God is not a wall, God is a road.

Job 5:6  Although affliction cometh not forth of the dust, neither doth trouble spring out of the ground;

5:7  Yet man is born unto trouble, as the sparks fly upward. 

            Here’s where the book of Job gets tricky, in my estimation, because so much of what is being said is—again in my estimation—true. Affliction is ‘aven’ which is fifteen times more likely to be rendered iniquity. However, it is not the most popular word for iniquity, that would be ‘avon.’ I don’t know if those two are related because Strong’s hints at no connection. I point this out because ‘aven’ means to pant with the idea of effort that is usually in vain. Imagine a small child exhausting himself trying to move a boulder several times larger, that is ‘aven.’ Meanwhile ‘avon’ means perversity coming from to be amiss or to make a crook, imagine a straight edge that’s bent that is ‘avon.’

            In both instances the result is waste, or nothingness. The child spends all the effort and gets nothing in return. If you need a straight edge to draw a perfect line for a map, a bent one gives you nothing to work with. If you think about it, in both cases this shows inquity for what it is, waste and frustration. Consider if, Eliphaz had been right in his condemnation of Job. His children were killed because of his sin, what does that make of all his efforts in raising them? In herding his cattle? In managing his finances? Waste and frustration.

            When we sin knowingly (iniquity is seemingly always a conscious sin), we waste our futures. We imagine that turning left when the map said go straight, will lead us more quickly or more scenically to our intended destination, but in the end we have arrived at somewhere we didn’t intend to be. Iniquity is the effort it took to get us to the wrong place.

            Yet, even if we don’t commit iniquity, our world is under a curse, so we still have trouble though it does not ‘spring out of the ground.’ Perhaps someone else’s iniquity or even their ignorant sins (or our own) might make our lives harder. When I used to eat pig, I would get sick more often with no reason that I could see. In the military, I constantly had to go through some extra step because someone else had done something wrong before me. Someone else’s wrong effort might have made it so I have to use right effort to restore things. Isn’t that redemption? To exert a force to restore something from a corrupted situation?

Job 5:8  I would seek unto God, and unto God would I commit my cause:

9  Which doeth great things and unsearchable; marvellous things without number:

10  Who giveth rain upon the earth, and sendeth waters upon the fields:

 

In this, Eliphaz does speak well in suggesting seeking God, though prefaced with himself again. Then a common theme in Job (or for that matter the Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclessiastes or the prophets)—the marvelous unsearchable nature of God. This can be seen by anyone who cares to observe the creation. My wife and I  make frequent observations about the impossibility of life by chance and evolution as it is taught in schools (I am not against mutation and diversity within a species). Consider the venomous snake: which evolved first the ability to make a substance that is only toxic when injected so that it doesn’t harm the snake itself? Or the hollow, otherwise useless fangs that retract themselves to avoid puncturing the snake? Or what about the breast: which evolved first the ability to make milk or the nipple for it to be extracted? Or perhaps the child with the inborn tendency to suck?

            Creation is the work of a Creator that considered so much more and deeper than all we can imagine. Just think when God made the universe and flung his stars into space, he already had one (or two) in mind that would come and stand over Bethlehem.

            Interestingly, here the word unsearchable is “ayin” meaning, no or nothing. In other words God does Great Things and God does No Things or immeasurable things (just like ‘nothing’ which cannot be measured). Both existence and nonexistence is of God.

            This can feel like a catchall. Something happens and you wonder, why. The answer “God works in mysterious ways.” True that is, but what kind of mystery? Is it, how many angels can dance on the head of a pin? Or is it “I wonder what’s around the next bend?” Or “I wonder what this will look like when it’s finished? The difference: is this something hopeless that cannot be known, or is it something we do not know, but we are meant to know?

            Why does God hide things? Is it so that he can say “I know something you don’t know”?

 

Pro 25:2  It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter.

 

Glory here and other forms of it appear 150 times out of the 214 renderings of the word glory. The word literally means weight, what we would say now is the “gravity” of a person or thing (yet is always rendered as glory, honor or the like). The presence of weight or gravity shapes the terrain around it, it pulls things towards it. The gravity of God is to conceal, but the gravity of kings is to search.

            If God truly wanted us to not know a thing, he could thwart every effort to discover. He could be a distant God, or like an idol, that never speaks or acts. Logically though, if he communes with us than he wants to be known by us, and this is the God we see:

 

Exo 29:44  And I will sanctify the tabernacle of the congregation, and the altar: I will sanctify also both Aaron and his sons, to minister to me in the priest's office.

45  And I will dwell among the children of Israel, and will be their God.

 

Hos 2:7  And she shall follow after her lovers, but she shall not overtake them; and she shall seek them, but shall not find them: then shall she say, I will go and return to my first husband; for then was it better with me than now.

 

Hos 2:14  Therefore, behold, I will allure her, and bring her into the wilderness, and speak comfortably unto her.

 

Hos 2:16  And it shall be at that day, saith the LORD, that thou shalt call me Ishi; and shalt call me no more Baali.

 

Jer 31:33  But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.

34  And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

 

Why dwell with? Why allure Israel? So that he will be called Ishi (man, sometimes husband) instead of Baali (master). What is the covenant of the latter days? That every man of the covenant will know YHVH. God wants to be known, not unknown!

            So how does this apply to Job? As a good husband, do you try to keep your wife in the dark? Do you purpose to keep her from knowing why you do what you do? Do you intentionally frustrate her? You might for a time because of some marital need, but the end goal is not darkness but light, unity not duality.

            Yet didn’t the apostolic writings also speak of God’s unsearchability?

 

Rom 11:32  For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.

33  O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!

 

Eph 3:7  Whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given unto me by the effectual working of his power.

8  Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ;

 

In both of these cases, the words are similar. They do not mean unsearchable, but not searched out or not tracked out. Will we ever find the fullness of God’s mercy? Probably not, but can you know the fullness of another man either? No, and if you could wouldn’t that be boring? There is always some new way or new degree that you can learn about a man or about YHVH.

            The point is not that we can know God in a past verb tense, the point is that we can know God in a present tense. God is unchanging, but dynamic. Consider the universe as a picture of God. We believe in the conservation of Matter and Energy, that neither can be destroyed or created—at least from within the confines of creation. So in a sense the universe does not change, it still has so many atoms and so much energy (though of course at a quantum level they’re really the same). If you were able to search the whole universe down to the atomic level in an instant, the moment after you had surveyed it all the universe would be different than the moment after. You couldn’t say “Well, I know where everything is now!” You could only say you “knew” at the moment where everything was, already stars, planets, atoms, photons, maybe even boson’s would be somewhere else.

            Likewise, YHVH changes not (Mal 3:6), but at the same time he is always doing new things (Isa 43:19, Jer 31:22, Gal 6:15, 2 Cor 5:17,1 Joh 2:8, Rev 21:5). God is not a wall, that you cannot see beyond. God is a road that leads ever on and on, always around new bends and hills that where ever you go is new and wherever you stop is still home.

Job 5.1: Disgust

            Finally back to Job.

           

Job 4:18  Behold, he put no trust in his servants; and his angels he charged with folly:

Job 4:19  How much less in them that dwell in houses of clay, whose foundation is in the dust, which are crushed before the moth?

            Were angels charged with folly? Certainly, Jude 1:6 speaks of this.

Jud 1:6  And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.

However, Jude 1:9 speaks of other angels that did rightly.

Jud 1:9  Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee.

            When Elisha was surrounded by the enemy, was he not also surrounded by a greater company of God’s angels? Did not Yeshua facing arrest attest that he had at his disposal some twelve legions of angels available if he but asked the Father? The first half is a bold lie (though many believe it), and the second part is a half truth (some were charged, but more were not).

Job 4:20  They are destroyed from morning to evening: they perish for ever without any regarding it.

21  Doth not their excellency which is in them go away? they die, even without wisdom.

 

  These are the final nails in the coffin. God does not care about the perishing?

Eze 18:22  All his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righteousness that he hath done he shall live.

23  Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord GOD: and not that he should return from his ways, and live?

Mat 10:29  Are not two sparrows sold for a farthing? and one of them shall not fall on the ground without your Father.

30  But the very hairs of your head are all numbered.

31  Fear ye not therefore, ye are of more value than many sparrows.

 

Deu 32:42  I will make mine arrows drunk with blood, and my sword shall devour flesh; and that with the blood of the slain and of the captives, from the beginning of revenges upon the enemy.

43  Rejoice, O ye nations, with his people: for he will avenge the blood of his servants, and will render vengeance to his adversaries, and will be merciful unto his land, and to his people.

 

2Ki 9:6  And he arose, and went into the house; and he poured the oil on his head, and said unto him, Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, I have anointed thee king over the people of the LORD, even over Israel.

2Ki 9:7  And thou shalt smite the house of Ahab thy master, that I may avenge the blood of my servants the prophets, and the blood of all the servants of the LORD, at the hand of Jezebel.

 

Psa 116:15  Precious in the sight of the LORD is the death of his saints.

 

Rev 19:1  And after these things I heard a great voice of much people in heaven, saying, Alleluia; Salvation, and glory, and honour, and power, unto the Lord our God:

2  For true and righteous are his judgments: for he hath judged the great whore, which did corrupt the earth with her fornication, and hath avenged the blood of his servants at her hand.

3  And again they said, Alleluia. And her smoke rose up for ever and ever.

 

            God cares even about the perishing of the wicked, he even cares about the falling of a sparrow to the ground, and he certainly cares about his saints enough to promise their avenging upon the heathen. There can be no truth in the idea that a man perishes without being regarded. It’s interesting when you think about it, there’s a repeating theme. The devil’s argument is that man won’t love God unless he gives them good. Then he tells a man who fears God, that he is wicked, and that he doesn’t deserve to ask God why. First he attacks the creation to the Creator, then the creation to himself.

            But what is the nature of the attack? After all there was truth in there; man is not more pure than his maker. However, notice who’s the subject in 18? It is God who puts no trust in his servants, who charges them and man with folly…according to the accusation. So in the accusation it is God who does not regard, certainly men regard the deaths of other men? Now he attacks the Creator to the creation. The essence of the enemy’s argument is that there is no relationship, it is entirely quid quo pro. Man praises only because God gives. God gives only if you please him, and even in that we are utter failures and disgusting in God’s sight. That is the message of Satan, you are disgusting to God.

 

Job 5:1  Call now, if there be any that will answer thee; and to which of the saints wilt thou turn?

2  For wrath killeth the foolish man, and envy slayeth the silly one.

3  I have seen the foolish taking root: but suddenly I cursed his habitation.

 

            Continuing his assumption of guilt, Eliphaz questions who will listen/heed Job since “I, Eliphaz, see and mark [here rendered curse] his habitation.” I paraphrase, but the sense of this man’s arrogance becomes evident. Remembering chapter 4, it is filled with references to himself. Not that it’s wrong to draw on personal experience or example, but put this in the context of a man who has already condemned his ‘friend.’ What evidence has he brought other than Job’s trouble? He is acting neither just nor wisely in judging, so if he is not judging for God, then for whom? You could say its ignorance, but it is the reckless ignorance. Or to reference again his vision that was not of God, he is acting presumptuously.

            The point is, he is not using his experience to further justice and wisdom, he is using it to promote himself (what else can it be?). To paraphrase these three verses, “Whose is going to listen to you? Trouble [here rendered wrath] kills the perverse and jealousy kills the deluded. At least, I can tell where the perverse lives.”  

 

Job 5:4  His children are far from safety, and they are crushed in the gate, neither is there any to deliver them.

5  Whose harvest the hungry eateth up, and taketh it even out of the thorns, and the robber swalloweth up their substance.

 

Talk about kicking you when you’re down, how did Job’s children die? Crushed in their brother’s house knocked flat by the wind. What happened to the oxen and the camels? Robbers. Now if you believe these men’s vague charges, then you might say “Well, his diagnosis is spot on, Job must have been a sinner.” We have the advantage of watching from over Eliphaz’s shoulder, but for our own warning we must see the temptation here.

            It’s easy to see trouble and ask “What did they do wrong to deserve this?” We’ve touched on that earlier in “Judgment.” But, before the wicked’s children were crushed in the gate, didn’t they have to have children? Before the harvest can be eaten or the cattle stolen, don’t they have to be seeded and planted? It wouldn’t be much if you had on apple on a tree that was stolen if that one apple could neither satisfy your hunger or sell to fill your pantry…in other words if you judging them as wicked because of the calamity that befalls them then what do you say before calamity befalls them? If Job was wicked, why weren’t these friends here weeks ago saying “Job, you are blowing it and this lifestyle will not last”? Because their method only works in hindsight.

Job 4.8: First Dose

            But this is incomplete, after all, how do we who have faith get faith to be exercised in the first place? Yes, from God, but by what means? When we have first believed, even then the faith was already present to be used. How does faith come?

Rom 10:13  For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

14  How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?

15  And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!

16  But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report?

17  So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

 

            Calling comes through believing, believing comes through hearing, hearing comes through the word of God. This is something very basic that is overlooked: a person cannot be reliable unless they make themselves liable. Suppose I say “I will return your hammer tomorrow if you lend it to me today.” If you trust me (give me strength to do good) then you will lend me the hammer. Suppose, you accidentally left your hammer at my house and I return it. I may have acted faithfully, but in your ignorance/neglect you did not actually place faith in me. One might argue that it was in fact God that placed the faith and I was rewarding his faith, which would be true by our discussion.

            But the point is that unless a promise is extended, no faith can take place. Faith comes by hearing because only at the point of hearing is faith possible. You cannot believe before you are promised. So how does God impart faith? By speaking his promises to you, by inviting you to rely upon him!

            This in part explains two strange passages of hope in scripture.

1Pe 3:18  For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:

19  By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;

20  Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.

 

1Pe 4:5  Who shall give account to him that is ready to judge the quick and the dead.

6  For for this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit.

 

            Counting these as one passage, we see that Messiah preached to imprisoned spirits and specifically to the dead. Why so that they might be judged but LIVE according to God! Preaching produces hearing, produces faith so that even that dead have the opportunity to believe. I say this is hopeful because to me it answers the question “What about people who have never heard the gospel?” It seems intuitive to say that if God loves the world more than I do, then he is more willing than any of us to say who can be saved. Do we honestly think, God sits on his throne biting his nails because he is powerless to save people who die in ignorance? God is not bound as many preach. God will have mercy on whom he will have mercy and even death cannot thwart him. If we have had doubts Peter should lay them to rest.

Job 4.7: Full with faith

By believing based on what we can do rather than what we will do, we can see how God is able to have faith in Job or Moses despite sin because his faith is not in expectation, but in supporting them to do the best that he knows they are capable of. This leads into the next question, what made Job’s best better than another’s best? If we are all capable of the same then couldn’t God have chosen anyone knowing they had the potential best as good as Job? If it were so then God’s glowing report of Job could have had anyone in it. In a sense this might be true (perhaps anyone can attain the same level as Job), but in the general sense of comparison “have you considered my servant Job…” it does not. If the comparison concerns only potential, and all potential were the same then anyone would be available for the same example and yet for many the result would be much different. Is God’s faith misplaced? What good is potential unrealized?

All things work to God’s good pleasure says Ephesians 1:11.

Eph 1:11 In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:
Eph 1:12 That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ.

There is therefore no possibility that God has misplaced his faith. And the outcome of the working is good for which he will be praised.

Rom 8:28 And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.

Good at least for them that love God. Therefore what remains if his faith is not misplaced and will result in good (though not necessarily the good of all those who have faith, more will be explained)? What if we modify our assumption? What if not everyone has the same potential/same trustworthiness?

 The questions that follows are, “Well, why does one have different potential from another? Where do we get our potential from?” Potential, by its very nature is not something that we do, but something that we have. For example, imagine your wallet has $5 in it. You have the potential then to buy a $5 cheeseburger (potential). If you choose to buy a candy bar along the way, you no longer have the original potential. Or if you forgo buying the cheeseburger, and wait until payday then you may then have the potential to buy both the cheeseburger and the candy bar. The change in potential comes from outside, but we might says “it is because of decisions you made.” However, the potential and change depend firstly on the outside. For example, if there is no cheeseburger to buy whether you save or not you will not have that potential, or if your boss does not pay, you will not have that potential. Thusly, potential can be changed and it depends on personal choices however those choices rely on external factors that man does not determine.

So by potential in this case we mean a person’s worthiness of trust, which must lie in the ability to believe/build up another (he cannot be worthy of what he is incapable). In other words to count someone worthy of faith, that person must be capable of acting in faith. Since we had surmised that potential comes from the outside, then if the capacity for faith is our potential then where does faith come from? Believe it or not, the question has already been answered.

Rom 12:1 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.
2 And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God. 
3 For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith. 

 Why are we to test to find that perfect will? Because we shouldn’t think more highly of ourselves but think soberly since God has given every man a measure of faith. This makes sense because if I thought that I had somehow acted in faith on my own when another had not, I would think less of them because look what I have done. But on the contrary, where did my faith come from? God! God gave me a measure of faith! Maybe there’s so much more that I cannot grasp because I lack faith, maybe there’s someone ‘below’ me that if he had more faith he would surge past me?

 This however, may be a stumbling block to some. God gives faith? To some this will smack of ‘predestination.’ How can we choose to be saved if God gives faith? Well, firstly you assume that God giving faith is the same as man exercising faith. They are not or else how can a man given faith also be a man able to sin? Does he run out of faith, if so then who is responsible for keeping the tank full? We end up blaming God for our sin. But people tend to manage their theology backwards, they figure out the end of the discussion (which they are usually wrong about) decide they don’t like that end and then conclude that what they are presently reading does not mean what it seems to mean because of the end it must lead to. There’s nothing but division down that road; how can you reason with someone when you insist scripture belongs to your private interpretation?

 Instead, let us simply say that we don’t understand the end, but at the present in black and white we have that God gives man faith. How else could it be do you suppose? Do you just magically have the ability to rely on the unseen? Did you create faith out of nothing? I believe Hebrews 12:2 would have issue with us if we claim to be the authors and finishers of our own faiths. 

Bringing us back to the question of potential, did God give each of us the same amount of faith?

Rom 12:4 For as we have many members in one body, and all members have not the same office:
5 So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another. 
6 Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us, whether prophecy, let us prophesy according to the proportion of faith; 

Gifts differ by the share of faith we have been given, since there are different gifts there are different portions of faith. Is it possible to be given no faith at all?

2Th 3:1 Finally, brethren, pray for us, that the word of the Lord may have free course, and be glorified, even as it is with you:
2 And that we may be delivered from unreasonable and wicked men: for all men have not faith. 
3 But the Lord is faithful, who shall stablish you, and keep you from evil. 

Not all men have faith? Didn’t Paul say that a portion is to everyman? Yes, but you must recall the context of 12:3 “For I say…to every man that is among you...” The addressed in Romans are “all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints… your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world” (1:6-8). All who are called to be saints are given a portion of faith, but not all are called.

Mat 20:16 So the last shall be first, and the first last: for many be called, but few chosen.

Mat 22:14 For many are called, but few are chosen.

1Co 1:24 But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.

God has not given everyone faith, and those that he has given do not all have the same amount of faith. Logically then, we must conclude that our potential for trustworthiness is different…or more precisely the amount of trust that we are each worthy of is different. Still, this idea offends people (I have been included in those people in times past). How can God hold people accountable by a glass ceiling?

We assume a static form of things. 

2Co 10:15 Not boasting of things without our measure, that is, of other men's labours; but having hope, when your faith is increased, that we shall be enlarged by you according to our rule abundantly,
16 To preach the gospel in the regions beyond you, and not to boast in another man's line of things made ready to our hand. 

 Faith can grow. Much of modern doctrine has been devoted to this idea of static or digital qualities. We imagine that God is a flicker of switches turning unsaved to saved, no faith to faith, unloving to loving, sin to righteousness. And none of those things are necessarily untrue, it is God working in us that causes all those things, but the point is vision. Ours is limited to the next stage. We imagine, if I can just finish the race of faith then I’ll be done. The perfect example is Heaven. Most people when I’ve asked about Heaven conjures images of a place unchanging, where we’ll have complete knowledge, be at peak blissful joy all the time—contradictorily imaging they will be sitting there alternating between endless sermons and endless church worship which can only be explained by their imagination that we will then have no will of our own. God’s goal is to make us all ‘happy’ robots.

 This is not God’s view. To put it perfectly, when we get to Revelation which we call “The End of the Story,” God says “Behold, I make all things new.” We see ends, God sees new beginnings. This is the long way to say, that just because God gives something like faith does not mean that that’s the end. We shouldn’t imagine that “Well God gave me this much faith, so I can only go this far.” We should use all what he’s given us with the expectation that God will give more. Is a child given the freedom of an adult and then held responsible in the same way?

 And it should be no other way. When I was growing up, I remember that my mom would offer me an orange. She would offer me half, and I would say that I wanted the whole thing, but she knew that I would not eat a whole one and that the excess would be wasted. Why would we expect that God would give us more faith than we can use? When Israel had come into the land, God said that he would drive out the enemy before Israel, but that he would not do it too quickly (Exo 23:29) because in the vacuum between the borders and the population, the land would become desolate and overpopulated with beasts.

This principle holds true in the kingdom from Heaven as well. Consider the parables of the talents in Matthew 25 and Luke 19. In each case it was the lord that gave the money to people who were already his servants. The servants did not ‘create’ it. In the Matthew version he says:

Mat 25:15 And unto one he gave five talents, to another two, and to another one; to every man according to his several ability; and straightway took his journey.

The amount of the given is based on ability. The presumed ability is that they can choose to be profitable with what’s given, in other words these servants are worthy of trust because they are ABLE to act according to trust. What happens in the end? He says “I will make thee ruler over many things” (Matt 25:21) to those who have gained. To the one who did nothing with the ability he had?

Mat 25:29 For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance: but from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath.

God gives us as much as we can use, but he will not give us more until we have used it. There is no glass ceiling, if we ask how God can judge us when he gives only so much faith to each person, the answer is because we have not used all the faith he has put in us.

Luk 17:1 Then said he unto the disciples, It is impossible but that offences will come: but woe unto him, through whom they come!
2 It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones. 
3 Take heed to yourselves: If thy brother trespass against thee, rebuke him; and if he repent, forgive him. 
4 And if he trespass against thee seven times in a day, and seven times in a day turn again to thee, saying, I repent; thou shalt forgive him. 
5 And the apostles said unto the Lord, Increase our faith. 
6 And the Lord said, If ye had faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye might say unto this sycamine tree, Be thou plucked up by the root, and be thou planted in the sea; and it should obey you.

When instructed in the way of forgiveness, the Apostles realize (or imagine) the hugeness of this instruction and ask Yeshua to give them more faith. How does he reply? By saying that even the smallest amount can accomplish the unbelievable. But the Apostles haven’t made any trees to uproot themselves…it seems then that Yeshua is saying “You don’t even use what you have.” Later in verses 9-10, he talks about how a servant is not thanked for doing what he ought to do.

In other words, this forgiveness and avoidance of offence is what we ought to do…the implication? God has already given us for what we ought to do—we don’t need more faith.  

So what is the process? We know our trustworthiness is given because God has “put faith in us” to be used, and that if we use more will be added, if we do not use…then what we have will be taken away.

Job 4:6: God has faith

Job 4:17 Shall mortal man be more just than God? shall a man be more pure than his maker? 
18 Behold, he put no trust in his servants; and his angels he charged with folly: 

  Then comes the lie…the hook in the worm. Suppose you’re walking along at work one day, and your coworker—a peer—says “The boss wants that TPS report done by today.” Later on another referring to your boss, the same coworker says “Bill is having a barbecue on Sabbath are you going to come?” Wasn’t he referring to the same man in both instances? Why then does he call them by two different words? In the one case, he is asking you to do something that’s work and reminds you of that context by calling him boss since surely you already knew he was the boss. Purposefully or accidentally, he is drawing this connection. In the latter scenario, the contextual event is a future barbecue, a social event and in this case he calls the same man Bill. Now, he is drawing a connection to him as just another man. An equal.

  The word used in 17 for man, is not “ish” (woman ishah, there’s an interesting study behind the two words), but rather “enosh.” Ish is the first and standard word for man as an individual or as a species. Two possibilities are considered for the etymology of Ish, one is that it is a contraction of Enosh, I don’t believe that is true, but I’ll address that in a moment. The other possibility is that it comes from an unused root meaning “existing.” This seems more likely because the created unfallen man was called this and was created by YHVH which means “the self existing one.” Meanwhile, the second word Enosh is not used until after the fall and it comes from the word “anash” which means frail or feeble. Was man created frail? Or was he created in the image of the self-existing God?

  So this ‘image’ that Eliphaz sees, why does he stress mortality and weakness against the justice of God? We don’t know whether Eliphaz’s earlier, baseless character assault on Job was because of this vision or merely in parallel, but there does seem to be a connection. Either the spirit was egging him on or provoking his thoughts. Or, perhaps there is no difference between a man who does not capture his own thoughts and one who does not guard against outside thoughts?

  I call to mind a thought from earlier…when did Satan first lie to Eve? A lie is not in the word said, but in the assertion made. If a person says something true with such a tone that the opposite is implied, are they telling the truth or lying? They’re lying because they are asserting the opposite of the truth. If then, the assertion makes a lie (asserting against what the speaker believes to be true) then even if the form were a question then it could still be a lie. Satan went out to deceive Eve from the first word, his assertion from the beginning was a lie even though he had not yet completed the expression of the assertion.

  My point is that the first two questions are the beginning of a lie. It is true that a man is not more just, nor more pure than his maker. But he is setting up a frame of mind…how can a feeble man be more just than God? How can even a valiant man be more pure than his maker? In other words, “Who are you to even question? Shut your mouth and admit you’re a sinner!” 

  It would seem, if we are familiar with Job that God has a very similar line of thought at the end of the book. 

Job 38:1 Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said, 
2 Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge? 
3 Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me.
  
Job 40:2 Shall he that contendeth with the Almighty instruct him? he that reproveth God, let him answer it. 

  We might read into this that God is angry, yet no where is it said that God was angry with Job, even so there is a turning point between what Eliphaz says and what God says in 38 and 40. 

Job 32:1 So these three men ceased to answer Job, because he was righteous in his own eyes. 
2 Then was kindled the wrath of Elihu the son of Barachel the Buzite, of the kindred of Ram: against Job was his wrath kindled, because he justified himself rather than God.

  Where we are in chapter 4, Job is merely questioning, later on he will make assertions that he is righteous (which he is) and that therefore God is unrighteous for what he’s doing (which is false). After that comes Elihu and God’s remarks. God has no problems with the questions, no problem with the contention, and no problem with the demand for an explanation. 

  Why then do so many of us when faced with a question concerning God basically tell the questioner to hold their tongue? We might hide it behind pious words, “You just need to have faith.” But the truth of that statement is “I don’t think you have enough faith…you are a defective and rebellious servant because you question.” Yet, that is backwards. How strong is your faith in God if you are afraid to give audience to any question that God might not be trustworthy according to your reckoning? Who has more faith in a friend, the one who says “I don’t want to hear it,” or the one who listens and then says “that’s not true, I’m sure there must be something that you are not aware of that made him act that way.” If we are afraid of challenging questions, then we are really afraid that our faith is misplaced and we would rather be ignorant.

Job 4:18 Behold, he put no trust in his servants; and his angels he charged with folly: 
19 How much less in them that dwell in houses of clay, whose foundation is in the dust, which are crushed before the moth? 

  The lie started with questions, now what do we see in this? The lies have become bald-faced. It seems to flow from the previous questions which are valid, but what of 18? “he put no trust in his servants…” Isn’t Job in this mess because God said “hey look at my servant!” God has been praising Job’s integrity all along, clearly he puts trust in his servant. But what is trust?

  The word used here is “aman” meaning to build up or confirm, support. It is the word used regarding Abraham when he “believed.” Is it ever used of people?

Num 12:7 My servant Moses is not so, who is faithful in all mine house. 

Isa 1:20 But if ye refuse and rebel, ye shall be devoured with the sword: for the mouth of the LORD hath spoken it. 
21 How is the faithful city become an harlot! it was full of judgment; righteousness lodged in it; but now murderers. 

  Aman here is faithful. Note in both references it is God who declares someone or a group “faithful” therefore it is God who has faith in them. Yet, how can this be? How can someone who knows the future and hearts have faith in Moses or Job? If a normal person says “I trust Chris,” what they are really saying is that they rely on this person because the experience of Chris’ character has lead them to a favorable view of his future dealings with them. In other words, they trust because they believe he will not betray them in the future.

  For God, this cannot be the case. God cannot expect anything, he knows for a fact what will happen. We might wonder in Job’s case if maybe he hasn’t reached such a stage that he is no longer a sinner. Nothing in scripture says that it is impossible, for the redeemed there should not be a question of if we can become sinless, but why don’t we live that way now? God’s glowing appraisal of his servant would certainly further this thought. 

  But God also had faith in Moses as quoted above, and that was eight chapters before he sinned by not sanctifying YHVH before the people. This precludes the idea that God trusts those who will not betray him because even Moses betrayed him. This leads us to the sticky question of what makes one faithful or trustworthy? 

  Consider again aman, meaning to build up or support or nurse or foster, as well as the normal thoughts of faith and belief. Ask yourself what is believing? If I say to a gunman on the far end of a shotgun that I trust him while keeping him squarely in my sights, do I trust him? No, it is not a word; it is something else. 

  Whatever the mechanics, if I believe that the gunmen is trustworthy then I might lower my weapon. It would be possible to lower my weapon by mistake without any part of my will electing to do so. I may have fumbled or had it knocked from my hand, my disarmament then has nothing to do with faith either. 

  For it to be faith, I must choose to lower my weapon believing not in what I expect will occur but in the nature of the other man. However, nature is only potential not result. A man can choose, which means that anyone no matter how reliable they have been in the past can choose to betray you in the present or future. The deepest betrayal after all is from one whom you trust because it is from them that you least expect it and have therefore made yourself most vulnerable. Consider David and Absalom. So then what nature are you to trust?

  You cannot believe in what someone might do based on past actions because they still might do good or evil. Where does this leave faith? You can only have faith in the good that they are capable of. This seems untrue because we struggle to grasp how this applies to God…or maybe it’s just me and this is completely natural to everyone else. But consider another use of aman.

Rth 4:16 And Naomi took the child, and laid it in her bosom, and became nurse unto it. 

  The word nurse is our subject again. Consider the act of nursing. What does it do? From the breast of the mother sustenance is flowing into the frail newborn. The “nursing” gives strength to the one nursed. The believing gives strength to the one believed. Belief does not have to do with what we expect from another, but of strengthening that one to do the most good that they are capable of.

  When you believe in your son, you push him to achieve higher than he ever has. When you believe in the rule of law, the law becomes stronger because of it. Even God in a sense becomes more capable. 

Gen 15:6 And he believed in the LORD; and he counted it to him for righteousness. 

Could YHVH have counted righteousness to Abraham if not for his faith?

Num 20:12 And the LORD spake unto Moses and Aaron, Because ye believed me not, to sanctify me in the eyes of the children of Israel, therefore ye shall not bring this congregation into the land which I have given them. 

Until now, YHVH would have brought Moses and Aaron into the promised land, but because of unbelief he would no longer do so. It would seem in these cases that one could say this hasn’t to do with God’s capability, but only his willingness. If that is the case then what is God not capable of doing? The answer is anything that he does not will to do. The only thing that limits God’s actions is God himself. It is his character that prevents him from acting contrary to his character. So then, because of belief God was capable of crediting rightouesness when before he was not. And because of unbelief God was incapable of bringing Moses and Aaron into the promised land. It was not an issue of outside restriction but of character restriction.
  
Deu 1:32 Yet in this thing ye did not believe the LORD your God, 

Deu 1:35 Surely there shall not one of these men of this evil generation see that good land, which I sware to give unto your fathers, 
  
  Was God not capable of bringing the evil men into the land that he had sworn?

Num 14:11 And the LORD said unto Moses, How long will this people provoke me? and how long will it be ere they believe me, for all the signs which I have shewed among them? 

Num 14:15 Now if thou shalt kill all this people as one man, then the nations which have heard the fame of thee will speak, saying, 
16 Because the LORD was not able to bring this people into the land which he sware unto them, therefore he hath slain them in the wilderness. 

Num 14:19 Pardon, I beseech thee, the iniquity of this people according unto the greatness of thy mercy, and as thou hast forgiven this people, from Egypt even until now. 
20 And the LORD said, I have pardoned according to thy word: 

  The reason that God pardoned was because he could bring them into the land, yet because of their unbelief not one of them would. Belief limits God’s capabilities because only God’s character limits his capabilities and unbelief limits what his character will allow.

Mar 6:4 But Jesus said unto them, A prophet is not without honour, but in his own country, and among his own kin, and in his own house. 
5 And he could there do no mighty work, save that he laid his hands upon a few sick folk, and healed them. 
6 And he marvelled because of their unbelief. And he went round about the villages, teaching. 

  Yeshua himself “could” do no mighty work in Nazareth because of their unbelief. The case must be clear that even God’s capacity is affected by our faith. Faith is the building up, the nursing of one to achieve the greatest not the expected good. 

  If it were the latter than when God fails to act then our unbelief is justified because he has betrayed our faith (expectation). Instead when we believe in his character (his greatest possible good), we allow him to do the most that he is capable of and he will then be able to bring us into the promised land.

Job 4.5: Temptation (Part 2)

The way to deal with lust is not to deny and pretend we don’t desire anything, but to realize that all desirable things come from God. Therefore how to get them is by the way the giver designates. It is God’s desire to give us our desires just as a good husband desires to provide for the desires of his wife.

Psa 21:1 The king shall joy in thy strength, O LORD; and in thy salvation how greatly shall he rejoice!
2 Thou hast given him his heart's desire, and hast not withholden the request of his lips. Selah.

The king rejoices in YHVH’s salvation because it was God that gave him his desire. This is just speculation on my part, but I wonder if when we read this “his heart’s desire” are we meant to read it “God gave him what his heart desired…” or are we meant to read it “God gave him that his heart desired…” I would argue that if it’s one then it’s the latter because the next phrase says that God gave him his request. Is David saying the same thing twice? Or is he saying that God both implants the desire and gives the fulfillment of the desire? Does God make the fruit of the tree only or does he make the hungering stomach also? Did God create woman only or did he first create a lonely man?

God is not trying to figure out how to get us to stop desiring, he put the desires there in the first place so that he could fill them. We need to stop thinking of the guy with the stolen Rolexes in the back alley as the supplier, and go to the WatchMaker.

So how do we do endure temptation, since Yeshua has shown us as New Adams that we can? We can’t stop the temptation because Yeshua himself was tempted, but without sin. This goes further into why we are tempted in the first place. We know the elements of temptation (not sin) are lust and trap, can we avoid either of those? No, even Yeshua had to have had lust and as we saw from Matthew he also had traps. How can I say that Yeshua had lust? Because he was tempted! You cannot temp the lustless. But as we’ve seen lust itself is not sin, it is the conception of desire (lust) and opportunity (trap). You can sidestep the trap when you see it or you can be ensared by it.

Gen 4:6 And the LORD said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen? 7 If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.

Cain had the blessing of YHVH pointing out the trap that lay at the door, but the temptation (lust and trap) were still there. Why didn’t God simply zap him with a bolt of perspective? This is the true nature of the bandwagon of freewill. I don’t say that to degrade it or criticize it, I’m saying we don’t understand it. People like freewill because they refuse the idea that some people cannot be saved because God has chosen them for destruction, and this is rightly so. The idea that God makes people who have no choice but to face eternal destruction can be rejected out of hand simply by the character of YHVH in scripture. If you study from the first five books alone and really understand the reasons for the commands, it becomes utterly impossible to believe that the same God who meticulously created, protected, and out of his lovingkindness instructed his people for their own good, would create people who had no ability to choose the course of life, when all of his commands are also based on his own character. It’s impossible without even looking at the rest of scripture.

The problem with freewill comes not from its validity, but from the ramifications that we choose to ignore. We would like to think that when we enter into a relationship with YHVH through the Messiah Yeshua, that God zaps us with everything we need. By that I mean, before I would get angry for unrighteous reasons, but now I simply don’t. When I would have been tempted, now I simply no longer have that desire. God simply opens up the program settings and flicks all the switches to the ‘overcomer’ position. Where is freewill then? In short, such people believe that their destiny is for God to strip away their freewill. God’s whole point with your life is for you to sin by your freewill then choose him once so that God can take it away and make you a robot for all eternity? That’s the ‘good news’? You cannot have free will one moment to let you choose God, and then God against your will rewrite who you are in your soul. You must continually cooperate, that is the double edge of freewill.

One of the upsides to true lust (biblically understood) is if/when we fully understand that all desire comes from God and therefore can only be met his way, then desire can always winnow out truth in the same sense that a healthy non-addicted person’s tastes will always crave what the body actually needs. By that I mean the bait for the trap is something real that God intended you to have by coming to him. In the real world, when you covet another man’s car it’s not the desire for a car that is wrong, it is the fact that you are choosing to desire someone else’s car. You’re choosing to make someone other than God the provider…isn’t that what Hosea was saying? Saying your lover provides? In other words, who you see as your provider is the one you see as God.

Why do we covet? The sense of the commandment is that we are choosing to desire, why? What good do we think to obtain by setting our hearts on something that we do not have? Either we believe that eventually we will be able to have this thing from its owner, or we believe it is the only thing that will meet our desire and even though it is unattainable this is the closest we can get to it. Why don’t we wait on God? Because we don’t believe he will provide for our desires…oh maybe, pie in the sky, he will eventually give us something, but it won’t be as good as if I have this thing right now. We believe that we know better what is good, and if it’s attainable then we have the power to provide it ourselves or no one has the power to provide it if it is unattainable. In other words, coveting makes myself into my own provider. I become my own god because either I will get it for me, or no one can. Who you see as your provider is the one you see as God.

So the upside to lust is that when you understand what you desire, it will always lead you to God. This applies to the issue of the misunderstanding freewill and many other false doctrines because in truth we don’t desire these things. No healthy soul can convincingly make a case “oh yes, I would like to not be able to choose.” We want structure and boundaries as all children do, and that are enforced in our lives, but no one wants to be a robot.

I know this seems a convoluted train of thought, I’ve been sitting here myself trying to figure out which parts are important and which are tangential. But what I’m trying to bring home is the reality that God wants us to desire, to long, to lust. And there will be temptation also because there will be traps in this life because we still have freewill and there are things that we want and have not. And since as Man we always will have freewill just as Yeshua still has freewill, I would argue that even in the resurrection we will have temptation. The difference will be that with spirits in communion with God’s Spirit, and souls in submission to the will of God coming down through the Spirit, we will always sidestep the traps. But the inescapable truth is that temptation will always be with us. We can’t say that we’ll have no desire because God gave us desire, what would be the point of living if there was no desire? Just to do things that you have no desire to do? We might as well be rocks just sitting. And we can’t say that we will always have our desires instantly met either, what would be the point of all God’s talk about rewarding if everyone would have everything they wanted as soon as they wanted it regardless of faithfulness? Are you telling me that saved-by-fire-Joe-Schmo will instantly have the same level of reward as on-fire-cross-bearing-Jane-Schmo?

God has never been one of instant gratification. Do you make children happy by giving them everything they want? No, there is a process to happiness. Making them work for things actually increases their gratitude and enjoyment of the things they are given. Contrary to modern thinking, you actually increase the value of something by being stingy with it!

Psa 1:1 Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful.
2 But his delight is in the law of the LORD; and in his law doth he meditate day and night.
3 And he shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of water, that bringeth forth his fruit in his season; his leaf also shall not wither; and whatsoever he doeth shall prosper.

Who is blessed? The man who doesn’t walk, stand, or sit with the ungodly, but instead delights in the torah…

Psa 40:4 Blessed is that man that maketh the LORD his trust, and respecteth not the proud, nor such as turn aside to lies.

Who is blessed? He who trusts in YHVH. Sure there are obvious good things that befall the people in these two Psalms. In 1, the man is planted and all his works are established. In the second it doesn’t say, but obviously whose trust will be rewarded more than the one who trusts in the giver of all good? I’m saying that the blessing is not the being established, it’s the abstaining and the delighting. The man is blessed because of the process he is undergoing, not because of the collateral good. We think of blessing as being given something, “Oh I’m rich so I am blessed.” But how many rich people can we think of who are not happy? And that is what this use of blessing means, it is not the word barak like when we are told to bless God, it is the word esher for happiness. Happiness comes by a process of delighting and trusting in YHVH.

So unless in the resurrection happiness will come for the first time in the form of a lightning bolt of prozac, there has to be process and growth. And where there is process and growth there is something desirable that is not yet obtained. Or would we say that unlike now, we will not have the ability to see what we lack? Is our contentness in the resurrection based on ignorance of what we lack? A lack or desire for God's goodness we lack? Or is our contentness based on our focus, communion, and trust in the one who will provide in the best timing for what we desire?

There will be people more grown and people less, people more blessed and people less blessed…but it will all be without sin, pain, death, or sorrow. Therefore, temptation is a good thing because it is the means of growth. It is by desiring and now having that we are driven to process. Let’s add one more thought to our analogy of the baited trap. We know that the trap is laid with stolen goods which we rightly desire, and placed in a place to tempt us to take the quick and easy path of satisfaction on our own terms. But as we realized earlier the same lust that draws us to do evil, draws us towards good. Consider the trap, once spotted as a trap. Realizing the truth that the food is desirable, but that here it has been laid to my destruction, by an enemy…instead of despairing, my God-designed hunger (lust) now draws me away to seek the life-giving sustenance of my maker.

Pro 16:26 The appetite of the laboring man laboreth for him; For his mouth urgeth him thereto. (ASV)

Again the upside of lust is that once we have understood what we are actually lusting after (the goodness of God) then the bait will not satisfy…it’s like looking at a twinky and going… “naw…that won’t really hit the spot.” Now the hunger pulls you away from the trap, to seek the source of goodness. How does that work? Because the hunger pushes you to labor! The hunger pushed you to the process! God gave us lust to drive us to the process, bringing us closer to him!

Pro 27:7 The full soul loatheth an honeycomb; but to the hungry soul every bitter thing is sweet.

This is why temptation is good! Why is the honeycomb loathsome? Because the man is full, his hunger is satisfied so even the enticing thing has a negative value. On the other hand, even the bitter thing is sweet to the hungry, why? Because it satisfies hunger. The temptation is good because even though it is bitter, the hunger (lust) drives us to the labour (process of happiness) that bearing the temptation will bring us closer to God and satisfy our hunger. The hunger can be mastered, like Cain we can rule over it and make it work for us. Side step the trap and press on to the source. Let’s go back to James.

Jas 1:12 Blessed is the man that endureth temptation: for when he is tried, he shall receive the crown of life, which the Lord hath promised to them that love him.

Blessed or happy is the man who endures…because when he is tried—the word means acceptable because what comes through the fire (the silver or gold) is the part that is acceptable what is consumed or burned out is the dross. It is the process of trying that makes the material acceptable—he shall be given life that God promised to those that love him (if we love him we keep his commandments).

Temptation is a good thing because it is the lust driven process that brings us to acceptability when we love him.

Jas 1:13 Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:
14 But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.

If we are made acceptable by the temptation, then we must master the element of lust and refuse the traps to become that acceptable vessel.

Jas 1:16 Do not err, my beloved brethren.
17 Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.

Finally, he gives this warning or instruction on how not to be lead to a trap by your lust, “Don’t err…every good gift…comes from the Father…” What is more desirable than the good and perfect gift?

Temptation makes us acceptable, we must have it that is why…

Jas 1:2 My brethren, count it all joy when ye fall into divers temptations;
3 Knowing this, that the trying of your faith worketh patience.
4 But let patience have her perfect work, that ye may be perfect and entire, wanting nothing.

Temptation (lust meeting a trap) works towards your completion!

1Pe 1:6 Wherein ye greatly rejoice, though now for a season, if need be, ye are in heaviness through manifold temptations:
7 That the trial of your faith, being much more precious than of gold that perisheth, though it be tried with fire, might be found unto praise and honour and glory at the appearing of Jesus Christ: 8 Whom having not seen, ye love; in whom, though now ye see him not, yet believing, ye rejoice with joy unspeakable and full of glory:
9 Receiving the end of your faith, even the salvation of your souls.

Temptations maybe bitter but they make your faith precious, in fact they perfect it…even the salvation of your souls. That is why they are to be rejoiced in! You’re in temptation? Guess what, God is making you perfect! You could go on and on in scripture and see how this is true. Check for yourself and see the positive way scripture speaks of temptation remembering that temptation, trial, and tribulation are all used synonymously.

There is one more thing to note though. The epistles all speak of trial as something to be met with joy because of what it does to your faith and how it makes you acceptable. However, if you look at the gospels you find that Yeshua had a seemingly contradictory view.

Mat 6:13 And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.

Mar 14:38 Watch ye and pray, lest ye enter into temptation. The spirit truly is ready, but the flesh is weak.

Luk 22:46 And said unto them, Why sleep ye? rise and pray, lest ye enter into temptation.

All the references to temptation are of something to be prayed to be avoided. So how does this work? It’s short and sweet, it’s good to learn to sidestep the traps, but it’s better to desire the unbaited food.

Luk 8:11 Now the parable is this: The seed is the word of God.
12 Those by the way side are they that hear; then cometh the devil, and taketh away the word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved.
13 They on the rock are they, which, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, which for a while believe, and in time of temptation fall away.

The trap brings with it a danger of falling into the trap. Certainly God will keep us from a trap that is too hard, 1 Cor 10:13. But God knows we have limits to our strength, why? Because he didn’t open us up and flip all our switches to ‘overcomer.’ It’s a process of learning to overcome, of being remade into the image of Messiah, of being renewed in mind…it’s a process. As God burns out the dross through temptation, he makes more room to fill us with good stuff. We grow to fill the areas that were previously filled with weakness.

So we pray not to enter into temptation, but be delivered…but just as sometimes God knows its best to not give us our daily bread; and just as Yeshua, who was closer to God than any of us, still faced temptations we too will face temptations despite our prayers. Pray that you do not enter temptation, so that you will not be beaten down and your faith be destroyed; but when you do, know that it is perfecting your faith and saving your soul so rejoice for the glory that is coming.

Job 4.4 Temptation (1 of 2)

Job 4:17 Shall mortal man be more just than God? shall a man be more pure than his maker?
18 Behold, he put no trust in his servants; and his angels he charged with folly:

We’ve discovered the identity or at least allegiance of the messenger to Eliphaz, yet, what do we do with the message? Remember the serpent in Genesis. He was a liar, but he told truth in his lie, even a truth that was not previously disclosed (“You shall become as gods knowing good and evil…”). Yet he also lied, in his denial of the certainty of their deaths.

We have established solidly, I believe, that spirit speaking was not of God. So if this spirit is not of God then its message is suspect. Not necessarily untrue, as the devil also used truth, though, to deceive (or lead astray). Of course, the deception doesn’t lie in whether the statement is true, but the intent of the thing. When did the deception of Eve begin? With what could have been an innocent question “Is it true that God hath said, Ye do not eat of every tree of the garden?” (YLT) because from the beginning he being subtle was intending to lead her astray meaning that even in a question which has no truth or falsity, there can be deception.

The mere fact that this spirit is not of God means whatever is said whether true or false is intending to discredit God. We could just skip over the statement, after all what good is it to study a possibly false and certainly malicious statement? It would seem none. But we must remember the principle from earlier concerning the filmmaker…no frame is wasted. What does God want us to see in this temptation?

Mat 4:1 Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil.

When in doubt about what something looks like we should always look to our example. That’s why he’s called the example. First thing that stands out, is why was Yeshua tempted? Memory would say that the first temptation being of bread means that he was tempted because he was hungry. But the truth in verse 1 is striking, he was tempted because he was lead “to be tempted.”

How can this be? It would be easy to say “oh that was so that we could know he was tempted.” But, I don’t have to see someone tempted to know they were. I’ve never needed the devil to meet me at the end of forty days of fasting to tempt me with bread, I’ve been tempted in the first five minutes of a day. Every time I go to the grocery store, or see someone who has what I want, I know temptation. The point could not have been to show us that he was tempted, because we have the rest of the gospels to show us his temptation. Didn’t the Pharasees tempt him (Matthew 16:1, 19:3)? Wasn’t he tempted to let the cup pass from him? Of course why else would he pray for it? Or do we think that he didn’t have the freewill to refuse the cup? If that were true then in what way would he be a high priest touched with our infirmities?

I think there were two reasons. The first, was unlike you and I before our redemption, he did not have what is understood as the sin nature. A huge topic in and of itself, but suffice to say that his spirit was in constant communion with God’s spirit—with the brief exception of an eternity on the cross. And since he was in constant submission, his soul never decided on it’s own to sin. He was the second Adam (1 Cor 15:45), and like the first Adam he was not compelled by an inner sentiment to do wrong. Or perhaps a better understanding would be, unlike the unredeemed man he did not lack the power to do right. Apart from God, man is incapable of doing right and by default he sins, it is not a compulsion but an inability that is the ‘sin nature.’ That is why we have to be freed from sin.

So in one sense it is to show us that Yeshua was tempted, because unlike unredeemed man tempted from his own internal inaptitude, Yeshua was tempted from the outside in. Just as we who are dead with Messiah are also. Thus like Adam, Yeshua and ourselves, are tempted by the serpent or other external sources. If—like post-fall man—Adam was unable to do right, what was the need for the serpent? He would have walked by the tree and snatched the fruit immediately.

Not to degress further, but imagine a child. A fallen child in our world when told not to do something being a new sinner just like the rest of us, has no compunction at all to violate any command he’s been given. He learns obedience through the rod of discipline. Internally he has no spirit telling him how to live right through it’s communion with God. Eventually we learn even apart from God not to do certain things because we will be punished by other men and maybe even by God, but there is no internal fortitude against wrong doing.

In contrast, Adam and Eve knew neither fear nor shame, nor were there any other people besides themselves. The fact that they did not immediately eat of the fruit, shows they had to learn unrighteousness. They had inner ability to not sin. But wait, what about the threat of death? How could they be effectively threatened with something they have never known in a perfect world? Everything in their lives is harmless! They have no experience with it.

You tell someone “Don’t do this or you’ll be killed,” and it’ll be hard to get them to do it because they do fear. I would argue that in reality, Eve simply took God at his word (or possibly Adam) that whatever death was, it was bad. There was no emotion attached to it, simply an acknowledgment of the truth just as we often talk about the death of Yeshua without it touching off any emotion when if we really understand it, it should be quiet different. Once the Serpent then challenged the truth, there was nothing stopping her. And once she had fallen, the threat of death was clearly not enough to keep Adam from following. If you had warned someone of death, and then someone said “you won’t get killed,” the person to whom they spoke would probably say “you try it first!” Why? Because they do fear death, it has weight in their minds. To someone who knew no pain or death, the ‘threat of death’ could be no more than an idea.

So the first thing we understand from the temptation of Yeshua is that he and we (because of his example) are not tempted from within, but from without and we have the ability to refuse. Since we know in truth that we still sin (not that we have to, or that it is inevitable, but simply that we do), this holds a huge promise of how we can submit to that inner spirit that keeps us from sin.

This leads us into Yeshua’s response to temptation.

Mat 4:2 And when he had fasted forty days and forty nights, he was afterward an hungred.
3 And when the tempter came to him, he said, If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread.
4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.

We’ve heard this message before, Yeshua replies with the word of God. The principle, reply with the word of God to temptation. Ask yourself, now why did Adam and Eve fail? These two accounts are perfect contrasts; First Adam (which is also the name of the species so Eve is included) and Last Adam. Eve (as half of the First Adam) was deceived and thus transgressed. Why was she deceived? This is key! How did she respond to the Serpent? It wasn’t with the Word of God, it was with the word of Man. “Nor touch it…” she said.

Well the first part was God’s Word, we might defend. But I would argue it’s the same as a lie. It is still a lie even if it contains truth because the intent is to deceive; can it still be the Word of God if we presume to add our own to it? If I quote scripture and add my own twist, attributing it to God then isn’t the entire statement not God’s? Truth does not come in words. Any word alone is not a truth; it is the statements, the assertions that convey truth, if one part lies the whole statement lies. The only difference between her lie and the serpent’s, was he intended to deceive, she accidentally deceived herself.

This of course makes Adam’s responsibility all the more severe because he was not deceived and from Yeshua’s example what he needed to do was simply answer with the Word of God. But there in comes his failing, he let Eve proceed instead of intervening to save her; and then when she had eaten he followed. Why? Again look to Yeshua, how did Yeshua deal with a bride separated by sin? He sacrificed himself trusting in the will of the Father to bring her back. What should Adam have done? Trusted God. In a sense, you could switch Job for Adam and Eliphaz for Eve.

This seems like a good dialogue, rather it is, Yeshua was tempted so that we like him could see how to overcome temptation as new creations, as New Adams. However, this only explains one reason why we are told of Yeshua’s temptation. It doesn’t answer the underlying, question why are we tempted? God doesn’t want us to sin, so why does God let us be tempted? For whatever reason, he is unwilling to stop it. We could be quick to jump on the freewill means temptation bandwagon, and freewill may be the mechanism of our temptation, and this would not be false.

Jas 1:14 But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.
15 Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.

Temptation is the combination of lust meeting a trap, in other words opportunity. Traps are baited with what they offer, even one that does not use bait is positioned around some natural bait. No one sets a bear trap in the middle of a desert and hopes to catch a bear. The point is temptation happens when our lust comes across bait, the thing it lusts after being offered to it. There are many beautiful women in the world, both in terms of personality and form, but not every married man commits adultery. There has to be the lust inside before it ‘conceives’ and brings out sin. Remember that the word lust does not mean necessarily a sexual desire, literally it means a longing. We also have the connotation that lust is necessarily bad, but scripture doesn’t see it that way.

Mat 13:16 But blessed are your eyes, for they see: and your ears, for they hear.
17 For verily I say unto you, That many prophets and righteous men have desired to see those things which ye see, and have not seen them; and to hear those things which ye hear, and have not heard them.

They were blessed because they get to see and hear the things that prophets and righteous men desired (lusted) after. This is also reflected in the aged scriptures.

Deu 5:21 Neither shalt thou desire thy neighbour's wife, neither shalt thou covet thy neighbour's house, his field, or his manservant, or his maidservant, his ox, or his ass, or any thing that is thy neighbour's.

Lusting and coveting are often used interchangeably by people, but they are not the same. The command here is actually two-fold, don’t desire (chamad meaning to delight in) your neighbor’s wife, the first use is Gen 2:9 referring to the trees that God made desirable. Desiring is not, wrong clearly God wanted us to desire his creation. The command then is not to make your neighbor’s wife pleasant to you. Does this mean that noticing the desirability of your neighbors wife is a sin? What if you saw a woman and found her desirable (which scripture does not condemn, Deu 21:11) but didn’t know she was married?

Gen 3:6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.

Chamad here is the “desired” part. Notice that it wasn’t when she saw that the tree was good…nor when it was pleasant to the eyes. She recognized that there was something pleasant (ta’avah meaning to long for), but in addition to that she saw it as a tree to be desired in the sense that God commanded we should not desire, not everything, but our neighbor’s things. The commandment is not against recognition of something desirable, it is against choosing to set your desire on it. The difference being “That is good and desirable,” and “I will desire to have that good.”

The second part of the command to not covet supports this. Covet avah meaning to wish for something. The first use of it by itself is in Numbers 11:34 when the now covenanted Israel tempts God to provide quail. A very interesting account when you look at it from the beginning. This is just after an incident of complaining which brought judgment. Notice how this begins…

Num 11:4 And the mixt multitude that was among them fell a lusting: and the children of Israel also wept again, and said, Who shall give us flesh to eat?
5 We remember the fish, which we did eat in Egypt freely; the cucumbers, and the melons, and the leeks, and the onions, and the garlick:
6 But now our soul is dried away: there is nothing at all, beside this manna, before our eyes.

Who is lusting here? The mixed multitude started it and the natural Israelites continued it. The mixed multitude is mentioned first? There is an importance in this, as if God is saying how bindingly he takes their joining to his covenant. These gentiles aren’t just along for the ride, God says they’re driving the bus too, there is one law for both stranger and natural born. Now what are they lusting after, the goods. What goods? Is Egypt the only place with fish and cucumbers? The point of the desire is not the thing, it was the place. They’re lusting for what the world offers instead of what God promised. This is definitely forbidden things, it’s the equivalent of Lot’s wife looking back to Soddom. If you think about the analogy God continually makes between his people and a harlot; God’s problem is never what they desire, but whom they desire it from!

Hos 1:2 The beginning of the word of the LORD by Hosea. And the LORD said to Hosea, Go, take unto thee a wife of whoredoms and children of whoredoms: for the land hath committed great whoredom, departing from the LORD.

Hos 2:5 For their mother hath played the harlot: she that conceived them hath done shamefully: for she said, I will go after my lovers, that give me my bread and my water, my wool and my flax, mine oil and my drink.
6 Therefore, behold, I will hedge up thy way with thorns, and make a wall, that she shall not find her paths.
7 And she shall follow after her lovers, but she shall not overtake them; and she shall seek them, but shall not find them: then shall she say, I will go and return to my first husband; for then was it better with me than now.
8 For she did not know that I gave her corn, and wine, and oil, and multiplied her silver and gold, which they prepared for Baal.

Providing a living picture of Israel, by YHVH’s direction Hosea marries a harlot to represent Israel. Notice in the second passage, why does their mother (Israel) chase after lovers (the Baalim)? To provide bread, water, wool, flax, oil and drink…which of those did God not promise to provide? None, according to the covenant if Israel followed him they would have all of those things. In fact according to Hosea God was providing all those things and they were attributing them to other gods. Her lovers were robbing her husband to give the harlot her hire.

A fundamental picture should be emerging now. God not Satan made all desirable things. That blows my mind! We are often mislead to believe that there are things we should not want as if the Devil could make something that is desirable and God is a killjoy trying to keep us from having fun with anyone else. God forbid that we should think that! Satan is stealing what God has made and offering it in a trap, but he didn't make the desirable thing! Everything we desire is of God.

“Wait, wait!” We say. “Temptation is desiring something we shouldn’t have!” But that’s not what the scripture says, temptation is when the desire meets the baited trap (enticement). What is the trap baited with? Something desirable. The desire isn’t the trap, it’s what is drawing you to the trap! What is desired is never the issue, it’s who is offering the desire. God didn’t tell fish not to eat bugs, but a fish should not take worm dangling on a string. Candy isn’t bad, but the stranger offering it to your child is! Desiring the beauty of a woman is not wrong, but don’t go to the adulteress; go to your wife!

If you think about it, really all lust is the same. The same lust that drives men to evil (sleeping with another man’s wife, stealing another man’s car) is the same lust that drives men to do good (protecting and serving your own wife or the unmarried woman in your community, protecting your investments or the investments of another man). The issue always comes down to who is offering it. As we saw earlier God called the tree of knowledge good, not evil. God didn’t want to refuse man knowledge God wanted man to come to God for knowledge; Satan is the offerer of the short cut. He’s the stranger with candy, the salesman with the free lunch. God is saying you need to take this path for your own good to find this thing you desire; Satan stole something God made to be desired and said “No, you don’t have to wait and work, come get it right here; now; on your terms!”

Now we can understand, lust is not sin. The sin is in trying to have that legitimate desire met by something on our terms in opposition to God’s which are for our own good. Now back to Numbers 11.

Interestingly here, the word for lusting is two words, Avah and Ta’avah. It’s as if they lust greatly or are longing to lust. They choose to desire it! The very next use is the command to not desire your neighbor’s wife or covet his stuff. The idea is not a command to not recognize desirable things, indeed how could God command us to not recognize his handiwork? How could one recognize the qualities of a good wife without evaluating the wives around him? How could God implant a longing for good, put good all around us, and then tell us not to long for it?

Clearly, lust as recognition is not the problem. The trap is not the problem. Even where the two meet is not the problem, it is when we decide to desire, long to lust, that is when we look at the bait and go “mmm…I would like to have that…in fact I will have that…or at least get as close as I can…maybe a little closer I’m safe here…one more step, I’m not springing the trap…” SNAP!!! Lust conceives and springs the trap thus there is sin.