Hezekiah is often remembered as the best king in the checkered history of the divided monarchy of Judah and Israel. While a great many of the successors of David and Solomon turned from true worship to the pagan religions of the nations around them, Hezekiah is remembered for his faith and faithfulness:
“He trusted in the LORD, the God of Israel, so that there was none like him among all the kings of Judah after him, nor among those who were before him. For he held fast to the LORD. He did not depart from following him, but kept the commandments that the LORD commanded Moses. And the LORD was with him; wherever he went out, he prospered” (2 Kings 18:5).
We remember not only the story of God’s healing of Hezekiah (2 Kings 20:1-6), but also numerous other details of the king’s reign, such as his successful destruction of pagan idolatry and other figurative and literal enemies, including the story of how God defeated the Assyrians on Hezekiah’s behalf when they attacked Jerusalem (2 Kings 19:32-36). He even survived, at least temporarily, the enemy of death (2 Kings 20:1). All these events show a Hezekiah who was truly an individual who followed God and who was blessed in being able to overcome his enemies.
Yet there was one enemy which appears to have remained that even Hezekiah was apparently unable to overcome. A final undefeated enemy is evident in the record of Hezekiah’s last years. When the king of Babylon sent diplomatic messengers to Hezekiah, the king unwisely showed the Babylonians every part of his kingdom and its treasures. We do not know whether this was the result of pride or just lack of strategic wisdom, but as a result the prophet Isaiah warned Hezekiah that this foolish action would result in the Babylonians eventually attacking Judah and destroying Jerusalem (2 Kings 20:12-18).
It is in Hezekiah’s reply to this word of God that we see what was perhaps the king’s last undefeated enemy: “The word of the Lord you have spoken is good,” Hezekiah replied. For he thought, ‘Will there not be peace and security in my lifetime?’” (2 Kings 20:19). The king’s words seem humble and accepting on the surface, but his recorded thoughts reveal an incredible degree of selfishness: that despite the horrors he had been told he had brought upon his country, Hezekiah’s attitude was “Will there not be peace and security in my lifetime?” Unlike the incident in which the king turned to God in weeping supplication regarding a problem that applied to him directly, when he had unwittingly triggered disaster for others, Hezekiah’s reaction was one of selfish lack of concern – of “Why should I be concerned?” – of “Whatever!”
It is clear that despite his many righteous deeds and the many enemies he overcame, Hezekiah’s last recorded enemy – the reality of his own unconquered selfishness – was one he did not overcome. The biblical record of this king’s reign essentially ends at this point, with Hezekiah’s thoughts recorded as a poignant lesson to us all. Whatever the victories we may have accomplished, they do not matter much in terms of the fulfillment of God’s purpose for us if we are not dedicated to overcoming the enemy of selfishness. Hezekiah’s story should remind us all not to let our lives – or even a single day – end in an attitude of “Whatever!”
*For many more lessons from the kings and other leaders recorded in the Old Testament, download a copy of our free e-book Lessons from Old Testament Leadershere.
The Berean Study Bible achieves a successful “word-for-word” and “thought-for-thought” balance in a clear, easy to read translation.
The Berean Study Bible (BSB) is a recent translation of the whole Bible published by the ministry behind the online Bible study site BibleHub.com. According to its website, the Berean Bible consists of four components or “translation tiers,” including the Study Version which is recommended for personal study, public reading, memorization, and evangelism.
The translation of the BSB was accomplished by a team of scholars associated with the Bible Hub ministry, and although the team was relatively small – it was composed of six scholars – this is not necessarily a bad thing, as the translation avoids many of the pitfalls associated with both single-person and large committee translation efforts.
The end result in this case is a version that is internally consistent and nicely positioned on the spectrum running from word-for-word to idea-for-idea translation. Reading the BSB often feels like a comfortable mid-ground between the fairly literal ESV and the somewhat more dynamic NIV. But that is a generalization, and there can be considerable variation in the treatment of words within individual verses. Comparing Acts 17:11 (the BSB’s signature verse) among these three versions provides an example of their respective styles while also showing the variation involved:
“Now these Jews were more noble than those in Thessalonica; they received the word with all eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so” ( Acts 17:11 ESV).
“Now the Bereans were more noble-minded than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if these teachings were true” (Acts 17:11 BSB).
“Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true” (Acts 17:11 NIV).
Although there is not a great deal of difference among the three renditions, notice that the BSB is the only one of the three versions that does not say that the “Bereans” were “Berean Jews” – which, while the Bereans in question may have been Jewish, that is not what the text actually says, nonetheless. While the ESV is fairly literal in simply stating that the Bereans were more noble (the Greek primarily means of noble physical birth), the BSB and NIV add “-minded” or “character,” which is the intended sense in this case. And while the NIV adds “what Paul said,” the BSB, like the ESV, is more literal, as Paul is not specifically mentioned in the Greek text.
So the BSB quite effectively utilizes both “word for word” and “thought for thought” approaches – as appropriate – in the translation process. But the very slight lean toward literality in the version is sometimes helpful. The version maintains the original gender designations in Scripture and, as a result, does not compromise accuracy in some translational situations. The BSB is also quite conservative among recent translations in utilizing capitalization for pronouns referring to God and Christ, as with “He,” “Him,” etc. These details will probably only be noticeable to those who usually use the NIV or other similar translation in their study, but the BSB consistently reads smoothly and without any hint of antiquated English.
The electronic versions of the BSB incorporate links to each book of the Bible and to each chapter from the beginning of each book. There are also links from points in the text to the notes at the end of each chapter, and from the notes back to the text.
Like all translations, the BSB is not perfect, but its attempt to faithfully follow the meaning of the underlying Hebrew and Greek text is commendable, and it is a translation that can be trusted for everyday study of the Scriptures.
The publishers of the BSB have generously made the translation available for free in a number of electronic versions suitable for reading on any computer, tablet, e-book reader, or smartphone. So if you have not used the Berean Study Bible, we recommend that you download a free copy in a format of your choice – either from the publisher’s website or from our own sister site, FreeChristianEBooks.org – and that you try it. It is a very worthwhile Bible version to have available for comparison, and one that you may well find yourself using regularly.
Biblical genealogies are things most of us read, accept and move on in our reading. But the genealogy Matthew gives for Jesus at the beginning of his Gospel has a particularly interesting aspect. Matthew divides the “family tree” he constructs for the promised Messiah into three sections of fourteen generations each, saying: “Thus there were fourteen generations in all from Abraham to David, fourteen from David to the exile to Babylon, and fourteen from the exile to the Messiah” (Matthew 1:17).
But if we look back into the Old Testament lists of the ancient kings of Judah who were among the ancestors of Jesus, we find that Matthew actually omits three individuals between the kings Jehoram and Uzziah (Matthew 1:8): Ahaziah (2 Kings 8:25), Joash (2 Kings 12:1) and Amaziah (2 Kings 14:1). In other words, there were actually seventeen known generations between David and the exile, rather than fourteen as Matthew states.
How can we reconcile this apparent contradiction in the Scriptures? First, we must understand that Matthew follows a common ancient practice in structuring the genealogy he gives into clear units which were more easily remembered and taught. That Matthew omits some individuals in order to accomplish this pattern is not surprising because if we look back to the very first verse of his Gospel, he does that to an even more striking degree in saying “This is the genealogy of Jesus the Messiah the son of David, the son of Abraham” – where the practice of “jumping generations” is clearly utilized to make his point: to stress that Jesus was the descendant of David (who is actually named first, before Abraham).
We must remember that because Mathew wrote to a primarily Jewish audience, he knew that his readers were familiar with the king lists of the Hebrew Scriptures and that they would understand he was “jumping generations” in Matthew 1:8 in exactly the same way he did in Matthew 1:1.
We can see this fact in another way. Ancient genealogies usually omitted women in their reckoning, but Matthew includes four women who were Gentiles or had Gentile connections (Matthew 1:3, 5-6), even though he did not include the four great matriarchs of the biblical tradition – Sarah, Rebekah, Leah and Rachel. The reason is clearly because another theme of Matthew’s Gospel is the inclusion of the Gentiles in God’s plan for humanity.
Matthew adjusted the details of his genealogy of Jesus in order to make the points that were vital for his story. So, rather than contradicting Old Testament accounts, Matthew’s genealogy of Jesus is carefully constructed to stress Jesus’ descent from David and from Gentile ancestors – which gave him the genealogy to be not only the King of the Jews, but also the King of all mankind.
Whether it is in international politics or in interpersonal relations, de-escalation of difficult and potentially dangerous situations is vital to the preservation of peace. Not surprisingly, the Bible has a lot to say about the principle of de-escalation and can teach us valuable lessons in this area.
De-escalation or “standing down” from potential emotional or political flash-points is a principle found throughout the Old and New Testaments alike. We see it everywhere from proverbs such as “A gentle answer turns away wrath, but harsh words stir up anger” (Proverbs 15:1 NLT) to the words of Jesus himself: “Blessed are the peacemakers” (Matthew 5:9).
But there is one section of the Bible that provides an amazingly clear example of interpersonal de-escalation – the story of the patriarch Jacob’s meeting with his brother Esau a number of years after Jacob had effectively cheated his brother out of his inheritance with that famous post-hunting trip bowl of stew (Genesis 25:34). When that incident occurred, Jacob had to literally leave town in the hopes that his brother’s anger (which was at the homicidal level) might subside (Genesis 27:43-44).
When we fast-forward in this story to the next time Jacob and Esau met – some twenty years later – we read that Jacob sent a message to his brother to test the situation and the returning messengers said: “We went to your brother Esau, and now he is coming to meet you, and four hundred men are with him” (Genesis 32:6). If there was ever a situation needing de-escalation, this would appear to be it.
Understandably, Jacob felt “fear and distress’ (Genesis 32:7), but notice how he handled the situation: “Jacob divided the people who were with him into two groups, and the flocks and herds and camels as well. He thought, ‘If Esau comes and attacks one group, the group that is left may escape’” (Genesis 32:7-8). Jacob then – understandably – prayed and asked God for his protection in this situation (Genesis 32:9-12). This was good basic tactical preparation. Jacob did what he could and asked God to help with the rest. But Jacob then proceeded to employ a very astute plan of de-escalation.
Jacob selected a large group of animals from his herds and flocks and divided these animals into smaller groups, each under the control of some of his servants – telling them “Go ahead of me, and keep some space between the herds” (Genesis 32:13-16). “For he thought, ‘I will pacify him with these gifts I am sending on ahead; later, when I see him, perhaps he will receive me’” (Genesis 32:20). This approach of attempting to win his brother’s favor by means of generous gifts is obvious enough, but there is a great deal more tactical wisdom to it than might meet the eye.
By sending his gift in multiple installments, Jacob actually gained a number of tactical advantages. First, he slowed the advance of Esau and his four hundred men who had to repeatedly stop and deal with the incoming gifts of animals. This not only bought Jacob time to plan and prepare for their meeting, but also slowed Esau down and helped distract him from any murderous thoughts of vengeance that may have been in his mind.
Second, Jacob continually bled off small numbers of Esau’s men who would have to be assigned to take charge of and herd the numerous groups of animals. Just as important from a tactical perspective, Jacob also was able to repeatedly insert small groups of his own men into the heart of the advancing potential enemy – giving him a major tactical plus if fighting occurred.
Third, from a tactical perspective, Jacob might have guessed that Esau did not regularly keep four hundred men in his employ. It was very likely that many if not most of these men had been quickly brought together as a mercenary force with the promise of plunder if they helped Esau attack Jacob’s group. If this were the case, Jacob’s extensive gifts gave Esau an option not to have to fight – they provided him with ample goods to pay off any fighters Esau might have hired.
Finally, there was, of course, an undoubted and cumulative psychological effect of the gifts Jacob sent ahead. Just as the Book of Proverbs tells us that a gift “pacifies anger” (Proverbs 21:14), Jacob was clearly aware of the potential for this in the gifts he was sending, as we have seen (Genesis 32:20). In that day and age it was also common for minor kings and nations to pay “tribute” (read “protection money”) to greater kings and nations in order to gain a guarantee of their safety from attack by their more powerful neighbors. Jacob’s gifts could clearly be seen as “tribute” – reinforcing the psychological effect of gifts that also proclaimed submissiveness.
Perhaps not surprisingly, and perhaps with God’s help, of course, this multi-pronged approach of de-escalation was wildly effective. When the two groups finally came into combat range Jacob cemented the de-escalation by stepping forward and bowing before his brother (Genesis 33:3). How effective this all was can be seen in Esau’s response: “Esau ran to meet Jacob and embraced him; he threw his arms around his neck and kissed him” (Genesis 33:4). If we think this would have been Esau’s response all along, we should ask ourselves why he needed to bring four hundred men to do that.
Submission may not always be the appropriate approach in situations where de-escalation is needed, but it often is. There is no question that Jacob’s humble strategy and careful use of tactical principles was totally successful in protecting a small group from a much larger and potentially very hostile one. The principles Jacob utilized are also a lasting lesson for us in the value of asking God’s help, then doing everything we can to avert violence when that is possible. In more cases than not, de-escalation does not just happen. De-escalation – as Jacob teaches us – is usually a matter of strategy and of carefully applied tactics.
The Thanksgiving holiday we celebrate in the United States is one in which we hopefully give thanks for the abundance or “overflow” of good things we have been given. A biblical verse often quoted in this context is that of the words of Christ regarding blessings: “Give, and it will be given to you. Good measure, pressed down, shaken together, running over, will be put into your lap. For with the measure you use it will be measured back to you” (Luke 6:38).
Notice how four measures are used to describe the overflowing fullness of the blessings being spoken of: Good measure – this is not a short-filling, but a filling to the brim. Pressed down – this is the first way we can get more into a container, by forcing even more in. Shaken together – we can also shake a container to make the contents settle to make room for more. Running over – finally, we can overfill till the container has an overflowing excess.
It would be hard to better describe the concept of the cornucopia – the horn of plenty spilling out abundant blessings that is so often used as a symbol of Thanksgiving! But let’s go back to the words of Jesus in the Gospel of Luke. We should remind ourselves, of course, that Jesus spoke of being blessed to the extent we bless – gifted to the extent that we give.
But there is actually more to consider when we look at the preceding verse – which is less frequently quoted – and we grasp the whole context: “Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven. Give, and it will be given to you. A good measure, pressed down, shaken together and running over, will be poured into your lap. For with the measure you use, it will be measured to you” (Luke 6:37-38).
Reading these verses together shows us that Christ’s words regarding overflowing blessings were set in the context of not judging, not condemning, and forgiving, as well as giving. In each of these cases the overflowing aspect of what we are given applies. Jesus’ words stress that we must be willing to “overflow” in our not judging or condemning others and in our forgiving them (Matthew 18:21-22).
So what does forgiveness have to do with Thanksgiving season? God’s word shows us that with blessings come responsibilities; God’s gifts are freely and abundantly given, but they come with expectations. Jesus’ words remind us that we will be blessed (there is nothing in his words indicating that he was not talking about both physical and spiritual blessings) as we bless, and we will be forgiven as we forgive. In a season in which we focus on thankfulness for the blessings we receive, we should perhaps also focus on the blessings we give – the gifts of not judging or condemning and actively forgiving. And the blessings we give should be “good measure, pressed down, shaken together and running over.”
Our God is an abundantly generous God. In giving and in forgiving, we should strive to be the same.
Recent Comments