the church can make sure that they are turning their entire tithe over to this church.)

Most readers here will know that I'm not egalitarian. I believe firmly that God created man and woman - and that He created them with different roles. That does not mean that men and women are not equal - but they are different.

Mark Driscoll is taking a beating on certain blogs for his blog post that was triggered by Ted Haggard's situation, but spoke to men in leadership in general.

In particular, another pastor in Seattle, Rose Madrid-Swetman, has written an "open letter" to Driscoll. Now (this is important) Madrid-Swetman has an agenda. She says so, on February 4, 2005:

Here is my agenda that I won't give up...

I want to see space created in the church for women to lead...

In September, two months before Driscoll wrote his post, Madrid-Swetman wrote:

There is a very big, inflential church in our city that holds a complementarian view. The complementarian view in our humble opinion is oppressive to women. It seems the more influence this church gets the more we are hearing questions as to "why" do they teach oppression of women?

So we know from Madrid-Swetman's writing that

1. she has an agenda that she won't give up
2. she was convinced before Driscoll wrote his post that "this church" holds a position that is oppresive to women.

Given those two things, it is my opinion that her "open letter" is a shot across the bow at Driscoll's theology concerning gender roles, not simply a response to his tone and to that particular post. This is a woman with an agenda (go back to the beginning of her blog).

But what about Mark Driscoll? I like Mark Driscoll and his general theology (I disagree with his - and his church's stand on divorce) and I especially like his stand on gender roles.

The only thing that I can see that would be offensive in general is the remark about it not being uncommon to see a pastor's wife who has "let herself go". Beyond that, it is the gender role theology that is offensive to those who embrace the opposite view. A woman who resents being taught that she is partly responsible for the purity of her husband - and that she is responsible for filling his sexual needs and desires - will find offense in the entire paragraph or two that addresses sexuality between a husband and wife.

What I do find fault with is Driscoll's appearing to emphasize the physical side of attractiveness. I seem to remember (and somebody can probably find it for me) where Driscoll said in one of his podcasts something to the effect that he wanted his wife to get rid of some of her clothes and revamp her wardrobe because she "looked too much like a mom". They have how many kids?!?! If you want to preach having a lot of kids, you need to be prepared for women who look like moms.

But as far as gender roles in home and church...I have NO beef with Driscoll.

Cain and Abel?

I was challenged to ponder this - and I don't know yet if I'm headed in the same direction as my challenger...but this is the direction that I went:

You all remember Cain and Abel.  Before this point in the Bible, God does not tell us how He wants sacrifices to be carried out, but Cain and Abel sacrificed to God.  We don't know whether or not God had told Adam and Eve, or Cain and Abel, what sort of sacrifice He wanted.  We are not even told until after this story that "men began to call upon the name of the Lord."
We do not know whether or not Cain knew that his sacrifice of the field would not be acceptable.  But it was not acceptable, while Abel's sacrifice of meat and fat was acceptable.

What we do know is how Cain reacted.

I'm not sure that I have the words to articulate this, so this truly is a "type while I think" sort of post...

We have no indication that Cain believed did not think his sacrifice would be acceptable.  The Bible does not tell us that Cain was acting in defiance of God when he sacrificed from the field.  It is very possible that Cain truly believed that he was doing the right thing.  Abel was a keeper of the flock and sacrificed from the flock; Cain was a keeper of the field and sacrificed from the field.  Both men sacrificed from the work of their own labor.

Let's assume that Cain held the conviction that sacrificing from the fruit of his own labor was God's will.  It is the same with those who embrace the egalitarian gender role (or lack thereof) theology.  For most, I have no reason to believe that they are insincere in their belief - they truly believe that there are no gender roles.

But Cain was wrong. What reaction did Cain have to God's rejection of his sacrifice?  He killed his brother.

Remember - as far as we know, Abel had nothing against his brother - it was the sacrifice Abel did not reject Cain or his sacrifice, it was God who rejected Cain.

The connection that I am making is that (even believing that he was doing the right thing), Cain was wrong.  And (being wrong) he lashed out.

Cain lashed out, but not at God.

Most Christians in this century don't kill those they lash out toward, but certainly "character assassination" is not unheard of.

Misogyny, abusive, oppressive are just a few of the labels that Driscoll has "earned" for his strong (and I believe Biblical) stand on gender roles.  Feminists (Christian and unbelievers alike) lash out at him.

That Driscoll and Mars Hill have come to their beliefs through sincere study of the Word seems to make no difference...

I'm going to cover chapters 3 and 4...I had another post started, but I'm really enjoying Nehemiah.

In chapter three, we mostly have a list of who did what - mostly names I cannot pronounce (ask a dear friend about my language challenge).

At any rate, we find that there are priests and temple servants and goldsmiths and perfumers who were all working on the wall.

One thing I noticed:

the Tekoites repaired, but their nobles would not stoop to serve their Lord.

Everybody pitched in, but there were a few who were "too good" to serve their Lord.

In chapter 4, we see Sanballat is up to no good again:

"...he was angry and greatly enraged, and he jeered at the Jews. And he said in the presence of his brothers and of the army of Samaria, "What are these feeble Jews doing? Will they restore it for themselves? Will they sacrifice? Will they finish up in a day? Will they revive the stones out of the heaps of rubbish, and burned ones at that?" Tobiah the Ammonite was beside him, and he said, "Yes, what they are building--if a fox goes up on it he will break down their stone wall!"

We see that this man didn't like what Nehemiah was doing. He chatted amongst those who agreed with him, mocked and baited. But Nehemiah didn't take the bait.

He prayed and gave it to God:

Hear, O our God, for we are despised. Turn back their taunt on their own heads and give them up to be plundered in a land where they are captives. Do not cover their guilt, and let not their sin be blotted out from your sight, for they have provoked you to anger in the presence of the builders.

And then Nehemiah went about the Lord's work:

So we built the wall.

So what did Sanballat & friends do?

...they were very angry. And they all plotted together to come and fight against Jerusalem and to cause confusion in it.

Still, Nehemiah prayed, but this time he also took practical steps and set guards. How dedicated was Nehemiah and those who labored along side of him?

So we labored at the work, and half of them held the spears from the break of dawn until the stars came out. I also said to the people at that time, "Let every man and his servant pass the night within Jerusalem, that they may be a guard for us by night and may labor by day." So neither I nor my brothers nor my servants nor the men of the guard who followed me, none of us took off our clothes; each kept his weapon at his right hand.

What about us?

When we run up against those who oppose us, how do we handle it?

Do we cave and run?  Or do we pray, take precautions and dig in to our work?