Judges series - Judges 19 - A Levite and His Concubine

The way to read this article is that the orange underlined texts are the verses of the Bible (NIV, unless otherwise stated). The black texts following the Bible verses (and enclosed by square brackets) are my commentaries. At the end of these Bible texts and commentaries, I have inserted a section on "Points to take note/What we have learnt/can learn".
{For full listing of all articles in this series, click here}

Judges 19

A Levite and His Concubine

1 In those days Israel had no king. Now a Levite who lived in a remote area in the hill country of Ephraim took a concubine from Bethlehem in Judah. 2 But she was unfaithful to him. She left him and went back to her father's house in Bethlehem, Judah. After she had been there four months, 3 her husband went to her to persuade her to return. He had with him his servant and two donkeys. She took him into her father's house, and when her father saw him, he gladly welcomed him. 4 His father-in-law, the girl's father, prevailed upon him to stay; so he remained with him three days, eating and drinking, and sleeping there. [These last few chapters of Judges are difficult chapters for even the best Bible scholars. I scanned the standard Bible commentaries but there was nothing very “solid” written about these chapters. I tell you these chapters are difficult, that explained why I scanned for help myself. Often, we find standard Bible commentaries might omit explanations for verses because they were easily understood but the omissions of much commentaries for these chapters were perhaps intentional, just on the ground that the scholars really did not know what to make out of these stories. Even as I write I am saying it isn’t easy for me either.

The time period of this story is believed to during the early Judges period. That it showed up in later chapters of the Book of Judges does not necessary mean that it occurred at later part of the period. It was early Judges period, because of the mention of the Levite high priest, Phinehas, in Judges 20:28. The morality depicted by this story was really bad, so bad that it makes one wondered why it could be done by God’s people, and allowed to be recorded here. When you finished the story, you will know what I mean.

Conquered lands were for the possession of the people of Israel. Moses distributed some territories, those on one side (the east) of the Jordan River (Moses did not cross over the Jordan River). Joshua was the one who led the Israelites across the Jordan River, took Jericho, and then later on, took other territories in the Promised Land, as the LORD fought and gave the territories over to the Israelites. Joshua distributed captured territories among the tribes of Israel (By the time Joshua was old and died, not all territories of the Promised Land were captured). But in the distribution, the Levi tribe got no land, they being the priestly tribe, was to live among the other tribes and depended on the other tribes to provide for them as they (the Levites) served as priests for the Israelites. This explains this particular Levite (and even the Levite of Judges 17), moving about the lands of various Israelite tribes (although this did not mean that members of other Israelite tribes did not move about/dwell in their brothers’ lands).

In this story, the Levite was in the hill country of Ephraim (this, I believe, was referring to the hill country of Samaria. This, later became part of Israel, the northern kingdom, the first king {Jeroboam} of which, was an Ephraim, the half-tribe of the house of Joseph. But please note that at this time, there were not yet, the duo kingdoms). He took a concubine from Bethlehem, Judah. The concubine, recorded here, in verse 2, was unfaithful to the Levite. She left the Levite and went back to her father’s house in Bethlehem. The Levite went to his father-in-law’s house to get his concubine back. The father-in-law kept asking the Levite to stay longer.]

[Added: 1 Mar 2013: Concerning the statement of the concubine being unfaithful, the word translated “played the whore” (KJV) and “unfaithful” (NIV) in Hebrew is zanah.  According to Dr Claude Mariottini, in his article, http://claudemariottini.com/rereading-judges-192/,

 “The word has a primary meaning of committing fornication, being a harlot. However, according to Koehler-Baumgartner, Lexicon in Veteris Testamenti Libros (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1958), 261, the word also can mean “to be angry, hateful” or to “feel repugnant against.”

The Professor went on to say:

“Thus, taking the above meaning of the word, the translation of the NRSV makes better sense: But his concubine became angry with him, and she went away from him to her father’s house at Bethlehem in Judah.  This is the view also adopted by some ancient translations such as the Septuagint, the Targum, and the Vulgate.  Neither of these ancient translations nor Josephus accused the woman of conjugal infidelity.”

 
I leave it to you to assess this; as far as I am concerned, it changes NOT, any of my other commentary on this account.]

5 On the fourth day they got up early and he prepared to leave, but the girl's father said to his son-in-law, "Refresh yourself with something to eat; then you can go." 6 So the two of them sat down to eat and drink together. Afterward the girl's father said, "Please stay tonight and enjoy yourself." 7 And when the man got up to go, his father-in-law persuaded him, so he stayed there that night. 8 On the morning of the fifth day, when he rose to go, the girl's father said, "Refresh yourself. Wait till afternoon!" So the two of them ate together. 9 Then when the man, with his concubine and his servant, got up to leave, his father-in-law, the girl's father, said, "Now look, it's almost evening. Spend the night here; the day is nearly over. Stay and enjoy yourself. Early tomorrow morning you can get up and be on your way home." 10 But, unwilling to stay another night, the man left and went toward Jebus (that is, Jerusalem), with his two saddled donkeys and his concubine. [The father-in-law kept asking his son-in-law to stay longer; what exactly was the motive was not revealed. Finally, despite it being almost evening, the Levite still set off with his concubine and servant.]
11 When they were near Jebus and the day was almost gone, the servant said to his master, "Come, let's stop at this city of the Jebusites and spend the night." 12 His master replied, "No. We won't go into an alien city, whose people are not Israelites. We will go on to Gibeah." 13 He added, "Come, let's try to reach Gibeah or Ramah and spend the night in one of those places." 14 So they went on, and the sun set as they neared Gibeah in Benjamin. 15 There they stopped to spend the night. They went and sat in the city square, but no one took them into his home for the night. [Because they set off late, soon it was nearly dark, and they had to spend the night somewhere, before continuing the next day. The Levite’s servant suggested a nearby city of the Jebusites. Jebusites was a local tribe of the inhabitants of the land (not one of the tribes of Israelites). But the Levite insisted on going to an Israelite-occupied city, and so they ended up in Gibeah, in Benjamin. Benjamites was a tribe of the Israelites.

They were at the city square but no one took them into his home for the night. In those days, hospitality to fellow travelers was expected to be the norm (Because of this norm, Abraham, entertained The Three Vistors/Men – you can read this in Who were The Three Visitors/Men), yet none of the Benjamites took the Levite in. What are we to make out of this? What was the intention of the LORD for having this recorded as such? Was it to show to us, with the disobedience of the Israelites as explained in Judges 2, brotherly kindness also went down the drains? The lack of brotherly kindness bothers the LORD, I believe, that was why we find that Jesus, in his earthly ministry, told of the story of the Good Samaritan. By the way, the “love thy neighbor as yourselves” is not a new command from Jesus; it was an Old Testament command (Lev 19:18); many believers are not aware of this! Or was it to indicate that things were so bad, in terms of moral values, that people just were too afraid to take any strangers into their home, lest they get robbed, molested or even killed?

In present times, do you take strangers into your home to stay? If not, what does it tell of the condition of mankind? Yes, perhaps, it is not wise (whose wisdom?) to take in strangers but how about servants of God (itinerant preachers, overseas preachers/speakers, visiting pastors, etc)? This chap, in the story, was a Levite – priestly family, in those days. There is an important point I believe the LORD had wanted to show to the children of the Israelites – I will dwell on it later, in my commentary for the next chapter, Judges 20.]
16 That evening an old man from the hill country of Ephraim, who was living in Gibeah (the men of the place were Benjamites), came in from his work in the fields. 17 When he looked and saw the traveler in the city square, the old man asked, "Where are you going? Where did you come from?" 18 He answered, "We are on our way from Bethlehem in Judah to a remote area in the hill country of Ephraim where I live. I have been to Bethlehem in Judah and now I am going to the house of the LORD. No one has taken me into his house. 19 We have both straw and fodder for our donkeys and bread and wine for ourselves your servants—me, your maidservant, and the young man with us. We don't need anything." 20 "You are welcome at my house," the old man said. "Let me supply whatever you need. Only don't spend the night in the square." 21 So he took him into his house and fed his donkeys. After they had washed their feet, they had something to eat and drink. [It is not very clear whether the old man in verse 16, was an Ephraimite (member of the half-tribe of the house of Joseph) or just a local of the Ephraim land, who was then living in Gibeah, the city of the Benjamites.

But I believe the old man should be an Ephraimite. My reason is this: We read earlier on, the Levite did not want to stop at a city belonging to the Jebusites for the reason that the Jebusites were aliens. So, if the old man was an alien, it was likely that the Levite would have again declined. Furthermore, the Levite’s saying that he was going to the house of the LORD, I believe, was an attempt to appeal to old man to take him in for the night – only an Israelite would be bothered whether or not, the strangers were going to the house of the LORD.]
22 While they were enjoying themselves, some of the wicked men of the city surrounded the house. Pounding on the door, they shouted to the old man who owned the house, "Bring out the man who came to your house so we can have sex with him." [Some Bible translations use the phrase, “sons of Belial” which was translated in the NIV version here as wicked men. There are various definitions of the sons of Belial, some referring to demons, some referring to men. In this context, it should be correct to say that men were being referred to. Some definitions included wicked men, worthless men, yokeless men (I take it to mean men without any meaningful work), men never to rise (“men without future”) – generally, scum of society. In the Book of Jubilees (aka Lesser Genesis, an ancient Jewish religious work), uncircumcised heathens were called sons of Belial.

It is important that we know who these people were, because of the offence committed and the consequence and punishment thereafter, which were the “offensive” elements in this story. Many commentators just assumed that since the city belonged to the Benjamites, the Benjamites did the hideous thing that you would read about later on.

If you have been following this series of mine on the Book of Judges, you would remember that the very thing that the Israelites did wrong that broke the Covenant God made with them was this: that they did not destroy the inhabitants together with all the altars of the pagan gods. Therefore, in places dwelled in by the Israelites, there would be local inhabitants amongst them. For some instances, the Israelites only forced the locals into forced labor, in others, inter-marrying happened afterwards, mixing of bloods and cultures, including worship of gods/deities. The latter was what God did not want to see happened, and it was fundamental in the covenant God had with the forefathers of the then Israelites.

I postulate that the wicked men in verse 22 were not Benjamites. I would not say that I have looked at all the commentaries on this story but of those I looked at, none postulated as such - that the wicked men were not Benjamites. If you look at the definitions of sons of Belial that I have talked about above, particularly the definition from the Book of Jubilees, you might agree with me. I am not saying that it was not possible, but I would say it was highly unlikely that the scum of the city of the Benjamites, made up of Benjamites; it would be more likely that the scum included original locals, other tribes from rural areas sojourned into the city and got dysfunctional much like what we see even in some of our societies and cities. Of course, here the owners of the city, the Benjamites could not escape from the responsibility for the city, leaving the scum of society to do what they like.

Some commentators dealt with the phrase “the people in the house were enjoying themselves” as if to imply that was a sin that “brought on” the subsequent hideous event. I think, that would be reading too much into a very “innocent” phrase.  {Added 26/09/2011: The same "enjoy/merry" {yatab, H3190} was also used in verses 6 & 9 above, by the father-in-law of the Levite - surely there was not the connotation of "sin" there.  It is probably and simply equivalent to "make yourself comfortable and enjoy your meal or stay"!}

Just in case, some did not understand what the wicked men were demanding, they were demanding that the Levite man be given to them for sodomy, for homo-sex. Homosexual practices were and are still expressly forbidden by God – Lev 18:22, Lev 20:13, Rom 1:26-27, 1 Cor 6:9, Jude 1:7 {Added 26/09/2011: My understanding is that God loves sinners, and therefore, including homosexual persons, but hates sins, and that included homosexual practices.}]
23 The owner of the house went outside and said to them, "No, my friends, don't be so vile. Since this man is my guest, don't do this disgraceful thing. 24 Look, here is my virgin daughter, and his concubine. I will bring them out to you now, and you can use them and do to them whatever you wish. But to this man, don't do such a disgraceful thing." 25 But the men would not listen to him. So the man took his concubine and sent her outside to them, and they raped her and abused her throughout the night, and at dawn they let her go. 26 At daybreak the woman went back to the house where her master was staying, fell down at the door and lay there until daylight. 27 When her master got up in the morning and opened the door of the house and stepped out to continue on his way, there lay his concubine, fallen in the doorway of the house, with her hands on the threshold. 28 He said to her, "Get up; let's go." But there was no answer. Then the man put her on his donkey and set out for home. [Yes, this account sounded so familiar, isn’t it? There was a similar account just before the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah; yes, compare this old man here with Lot, Abraham’s nephew. Even compare the entire story.

Here is one more reason I think the old man was an Ephraimite, not a local inhabitant sojourned into Gibeah. The locals would remember the destruction of their twin cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. Yes, Lot, then was staying among the locals of the land on the plains of Jordan. But would they, the locals, have known and passed down the generations, the part of the event that had Lot’s proposal of letting his daughters be defiled instead of the men who were guests at his (Lot’s) house {the 2 men at Lot’s house were angels, and they saved the day, the daughters were not defiled and the twin cities were destroyed by God through the raining down of burning sulphur (Genesis 19)}; I think not.

All the people of Sodom and Gomorrah died except Lot and his daughters. From Lot and his own daughters {the girls slept with their father} came the Moabites and Ammonites; and we also have read in Judges, in an earlier chapter, on Judge Jephthah, that Israelites did not destroy the 2 descendant tribes of Lot, when they (the Israelites) came out of Egypt to go to the Promised Land. Lot and Abraham came from the same bloodline of Shem, son of Noah. I believe on the account of the bloodline, the love of Abraham had for his nephew, and the pact Abraham had with his nephew, God did not want the wars between the Israelites and the descendants of Lot, if it could be avoided (see Deu 2:9,16). For these reasons, the part of the story about Lot’s proposal to the vile men of Sodom (to have his daughters) and how he (Lot) escaped death at Sodom, I believe, got passed onto the Israelites, pointing to the old man was an Israelite.

Alternatively, Abraham could be the one who passed down the story to the Israelites because even though the Bible did not record that he (Abraham) went to look for Lot after the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, it was highly probable that he searched out Lot after the destruction since he pleaded with the LORD in Genesis 19, because he knew his nephew was in Sodom. I believe the old man had to be an Israelite to care about such a story and approach, and imitated Lot.

While I did not think the scum were Israelites (also, not Benjamites), I am of the opinion that the old man was an Israelite (not necessarily a Benjamite, though), and not an uncircumcised heathen. If the old man had been the latter, old Bible translations would not have recorded the wicked men as sons of Belial, which meant uncircumcised heathens (according the definition in the Book of Jubilees) with the old man in context, for the old man would then fall in the same category.

I believe, here is a sad case of these: firstly, people (the old man) not knowing well enough, particularly the dealing of God with His pinnacle creation, Man, and did a wrong thing, thinking that history would kind of repeat itself with angels coming to the rescue; secondly, people (the Levite) conveniently manipulated the same.

Maybe some of the cultish “Christian” sad stories of more recent times, involving loss of many lives, were similarly rooted in the misinterpretation and manipulation of scriptures and our true faith heritage. But this does not point towards the suggestion that, not knowing is better than knowing. Because if we do not know the Word/Bible, although we would not be influenced by it, including misinterpretations thereof, at the same time, we would be deprived of its goodness, and instead be influenced and governed by our other knowledge, acquired in life and in dealings with the non-Christian world. The way out is not to throw out the Bible, but to correctly, interpret the Word of God.

In verse 25, we read that eventually, it was the Levite who gave his concubine to the wicked men, not the old man. So the old man’s daughter did not get implicated. But from verse 24, it was clear the old man had thought like what Lot thought of, but it was the Levite who did it. The Levite must have thought likewise (the thoughts of Lot), or in agreement with the old man, and made use of the Lot’s story to save his own skin. The Levite went to sleep and did nothing the whole night. What the wicked men did to the concubine I need not repeat here, I just want to say that she was so inhumanely abused that she was already dead when her husband found her at the door.]
29 When he reached home, he took a knife and cut up his concubine, limb by limb, into twelve parts and sent them into all the areas of Israel. 30 Everyone who saw it said, "Such a thing has never been seen or done, not since the day the Israelites came up out of Egypt. Think about it! Consider it! Tell us what to do!" [These verses just, very crudely, said the Levite took a knife and cut up his concubine in full view of the public, much like one cuts up a dead animal. In those days, being unfaithful deserved death, even by stoning, and so, some commentators tended to say she got what she deserved, death, even if her husband had forgiven her!

But the humiliation she suffered before death, to me, did not point to a punishment by God for her sin. Furthermore, in the Gospel, John 20:23 is capable of being interpreted as Jesus was saying if you forgave someone who had sinned against you, God would also forgive that person. God is the same yesterday, today, and forever. Do not be too quick to say bad things that happened to people are due to God. Every action of God is justified, even if it appeared “bad” to us, there is no wickedness in God. And many bad things are part of the workings of a fallen world, not the doing of God. I do not think that in this case, it is a doing of God. In fact, I doubt whether the Levite had really forgiven his concubine.

After cutting up the body into 12 parts, the Levite had them sent to the tribes of Israel, all over the land! When the people saw the parts, they were shocked, and wondered what to do.]

What can be learnt here: - a shocking story!
Here is the recap –

In this story, a Levite in the Ephraim hill country took a concubine from Bethlehem, Judah. The concubine was unfaithful, and afterward, had left home and gone back to her father’s house in Bethlehem. The Levite went to fetch her back, and on the way back, when it was late, they decided to spend the night in Gibeah, a city, controlled by the Benjamin tribe. An old man, probably a fellow Israelite, extended hospitality to the couple. In the night, while everyone was inside the house, some wicked men of the city came to the door, demanding the Levite be given over to them to have sex, sodomy! The old man said that, that would be a vile and disgraceful thing to do, and countered, offering to give his own virgin daughter and the Levite’s concubine to the men, but the men refused. The Levite took his concubine and gave her to the men outside. The men raped and abused the Levite’s concubine until next morning, and she died. Both the old man, and the Levite did nothing until the next morning! The Levite took the body and went back to his own home. On arrival, he cut up the body into 12 parts, and had them sent to the tribes of Israel, all over the place. When the people saw the parts, they were shocked, and wondered what to do.

The story did not end there, it continued into the next 2 chapters, Judges 20 & 21; and we will look at them in subsequent articles.

What were the lessons here? Apart from the indirect issues I have raised in the body of my exposition of the chapter, I will add no more, but to defer them until the exposition of the next chapter; but you can attempt the question (of what lessons) yourself, first!



Anthony Chia – Perhaps, Lord, what you are trying to say here was that if we, the people of God, do not “guard” our city properly, wickedness will take over, disorder, corruption and vileness can become the order of the day, and it will be a sad state of affair, and a sad day or time. May you awaken your people from slumber, in the land of Singapore to guard this Antioch. Amen.

Comments are welcome here. Alternatively, email them to me @: ... {click on it to reveal complete address}
Or just email me your email address so that I can put you on my blog (new entry) notification list. To go back to blog main page, click here.

Animals do not go to Heaven

This article came about because a sister, whose pet dog died recently, has wanted to believe that animals do get resurrected to Heaven; and has asked that I spent some time to consider the matter. These are my findings:

1. Clearly, the understanding from Genesis is that animals are bi-partite, body and soul. Man, on the other hand, is tri-partite, body, soul and spirit. The spirit part makes all the difference. Only spirited soul could ever hope to be resurrected to Heaven, for Kingdom of Heaven living. From this standpoint alone, animals (and plants, likewise) will not be able to make it up to Heaven by resurrection.

2. Following from point 1, if there are animals and plants in Heaven, they are not the same animals (like her pet dog) and plants that were resurrected to Heaven. If there are, indeed, exact animals (which I do not know if there are, and I am not saying that there cannot be any), they are created by God, and are not those same ones which used to be living on earth!

3. It is clearly unthinkable to have animals (and plants) resurrected to Heaven. If one animal, like her pet dog, is resurrected, shouldn’t other animals like the chicken, duck, fish, monkey, snake, and what have you {even lice and germs!}, be also entitled to be resurrected? Now, we eat many of these animals (and plants too); how are we going to face the accusation of all these animals against us when we go up to Heaven? We do not ask for God’s forgiveness for eating any of them, do we? How are we going to clear the Judgment Day then? Well, it is regardless that the Bible was written only for Man (as the sister said, fallen Man). Even if animals cannot read the Bible, you and I can, and so, God could have easily included in it, a statement that we cannot eat animals, just like we obviously, cannot kill to eat another man, for that would be sin against that man (and God). On the contrary, the fact that there were Old Testament scriptures which talked about certain animals or animals under certain conditions (like how they died, etc) should not be consumed, we can assume that there was and is no total prohibition to eat animals (Those who argue that believers should presently be totally vegetarians are not of line).

4. Scripture is very clear that Jesus died for Man, even Satan and the fallen angels were not included, meaning only men are able to appropriate the propitiation of sin provided by Jesus.

5. As to her being given Revelation 22:15, as support, in which “dogs” were mentioned there, we really have to interpret it within the context.

14Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city. 15For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie. (Rev 22:14-15 KJV)

Now, this is how it should be interpreted: Obviously, verse 14 is referring to Man. Blessed are the believers who do God’s commandments, that they may have the right to the tree of life (which presumably sustains life, keeping us in eternal life), and may enter in, through the gates, of Heaven, into the City, the Heavenly Jerusalem. Now, leaving “dogs” aside, every other one mentioned in verse 15 is a Man. Logical interpretation will point us to say that the “dogs” there must be referring to Man, and not a lone isolated animal, a dog. The “dogs” here must be interpreted as referring to “undesirable” men of the same class as sorcerers, whoremongers, murderers and idolaters, and whosoever who love lies and lied.

This is what has been said of the use of dogs on men (i.e. calling someone a dog!):

“It is a wide cross-cultural practice to use 'dog' as some sort of derogatory term," says John Archibald, head of the University of Calgary's linguistics department.

The English term “bitch” {female dog} has long been derogatory - Lawrence Paros, author of Bawdy Language.

Of course, generally speaking in cultures of the Middle East, there were aspects connected with dogs being “unclean”. Under Judaism (the belief of the Jews, before the Messiah’s 1st coming), dogs were said to be “unclean” by characteristics under Levitical laws.

Our Senior Pastor, in the last weekend sermon, also expressed that the “dogs” in Rev 22:15 above, were referring to people and not animals.

6. She was also given by others, Isaiah 65:25, in support of the argument that animals do make it to Heaven; I believe no convincing verdict can be drawn from the text:

The wolf and the lamb will feed together,
and the lion will eat straw like the ox,
but dust will be the serpent’s food.
They will neither harm nor destroy
on all my holy mountain,”
says the LORD. (Isaiah 65:25)

Firstly, this verse merely painted that there are animals at this particular time period. And during this time period, the animals are at peace and living harmoniously, indeed. My interpretation of Isaiah 65 is that, the time period in question or the place, is not necessarily referring to the time after death (life after this life or next age) or Heaven. At most, and it could possibly be correct, the time period was referring to the Millennium Rule of Jesus on earth recorded for us in the Book of Revelation. Of course, to explain how the conclusion is reached that Heaven was not being referred to, would necessitate me to dish out my entire commentary on Isaiah 65; which I am not going to, here.

Secondly, even if indeed, the place was in Heaven, it still did not say anything of whether or not, the animals were the ones once living on earth, and got resurrected to Heaven; it only painted a picture of animals being there, living in harmony and peacefully. As I have said in point 2 above, I am not saying that Heaven cannot have any animals, but what I am saying is that, such, if any, would NOT be the same ones previously living on earth like us, and got resurrected to Heaven.

For a moment, even if we can assume that, from earth an animal got to Heaven, it obviously did not get there by the same manner we are getting there, i.e. by believing in Jesus Christ by grace, through faith; and so, if what was not revealed in Scripture, even if we got it right, that animals do get to Heaven, it is guesswork!

7. There are jokes out there on the internet, etc, about dogs or animals having died, and people wanting to do the “wake” to send them on their way to Heaven. In fact, our Senior Pastor shared one in his sermon last weekend. Here, is one question asked by a Jew concerning the same, on the internet; and an real Rabbi answered the question:

Question: Does Judaism provide any prayers we can say when burying our beloved pet dog?

Answer: Kaddish and real prayers are a bit more complicated. While
these prayers have meaning for human beings reaching out to the Divine, it is possible that reciting these prayers for animals is inappropriate and desecrates Jewish worship.

Clearly, those who relied solely on the Old Testament did not believe that there could possibly be any possibility of animals making it up to Heaven.

I am sorry for the sister’s loss, of her pet dog, which she obviously loved very much. I have lost pet dogs before, as well. In fact, when I was still a boy, my pet dog ran after me when I crossed the road to take my school transport to go to school. I only knew it was run over by a bus after I got home from school. It did not die immediately; I had to care for it for a few days before it passed away. It was so sad, and today I can still picture the dog resting on an old zinc sheet before it died. But there is nothing we can do about it. It is all part of life. Who knows, if God does allow dogs in Heaven, maybe He might indulge us with replica (not the same dogs) of our pet dogs! Ha Ha!



Anthony Chia – That which God has not revealed; right or wrong, it is guesswork, and it counts not, but what God has revealed, we must lay hold of it.

Comments are welcome here. Alternatively, email them to me @: high.expressions@gmail.com
Or just email me your email address so that I can put you on my blog (new entry) notification list. To go back to blog main page, click here.

Lord, what are you saying in “these”?

It has been some time since I last wrote anything of a testimonial nature concerning my “little ministry”. Is my little ministry dead? Is there not any fruit from the ministry that I can write about? Is there nothing worth journaling about?

What is the “little ministry” all about?
Below this is a cut and paste from an earlier article:

“By the little ministry, for the benefit of readers who are new to this site, I mean the tiny bit or two that I believe the Lord is using me in, or even would like to believe the Lord is using me in. Principally, there is a bit which I am a little more certain that the Lord is using me in a tiny way; and that is in the broad area of healing. Of course, for many who had embraced the baptism of the Holy Spirit, and the power thereof, such things that I do, may not, in their eyes, amount to a ministry at all, especially when what I do, I do not do it in a full-time manner. But I want to call it a ministry, if not for any other reasons, it is better for me to view the things I do, as important to the Lord because the sinful nature in me, naturally will not want me to do the things that I do. It is tiny, yet I must see it as capable of being made wider, deeper, and greater; not that I can but the Lord is able, and He can enlarge if He so desires.

Is there any other bit? I like to dream with the Lord, and based on what I see as having happened or is happening to me, I like to picture myself as a “healer” with a slightly unique slant, a singing healer. We all have many dreams. How about a dream with the Lord? I find that dreaming with the Lord is one thing, not difficult at all, but to make an effort for that dream, is altogether a different thing, not a easy thing, because the sinful nature in us doesn’t like that. The tug of war of us trying to live according to the Spirit, and not, to the sinful nature is really tough, as like the Apostle Paul said it, in his epistles. But that is the reality of this life; there is no escaping it, we have to face it, and learn to win in that tug of war of choices of life, bearing in mind that Scriptures said that the Lord’s grace is sufficient for us, and that the Lord is faithful.”

Everything is more or less still going on, and at the usual venues. I still am faithful in ministering on a voluntarily basis, in all 3 services of my church (one, on Saturday, and two, on Sunday morning). For this, typically, I function in the “Altar Ministry”, which in my church is referring to the ministry time that we have for each service, after the typical praise and worship session that takes place at the beginning of each service. I move in the word of knowledge, a little, by the grace of God, and would typically be releasing words of knowledge (on sickness, etc) regularly, and general words of prophecy occasionally, during these ministry times. I would pray for the sick and any others, requiring ministry, after the release of words. I still go, about an hour earlier, each Sunday, to church, to intercede for this ministry and the services, at the front of the sanctuary. I still intercede for people I promised I would pray for them, and I would pray for my loved ones. I have been doing this since 2008. Also, since 2008, I have been with one of the gates (chapters) of the Full Gospel Business(men) Fellowship. I serve in the gate-committee and try to exercise my spiritual gifts and pray for people in those weekly gate meetings. I also frequent another monthly marketplace fellowship run by a brother from my church, in which I avail myself to pray for people with needs. Then, although I do intercede for the sick, apart from prayers in person, sister Liz Mah in Malaysia (with stage 4 lung cancer, her blog, Liz’s Adventure), has been a unique case, one whom, I suppose the Lord has somehow caused to me to have a “burden” for, and is whom I have spent much time, not just saying prayers for her, but have been trying to build up in the faith, to the extent that she could receive the feeding. And of course, this blog has kept me busy too, apart from my private study of the Word.

Dead or alive?
I guess in terms of the “doing”, they are still there, but of course, the doing alone, did not imply much, maybe a little faithfulness (and maybe a little of men as a “habitual” creature!).

Or could it mean more than just that, especially, in such things, tangible results are not known easily, at least for my settings. I sometimes wondered what sustained me in all these. People go to 1 service per weekend, I go for all 3! I am just a member of congregation; I am not a pastor and not a staff of the church, I am not required to do so.

Is it for the honors? Yes, but not the honors from men. I supposed at the end of the day, it is because of the honors and privilege that the Lord has given to me that I cannot ignore. Furthermore, I could no longer turn my back on His love shown to me:

Who am I that the Lord has taken notice of me;
Who am I that the Lord has cared to hold on to me all these years;
Who am I that the Lord should come near when even my beloved has decided to desert me;
Who am I that the Lord had cared to put His thought into me when I had sunk to the bottom of the deepest ocean;
Who am I that the Lord had cared to consider what would keep me from despair;
Who am I that the Lord should encourage when even my beloved has abandoned me to meaninglessness;
Just because I said, The Lord would be number 1 in my heart; even though I did not live up to it?

I remember my troubled days, how I could not sleep, and the only way I could get to sleep was to hug His Word to my chest, and called His name until I fell asleep. Who had heard me in the dark of the night? It was He, the Lord God Almighty. How could I turn my back from your love, now, Lord? Lord, you know I want to say, “Never”, but I fear once again I could not live up to it. By faith, I shall say, “Never.”

A couple of “these”
I could remember the times when it was difficult for me to function in the release of words of knowledge and prophecy, how if not, for the audacity the Lord put in me, I would have chickened out. I remember I was weak; a man from despair, and in abandonment, yet He showed His strength in me, even the strongest had to take note. The Lord has shown me honors when my closest has dishonored me.

1. Honors by the Lord (through men)
The Lord has not just honored me by his presence; he has given me honors by men. Not that I seek the honors from men, but it is good to know that I have helped and is appreciated.

More recently there were more feedback from people, that indeed the ministry I do in church has touched people, and they have received healing and ministry. I have more people stopping me outside the church, like in the supermarket, telling me that they had been ministered. A number asked if I could remember them, but I really could not remember, for I have prayed for too many, in church. And of course, it is an honor that people chose to come to me for prayer when there are pastors around. That some people repeatedly came back to me for their prayer needs did tell that the love of the Lord did flow across, through me. What a privilege to have been your minister, Lord! I thank the Lord, too, for the honors of church remembering me as a ministry partner in the Altar Ministry, and extended me the ministry year-end gift. I am even more surprised, that Lord, you would honor me with the Senior Pastor singling me out, to assist him in praying for a sick at the start 2011, before the entire congregation, when clearly there was no such need.

2. Tell him to pray for you
Even this could happen: From the Full Gospel Business(men) Fellowship, a member came saying that he had been told by the Lord to ask me to intercede for his non-moving stocks, and when I have done that some of the stocks moved. I thank you, Lord, for truly the member, he has believed, that, that was your voice, and you have intervened, and the proof of that was that he intentionally gave me a Christmas gift. Lord, you know I cannot minister for profit, but since it was an honoring act, not of money, I have accepted it.

3. He wanted it too
From the monthly marketplace fellowship (Tuas Reachout Fellowship), some were strongly moved by my singing in tongue that one of them who helped out in his own church healing services, sought me out, wanting the gift. I was glad to pray for impartation, and he received. It was an honor.

4. Will you be my mentor?
This too, was an honor. Lord, thank you for the Christmas gift from this mentee.

5. Multiple wheelchairs
More recently, in December 2010, it was close to Christmas, and I felt that morning in the church service, generally, that the Lord had wanted to minister a comforting touch to some needing that. I mentioned a specific category being cancer sufferers. I do not remember ministering to any with cancers, perhaps, the atmosphere then had brought out many who needed prayers, and I did not pick and choose; I just ministered to those needed prayers, but after I thought I had finished, a man pushed a wheelchair-bound man for me to pray. Before I even started praying for the man, another on wheelchair was pushed beside, for me to pray. These had chosen me to pray for them. I mentioned in an article of November 2009, I had a dream of seeing multiple wheelchair-bound people before me, and one of them stood up before me. But the needs of the 2 persons on wheelchairs were not specifically that they be healed to be able to stand up, and so, there was no standing up, but indeed multiple persons on wheelchairs came before me. Did it mean anything or was it a precursor to more of such, and one day, someone will stand from the wheelchair healed?

6. Almost the same, same cancer, same stage
Those reading the more recent articles on my blog know Liz Mah. On the 17th December 2010, she came down to Singapore with her 2 sons and husband from Malaysia for a short break. I had suggested that for that weekend, if she could make it, she could come to my church so that I could pray for her. I sent her an email with an attached map, but I did not hear from her. Liz did come to Singapore, but she did NOT come to the church that weekend, but I had a strange phenomenon that weekend, another woman, also with stage 4 lung cancer, with 2 sons, and a husband came to church and they were seated right behind my seat, and I ministered to the family. How strange?!

7. Leg grew in my hand and before my eyes!
This just happened over the weekend, Sunday, 9 January 2011. I was in church and it was at the end of the 8.30 am service. What happened was that I also commonly wait around for a couple of minutes after the service, just in case there are any people who still want to be prayed for, but have not come to the front during the usual ministry time after the praise and worship before the sermon.

This brother, older than me, came to me and told me that he still had difficulty walking properly, despite having operation on one of his knees. He explained that because of the operation, the operated leg had become longer. I told him that I could check it out for him, and so I had him seated down, back against the back of the seat (sit straight), and I then lifted both his legs, and I could tell one leg was longer than the other by about ½ inch. When I pointed to the longer leg, he said, that was the leg he had been operated on. I told him I was going to pray for him, and I launched into praying in tongue. The tongue prayer came out melodious but was forceful, and I could feel the shorter leg growing, for I had held up both his legs with both hands, one on each hand. As I watched, the shorter leg grew longer before my eyes to match the other leg. I was so thrilled, even though I have seen it happened before when some other minister elsewhere had done the same. This is a first for me, praying and seeing an observable miracle happening before my eyes (apart from seeing people slain). Hallelujah! The Lord had done it.

So, Lord, what are you saying in these, you have more installed for me? What must I do? Yes, I have, by faith, said as a resolve for the new year that I am abandoned to you. Remind me always, Lord, that I have said such a thing. More importantly too, Lord, help me to walk the talk.



Anthony Chia – All glory to God. Lord, thank you for the honors. May I always walk humbly before you as you have demanded in Micah 6:8.

PS: Please intercede for sister Liz Mah, even if it is for a season of time.  Thank you (Go to her blog, if you want to know more about her {Liz's Adventure}).

Comments are welcome here. Alternatively, email them to me @: ... {click on it to reveal complete address}
Or just email me your email address so that I can put you on my blog (new entry) notification list. To go back to blog main page, click here.

About God's Compassion (Ps 145:9 & Rom 9:15-16)

Recently, Sister Liz puts up an article on God’s compassion in which she genuinely queried about God’s compassion. Principally, she has 2 texts, Ps 145:8-9 and Rom 9:15-16. Ps 145:9 said that the LORD is good to all {men} He has made, He has compassion on all of them; whereas Rom 9:15-16 said that God will have mercy on whom He have mercy, and He will have compassion on whom He has compassion. It does not depend on man’s desire or effort but on His mercy.

 Sister Liz’s issue was that, whether God really has compassion on all men He made (Ps 145:9 said so) when God also said that He will have compassion on whom He has compassion on (which seems to suggest it can happen that He may not have compassion on some), and that compassion depended not on man’s desire or effort, but on His mercy (Rom 9:15-16). Sister Liz said, “So how?”

 Sister Liz looked up John Gill’s expositions and other references, and in the end she concluded this:

 “So now I understand that truly God is compassionate to all the chosen people of a God, the elect, who love Him and is loved by Him, redeemed and justified by Him and not generally to mean compassionate to all He has created.”


I would like to provide some understanding, and perspective on the issue.

John Gill’s exposition, I do not quite agree
Firstly, John Gill’s implying that verses 8-9 were specific to a select group of people, “the elect”, I do not think it was quite correct {There is claim that John Gill was hyper-Calvinistic, Perhaps, general predestination of personal salvation notion got in the way. My stance is that I do not believe in general predestination of personal salvation.}.

His narrowing of the compassion is not appropriate; rather compassion (and good) there, should be interpreted in its largest scope. And so, compassion (and good) there should include, and not exclude, general and providential goodness to all men. A lot of people cannot see that some of the verses in the Old Testament (OT) were referring to Jesus, but at the same time, it is not appropriate to “force” Jesus into clearly “non-Jesus” texts, although “types” are common. To say that “elect” or chosen people or believers or new creations (because of the “He made”, in the verses) were the only ones being addressed in those few verses of Ps 145, is “forcing” it, and is not appropriate.

Theology and doctrines are not formed out of experience, per se
There is a place for experience in a Christian’s walk, yet theology and doctrines are not formed out of experience, rather experience testifies to the truths of God, and much of those, are written in the Word of God (although there is much that we, men, may not have understood; we say we do not have revelation of what was written). For example, just because some enter into salvation, and some don’t, does not necessarily imply there is a general predestination of personal salvation by God.

When it is of His nature, it is of His nature
When the Bible says God is good. It means what is says, God is good. God is good even if today I am divorced by my spouse; God is good even if I am stricken with cancer; God is good even if I lost a leg; God is good even if I were Job of the Bible. While it is true that being a believer is important, in fact, it is no exaggeration to say it is everything, yet the goodness of God is of His nature, nothing to do with our status, yet the compassion of God is of His nature, nothing to do with whether or not, we are Christians or non-Christians. Even if we narrow the target people to the elect, the same observation still holds – some do not “get” that God’s compassion they sought for.

Theocentricism Vs Anthropocentricism
In biblical interpretations, we must adopt a theocentric view (God-centred view), and not an anthropocentric view (man-centred view). Many people cannot see what I said in the preceding paragraph, because I believe, they thought they have a better grasp {man-perspective} of goodness, compassion, and love, and so, they view God and God’s truths and ways, through their own human lenses, rather than gleaning from the whole counsel of the Word, of how God revealed of Himself. Concerning such as goodness, compassion, and love, man thinks he knows a lot {and thus he looks at scriptures through his own human lenses}, however, if you think about holiness, unquestionably, it comes out different; oh, oh, that is about God; it is how He is, in fact, we scarcely grasp holiness, and so, we more readily accepts it as the way He is; He is Holiness (of course, for some, because they grasp not, they completely ignore holiness as anything).

Compassion is in the Nature of God
God’s compassion was there for one even before he becomes a Christian. God’s goodness was there before a person becomes a believer. Much compassion was extended out to Man. In fact, Jesus’ dying on the Cross was and is compassion for all men (1 John 2:2). It is the high expression of God’s passion for Man. Even today, many people around the world, across all of time, and they were and are, not Christians, but God had and has extended goodness and compassion, in various ways and forms, to them. It is wrong for people to say, you are healed because you are a Christian, and he is not healed because he is not a Christian. It is wrong for people to say, I have long life because I am a Christian, you are going to die young because you are not a Christian. Yes, when the time of reckoning comes, there is a divide, but until then, the love of God, the compassion and the goodness of God, they do not flow out according to that divide, as in, nil for he who is on the wrong side of the fence.

Jesus’ ministry not resisted to elects
Just look at the miracles and the healings recorded for us in the Bible, Jesus did them without such patterning. Jesus had compassion for the 5,000 men, and He healed them and He fed all of them. How many of them actually believed Him before receiving His compassion? How many of them actually believed Him after receiving His compassion? Following from that miraculous feeding, with the discourse of Jesus at Capernaum, not many really believed Him, yet Jesus already healed many of them, and fed all of them. You can read of this in John 6.

Mission work in poor and needy nations/peoples reflected otherwise
Those who had been to such missions will report that God used them to heal and perform miracles on many who knew little or nothing about the gospel. God's compassion flowed out and touched and healed many without necessitating the persons to have had received Jesus into their lives. God’s compassion went out to those needing compassion, regardless of their status of being a believer or not. If you want to see God’s compassion flowing through you with signs and wonders and miracles, go to the poor and the needy, the sick, the rural, and the shunned peoples.

Apostle Paul did not get the compassion he sought
In 2 Cor 12:7-9, we read of the Apostle Paul’s affliction, thorn in the flesh. It does not matter, what interpretation you give to “thorn” in that text (in v7), still it was something that greatly affected Paul; it tormented Paul (v7). God was not removing the “thorn” despite 3 times Paul pleaded with God. Paul was obviously an elect, but still in this instance, God did not “heal” him {“heal”, if you believe he was diseased, “set him free”, if you believe the “thorn” was a person, or a bondage, etc}.

{Actually, I believe I just understood another thing, from this Paul’s affliction, through this examination of the question posed, perhaps, I will write about it in days to come.}

But the question is a legitimate one
Yes, the question is a legitimate one, and it shows, we want to understand, and that is what God wants, when we meditate on His word. The answer to the question is:

Yes, God really has compassion on all men {no point talking about animals} He has made; and He will have compassion on whom He has compassion on; and God’s compassion depends on God’s mercy and not on man’s desire or effort. Let me explain:

It is in His nature
It is in God’s nature, compassion, I mean. We did not in any way shape Him. He exists {no beginning, no end} and He was and is like that, full of compassion; we are His creation, who came afterwards. God has compassion, not only for this man, or that man, but for all men, and God does not, just have compassion today, or had it yesterday and no other day, He has compassion from day 1. So, when we look at God’s compassion, per se, it is really not difficult to appreciate God does have compassion for all of men.

But God is not just compassion
Just as we can picture God’s multi-personhood, we should know there are different elements to God’s nature. Jesus is friend; Jesus is also brother, king, Lord, and God. Similarly, God is compassion, but He is not just compassion, He is wisdom, He is righteousness, and He is holiness.

I am a playmate to my children, but I am not just their playmate; I am their teacher and their father as well. They will not always have me playing with them all the time; “who I am”, “prevent me” from playing with them all the time. When the need to instruct comes higher, I instruct them over playing with them. This is a simplistic illustration, but I hope you get the idea.

Apart from compassion, there are the dictates of His higher nature, prime of which are sovereignty, wisdom, and holiness and righteousness. On the personhood side, God is first of all, God, and the chief attributes represented that personhood are sovereignty and wisdom. The personhood and the nature-hood of God work together, to give “Who He is” (or the “I AM”).

Know the highest personhood and nature-hood
We must understand that, the “GOD-personhood” and the “HOLINESS nature-hood” of God rank highest; many do not know this, because many churches defer to men, preferring not to talk about things men do not like to hear. People like to hear the love of God, compassion of God, and faithfulness of God, often painted through the lenses of man, and these are preached countless times, until it slips people’s mind that God is first of all, God, and first of all, holiness. When we lose sight of these 2 aspects of God, our lenses become distorted, and we cannot interpret Scriptures the way it should be.

Compassion ranks high, yet “God-personhood” ranks highest (holiness co-ranks that)
Compassion ranks high; God is compassion, He wanted and wants to be compassionate towards all men, it is an important element of Him, and so looking at that, per se, it is true that God has compassion on all men.

He will have compassion on whom He has compassion on (NOT He MUST, on ALL), shows up when His “God-personhood” is needed at the forefront. The key attributes of that “God-personhood” are sovereignty and wisdom.

A simple illustration
I give you my simple illustration of a few years ago, when the Lord led me to minister to a young man (who had just become a Christian) who had problem handling compassion.

When the young man accepted Jesus, the Lord had made tender his heart, and he could “feel” compassion for people. He was “infected” by God, who is compassion. His issue was how much was he to follow through with the compassion, was he to keep giving of his money or time, etc? This young man had his constraints, and so, his first issue was how far must he go?

I told this young man that, suppose a beggar came to him, and asked him for some money, what would he have done? He said he would give something. And I said, alright, suppose with compassion, and after “looking over” the beggar, he gave $10.00 to the beggar; but the next day, the beggar told his friend that there was this young man at such and such a place, who was very kind to him and had given him $10.00. I said when this friend of the first beggar came to him (the young man), what would he do?

He said he would give the man, $10.00. Then I said, “What if he appears double pitiful, and has expected $20.00 from you?” Then, he said, “That is the point, I felt bad not having been able to meet such expectations. In this case, the man expected $20.00, and I could only give him $10.00!” To which I said, “Why don’t you give him $20.00?” The young man said, “But I have my own constraints; sometimes, I saw requests were genuine and I wanted to help, and help more, but I could not; sometimes, they were not genuine, at least, not so pressing, like they (some people) insisted that I helped them on a particular day, when I really was constrained to help.”

I explained to the young man that it was right to have compassion (and we should have compassion), for our God is full of compassion; help if he could, to give a little, if he could, of money or time or in other forms {we can do something, but we need not do everything asked for}.

Then I told him when it was out of compassion he gave, he gave of his own accord, people could not {should not} demand, he did not “owe” them. The money was his, and his time was his; it was up to him to decide how much to give. But the young man retorted, “But I feel bad.” I told him, “No, you should not feel bad. What if the next day, the 2 beggars bring 10 other beggars each to you, are you going give to all the 20 beggars? Worse still, what if each one of them, comes telling even more pitiful stories, and has expected you to give them more?”

The illustration tells 2 things
The story illustrated 2 important things: One, that compassion is not extended in vacuum; there are constraints, for the young man, and even for anyone of us. Two, even if there is no constraints on our part, still we decide, we own that which is given out.

But one may argue that God is without constraints. Is it really? God does not have the same constraints as the young man, but God is constrained by “Who He is”. For one thing, “Who He is” has wisdom, and holiness and righteousness rolled in, plus a few others.

The young man has to learn to decide, and I told him that he was to do it without “feeling bad”. If we take out the young man, and put in God, it is God decides, because He is God; He controls all and it is His to grant. The key attributes of that God-personhood are sovereignty and wisdom, and they would come forth together with other attributes in “Who He is” to “constrains” Him, if He will have compassion on A or B or none at all.

Considered graciousness
God’s compassion flows out according to His mercy, and not dependant on man’s desire or effort. What is mercy? Mercy is we not getting the ill-consequence that is coming to us. So, when we say God has mercy on a person, we are saying that God has decided to intervene according to His wisdom and understanding (not ours) and love, such that the ill-consequence is set aside. God’s mercy is not law, but it is still a considered graciousness on the part of God.

I believe God wants to be gracious to us as far as possible, for He loves us, because He made the choice of creating us, but yet because of His God-personhood, He still needs to consider, and that is why God’s compassion flows out according to His considered graciousness (mercy), not dependant on man’s desire or effort.

A simple example to illustrate, suppose, this morning, before leaving the house, you looked out of the window and you saw the sky was full of dark clouds, indicating that it might rain, but still you decided not to take an umbrella with you when you left home. The ill-consequence of that is that you are going to get wet, and (let’s say) catch a cold. Suppose God sends a handsome young man with an extra umbrella; in God’s mercy you avoided the rain, avoided the ill-consequence of getting wet and sick. If God did not intervene, you “had it coming”; God did not “owe” you, to have to send an umbrella to you.

Although, there are many situations quite outside of “you had it coming” {your fault!}, the point is that some ill-consequences are coming your way, and God is not responsible for them, and then He has to decide if He will intervene to set aside those consequences for you – a considered graciousness, when you receive His compassion.

Actually the question is generic
Actually, the whole thing, if we look at it honestly, it is no different from a generic scenario of asking the question of why God does not grant us, all our requests.

What we do not like, is ill-consequence {to us} which we want set aside. What we like is what the compassion of God brings. The Apostle Paul said in Scripture {Rom 9:22-23} that we are object of wrath {God’s wrath}, due to The Fall of Man, and we are object of mercy {God’s mercy}, for God still desires to aid us despite the coming on, of the ill-consequences of The Fall. And so, really, much of what is extended by God to us, is rightly, in many scriptures, described as mercy. In the great mercy of God, Adam and Eve were not struck dead by God instantly, when He had previously said they shall surely die, if they disobeyed (concerning The Fall). Every goodness of God extended to Man thereafter, in the largest picture, is mercy of God and grace of God.

For an everyday example, we could be wanting a good-paying manager job. What we are telling God is that, for such and such of our qualifications, because of such and such that we did not manage well in the past, if God, you do not have compassion {mercy} on us, we might have to work as a ……, have to do ….. and get a pay of only…. etc, etc. We are in effect, praying for God’s compassion that we do not end up with a “lousy job” – what we do not like, the ill-consequence of what we did not manage well in the past.

Of course, in life, there are consequences that were “purely” due to the fallen world nature running its course; nonetheless, because they are “ill”, we naturally want them set aside for us.

Not at all!
A common lament: How come so and so, were born in rich families, but not me?! What then shall I say? Is God unjust? The Apostle Paul answered for such questions, in verse 14 of Romans 9, and he said “Not at all!” I believe Paul was able to answer as such, because he has a greater comprehension of the wisdom of God. It is God’s wisdom that matters, not ours. It is God’s overall set-up for Man, and even the same for a particular man, that matters, not what Man or that man’s idea of how things should be lined up for him. We must grasp this AND accept.

Then is it according to His whim and fancy?
You may then say, “Brother Anthony, you mean it is all up to God, if He likes, He will grant (compassion or mercy, and blessing), if He does not, He will not.” Yes, if we take it that what He likes is governed by Who He is.

For example, we can be sure God does not like wickedness, for wickedness runs contrary to Who He is. And so, if you promote wickedness, He will not be on your side. If you want to cheat people of their hard-earned money, but you tell God to have compassion on you so that you will not be caught and be put to shame and to jail, do you think God will let His compassion flows out to you to ensure you will not be caught? No, “Who He is” “constrains” Him. {I am not saying 100% God will not have compassion on such a person, but you can be sure that while He might still accept the person, He does not and cannot approve the man's wicked ways. It is the same as saying that God came to justify {render righteous} the wicked (if you are not wicked at all, you have no need for God's justification) but at the same time, God does not justify the cause of the wicked.}

On the other hand, if you, after exhausting all your annual leave asked for time off, to go see a friend who was suddenly hospitalized, and you had meant to come back to the office within the time required to avoid the time-off being counted as taking a half-day unpaid leave, but you were held by your friend who wanted to know more about Jesus while lying on the hospital bed, very sick. You committed it to the Lord, and stayed longer and shared the gospel with your friend, and then you went back to the office, arriving later than the cut-off time. You prayed to God for the understanding of your supervisor. It can be that God will have compassion on you and you get off, without a half-day pay being deducted from you, for what you desired and went on to do, was in alignment with Who He is, and that can draw Him to intervene for you concerning your time-off.

Now, if the last time this happened to you, and you got half-day’s pay deducted from you, despite praying to God, it still did not mean that your desire and action had not caught the admiration of God, but it could be that God just felt that it was alright for you to sacrifice that half-day pay for the sake of the gospel. God might have just made a note somewhere in His diary!

Our part is to know Him
What I am saying is that our part is to get to know Him, Who He is, be aligned to that, and trust Him that when our desire is to please Him, and to glorify Him, He knows, and likes it; whatever it is, He will take care of us, according to His wisdom and understanding (not ours), and we have nothing to worry about. It is not cliché. Many, including me, have no idea how much it entails to get to this state. If you think there is no “getting there”, and you think you are “there already”, you are probably too skewed towards the overly grace teaching, and you better rethink.

Conclusion
God has compassion on all men, and God will have compassion on whom He has compassion. Both are valid.

It is not that God’s compassion is holding true only for the elect, but rather as a believer you have the Word and you have the Holy Spirit, you have been greatly endowed to get to where the considered graciousness (mercy) of God will find you, and carry you through life’s journey.



Anthony Chia - Lord, may you like me more, even as you love me. The world might have, have it wrong. Maybe, you love all men, but you will like some of us more than others, as it is first of all, your prerogative, and secondly, why would you not like any who is after your own heart. In other words, Lord, may I not only get to know you more, but also to please you, as David did. Amen.

Comments are welcome here. Alternatively, email them to me @: ... {click on it to reveal complete address}
Or just email me your email address so that I can put you on my blog (new entry) notification list. To go back to blog main page, click here.

Correct understanding of salvation, and relationships between salvation, grace, faith and good works

For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God (Eph 2:8)

What should salvation be for a believer?
Salvation is:

1. The way put forth by God, since The Fall of Man, for Man to be able to be saved from eternal
    destruction - the entering and remaining in the burning fire of Hell.

2. To be saved is therefore,
    a) to avoid going to Hell;
    b) to finally, enter Heaven, the dwelling place of God, to live with God;

3. Having being reconciled back to God (being justified), until we die (physically), or are raptured,
    to live our life consistent to one going to live with God; and that necessitates we learn to live
    under  the Lordship of God. A non-believer is a mutiny, and has to be reconciled back to God, and
    when he has been reconciled through salvation, he is to live under the Lordship of God.  Having
    being justified, a believer needs to come under sanctification, before proceeding to Heaven. For
    Salvation as Justification and Sanctification, read: "Salvation as Justification and Sanctification".

Per se, Salvation is NOT these…
Salvation is NOT about prosperity in earthly living per se. It is NOT even about long life, NOT about wealth and health (health even), NOT about worldly accomplishments, NOT about leaving a worldly legacy, NOT about being philantrophic, as such. The truth is that salvation is about Heaven and Hell, and it is about the Lordship of God. The truth is the truth, regardless of people NOT liking to think about it or be reminded of these things.

Ah, it is really deferring to men, to sugarcoat the salvation of God. When we sugarcoat, when we add layers of sweet stuff over a thing, the thing is NOT gone, but the purity of it is hidden. What is worse is that situation can become such that the sugarcoat became the thing that people desire, instead of the gem inside. When this happens, the truth is missed.

Of course, salvation (sozo) includes health, physical and emotional; the meetings of our earthly needs; and being in able form, to do lots of “good works”; yet these are just the things that can accompany the main objectives of salvation, and are which, we as believers, can look to God to provide.

So, if today, we, as believers, are NOT in good physical health, or NOT at all wealthy relative to the Jones, salvation did NOT short-change us, God did NOT do any injustice against us, or God has NOT been unfair to us, for salvation is NOT about these things, per se.

A journey back (to God) or a journey to destruction
Life on earth is transient. Relative to eternity, it is really miniscule. Since The Fall of Man, life on earth is a short journey (and it has gone shorter and shorter since The Fall) to, either Hell or Heaven. A person in salvation travels the Way of Holiness, while the ones without, they travelled outside of that way or highway. Those of us, believers, have Jesus Christ leading us, and our part to play, is to learn to submit to His Lordship. Scriptures are full of pictures of steadfastness, perseverance and obedience, and that is how we are to journey.

The mindset
As believers, if we become as rich as the Jones, we are thankful to God, if we are NOT, we are also thankful to Him; if we are as fit as a fiddle, we thank God, if we are NOT, we also thank Him, and praise Him for who He is; if we have been able to accomplish much in our earthly lives, we thank Him for His endowments and enabling, if we have NOT, still we thank Him for every breath of our lives, for with every breath, we have been afforded the opportunity to say, “Lord, please forgive us our sins, cleanse us, for you are holy and righteous; and Lord, we thank you for this extra moment that we can learn submission to your Lordship, before we come to live with you.”

If we are called home early, we accept it, if we are called later, we accept it too, and until we are called, we are to live in submission to the Lordship of God, in steadfastness, in perseverance, and in obedience out of love for our Lord, regardless of afflictions (of ill-health, emotional struggles, poverty, etc, etc), knowing that our God is holy and righteous, and He is full of love and faithfulness towards us (Ps 89:14), wanting us to return to Him in the freedom of children of God (Rom 8:21).

Today, if you are a young man or woman, you may balk at reading such sayings, for to you, the picture of Hell and Heaven seems so very far away, but Scripture tells that our souls may be demanded of us at any time, when we least expect it. It is independent of your young age or your preoccupation.

Relationships between salvation, grace, faith and good works
In the above, I have not mentioned grace, faith or what we need to do to enter into salvation; it was intentional, for I have desired to say what salvation truly is meant to be, for us, Man – avoidance of Hell, and getting to Heaven. Now, next, we will take a look at what is the relationship between grace and faith in relation to salvation, and good works.

Grace, salvation, gift and faith
Grace is unmerited favor of God. By unmerited favor, it means that the favor is granted without us doing anything to earn it. In other words, it is a gift. When we say that something is by grace, we mean, that something is granted as a gift, and so in Eph 2:8, when it is said that it is by grace that we are saved, it means that salvation is a gift from God.

My own interpretation of “and THIS not from yourselves, it is the gift of God”, of that verse 8, is that it ("THIS") is referring to salvation. Salvation is by grace of God, a gift from God. It is NOT intentionally referring to grace as such.

I know people talked about grace as a gift of God; I am NOT saying grace is NOT a gift of God, but grace given as a gift and salvation given as a gift can be quite different.  Grace is better said as a favour, although it is a gift.

Salvation as a gift is like, I say, "Everyone who follows me into the next room, will get a gift".  Everyone, you, he or she, a young woman, an old lady, a healthy man or a sick man, etc. (when you follow me into the next room), you get a gift.

Grace as a gift is like, I have here, a bag of gifts and I say, "Hey, you there, catch", and I throw out a gift to him; "The lady in black, here, this is for you; it will suit you well", and I hand out a gift to her; "The girl seated down, come here, I have a nice gift for you; I would like you to use it to cheer your sick mother back home", and I hand over a beautifully wrapped gift to the girl; etc, etc.  Not everyone in the room gets a gift, some does NOT.  Grace is as He determines.  Salvation as a gift is more a subset of Grace as a gift.

Faith here, NOT a gift to the same extent
Many people, I believe, have erroneously used Eph 2:8 and said that faith is by God, NOT from us. The gift of God referred to, in the verse, is salvation, NOT faith. I have already said above, the gift referred to, in the verse is NOT grace, either  (although grace is a gift of God).

It is possible though, that sometimes, the word, “grace” is used in place of the word, salvation. For example, in Rom 5:2, “this grace” was referring to salvation or reconciliation back to God which is what salvation is about.

The point to note is that, this Eph 2:8 verse is NOT saying faith is a gift of God, even though there are preachers out there claiming that the faith mentioned here is a gift. I cannot agree with this notion, because if it were so, then all who hear the gospel should be entering into salvation, but this is NOT the case, precisely because faith is lacking in some instances.

Unless one believes in GENERAL predestination of PERSONAL salvation {predestination implies that all already set by God as to who will be saved and who will NOT}, which I do NOT believe, faith here CANNOT be a gift to the same as extent as salvation is a gift of God.

Does faith come from God or not?
While it is NOT incorrect to say everything comes from God, often times, we must avoid it as a cliché. If we apply this all the time, we will end up saying even evil things that happen to people come from God.

Of course, when we trace everything back across (all) time, everything originated from God. Even Satan is creation of God. But we really cannot say that all the evil done by Satan, are coming from God {Although, on a more positive note, we are inclined to say positive things come from God, for we have a good God actively pursuing Man, intending only good for us all}.

I believe the overall counsel of the Word, teaches us that faith is NOT to be treated in like manner as salvation, a gift of God, although like I said, of course, everything comes from God.

There is a verse (Rom 12:3) in Scripture that has the mention of faith or a measure of faith, as being given by God, but in so many verses in Scripture {you can just do a concordance search}, the understanding given is that faith is NOT to be looked at as gift of God or grace of God in the sense that it is an unmerited favor of God that God must give. We will look at that Romans verse in a moment, but I want to say that there is another verse where unmistakably there is a faith that is a gift from God, and that is found in 1 Cor 12:9 which listed the gifts of the Holy Spirit.

1 Cor 12:9, and the question it poses
In the case of 1 Cor 12:9, gifts were dealt with, and as such, the 9 items there, were for free, given unmerited for, and by grace. Regardless how one argues concerning when a believer becomes possessed of the gifts, it is still to be understood that the gifts, being gifts, are freely given by God. And so, when one believer has a gift, and another does not seem to, to me, it indicated nothing of any “superiority” of the former over the latter, for a spiritual gift is NOT merited for (one does NOT earn it). You may ask about the relevance of this? Its relevance is that, in 1 Cor 12:9, it is stated that there is such a thing as a gift of faith, whereas I have just mentioned earlier that generally, faith (normal faith) is NOT a gift of God to the same extent as salvation of God is. 

Does it means if I do NOT have the faith to do certain thing, it has nothing to do with me, that I should even be bothered with, at all, much like I be NOT bothered, if a sick person I pray for, does NOT get healed,  arguing that it is God’s responsibility since faith is to be given by Him (to me), as it is said to be a gift from Him {in 1 Cor 12:9}? What do you think? Is it correct to say, “Blame God, don’t blame me since faith is supposed to be given by Him.”?

My divide of the Word
To correctly divide the Word of God, I believe, we have to have a proper perspective of the free-will of Man, given by God, and the interventions of God. In order NOT to get very long-drawn into this, it suffices to say that both the free-will of Man and the interventions of God are at work. And this means that there is a part that Man is to do, and there are things God does, in the normal, as well as things that God does as interventions. To what extent God intervene, is of course, His prerogative.

Faith to usher in God’s intervention
Faith is required for us to live a life pleasing unto God, for the ways of the world are often out of syn. with the ways of God. To go against the pulls and pushes of the world, we need to trust God (have faith in God) that He would intervene when we are in alignment to His ways or want to be in alignment.

Although it is NOT to be said that it is imperative for faith to be present in order for God’s interventions to come, often times, faith ushers in God’s interventions, for faith is in part, a right belief consistent with the truth of God {I am leaving out the discussion of the make-up of faith}.

Supernatural faith and normal faith
In terms of the faith required to “draw” the interventions of God, for exceptional interventions, there is a class of faith called supernatural faith; all other faith falls under normal faith. The onus for normal faith rests with us.

The faith talked about in 1 Cor 12:9 is NOT normal but supernatural, and so are the other 8 gifts listed in 1 Cor 12. The gift of tongue is supernatural, and the gift of healing is supernatural. When I pray for a seriously sick person and he is healed, it is supernatural, it is crazy to think that I can somehow work up a healing power to heal a seriously sick man; it is a supernatural intervention and healing from God. If I move in that gift, it is a supernatural gift, given by grace of God. Similarly, the faith in 1 Cor 12:9 is also a supernatural faith, that cometh by grace of God, and is a gift.

A simple way of looking at the issue is that onus of normal faith rests with us, that of supernatural faith, with God.

Back to “the” question
Now, is the faith to accept Jesus Christ as one’s personal Lord and Savior, a normal faith or a supernatural faith? Eph 2:8 said that we are saved by grace, through faith. So, is the faith here, a normal faith or supernatural faith? If we say that it is supernatural, and therefore, a gift, then whose fault is it that one does NOT come into salvation? Is it the Gospel sharer or the preacher? Or is it God’s fault?

If it is the sharer or preacher’s fault, do you think you will want to share? I probably will NOT, for it ties with a Chinese idiom, “the more you do, the more wrong you commit, the less you do, the less wrong you make!” If it is NOT the fault of mine, as the sharer or preacher, than whose fault is it, God’s? Or do you want to be very polite, and say that it is God’s responsibility; up to him, whether or NOT, He wants to give the faith to accept Jesus? Or is it NOT the onus of the hearer to decide if he will choose to believe?

We all know that Scripture said that God desires that all men be saved (1 Tim 2:4), and if we say that He is responsible for giving of the faith, is God trying to be “funny” on an absolutely serious issue, to give some, and NOT to others? Of course, NOT; I believe therefore, the faith in Eph 2:8, and for that matter, the same in many scenarios, is normal faith, a faith that is to come from the person’s choice.

Many scriptures indicated normal faith
Many pictures painted by Scriptures show us that the faith element required is the normal faith that is to come from us. If we hold onto the notion that God has to make us to have the faith for an action, we can end up, repeatedly asking God, “God, make me have the faith”, and yet nothing happens! God's fault!

One can be attempted to say, as we yield our free-will to God, God is able to give us the faith for action, and things will happen, but honestly, it is still like a chicken and egg issue. Which comes first, to let go of your free-will or have faith? Do we need to let go of our free-will to have faith or is it the other way round, we need to have faith to let go of our free-will? I say it is more of a choice issue; we have to decide to release our free-will to God; we have to choose to have faith in God.

How can we make such choices or how can we “acquire” faith in God, is a thing that we should learn, but before we go there, let me address the odd verse of Rom 12:3 which has in it, "faith is given by God".

Romans 12:3 – faith is given by God?
For by the grace given me I {Apostle Paul} say to every one of you: Do not think of yourself more highly than you ought, but rather think of yourself with sober judgment, in accordance with the measure of faith God has given you (Rom 12:3).

Many people have taken the above out of context, to mean that our faith has nothing to with what we do or NOT do, but have everything to do with whether or NOT God has given/is giving the faith or NOT, for an action.

Such pushing of responsibility back to God, is commonly liked by the “overly grace” believers, for they so often, believe that if they were supposed to do a thing, God would move them to do it, there is NOT the need to try, or be exhorted to do, for they think they have (claim to have) the full mind of Christ, such that if God has wanted a thing done, they would know! This is self-pride, to a very high degree.

If I do NOT have the faith to do a thing, it is because I have NOT come into possessing that measure of faith, rather than it is because God has NOT given me the measure of faith required {unless the situation calls for supernatural faith}. This is the correct attitude, for in it, there is a dose of onus on our part, in getting higher level of faith. Scripture is very clear that God expects faith from us. Without going into detail discussions, I will just quote Scripture saying that without faith it is impossible to please God (Heb 11:6). Very obviously, such a scripture is meaningless if we insist that the faith we need to please God is the faith He must give to us.

The truth is that Rom 12:3 was only trying to say that we are NOT to “run ahead” or “run outside” of what God is doing and intending to do with us. It is like saying God has prepared you to be the manager of a department, and you run ahead and want to be the CEO of the company. In other words, the Lord has equipped you to function at a certain level, and function with faith, of course, for only in that way, what you do, is pleasing unto Him; and so, you do NOT “run ahead” or “run outside” of that; if you do that, you are thinking too highly of yourselves.

The exhortation of this verse, Rom 12:3, is along the line of 1 Cor 7:17 - But as God hath distributed (G3307) to every man, as the Lord hath called {to service} every one, so let him walk. And so ordain I {Paul} in all churches. The “given” in “…faith God has given you” in Rom 12:3, comes from the same Greek word, merizō (G3307), as in “distributed” in 1 Cor 7:17, it is just that the translators used different English words for the same Greek word.

I am NOT saying there is NOT the "God-beginning" of things, good things.  All good things comes from God; and if they don't come directly, but through others, the initiation does come from God.  While Phil 2:12 tells us that we are to work out our salvation with fear and trembling, the working has to be with God, for the verse following (v13), it was stated for us that God was the one who works in us to will and act in order to fulfill His good purpose.  Through the indwelling Holy Spirit, God works in us, our response to the leading of the Holy Spirit, is the part that is "faith-asking".  Will you choose to trust (have faith in) the Holy Spirit's leading, and go do what is required?

Rom 12:3 is NOT about God has to give normal faith in order that one has faith to live a life pleasing unto God. I also do NOT believe supernatural faith was implied there. I repeat, it is trying to say that we are NOT to “run ahead” or “run outside” of what God is doing and intending to do with us.

[Added 14 June 2011: We develop our faith (normal faith) in the refining process that all believers are subjected to, by the Lord. The Apostle Paul spoke about growth from infancy to maturity in the faith, nothing of the sort that some "overly grace" preachers have suggested that we jump from imperfection to perfection in the blink of the eye, upon born again.]

To possess normal faith
Concerning coming to possess faith, perhaps, we should consider, firstly the faith required for entering into salvation. Then, we will look at post born-again, how faith can be sustained and “grown”.

Faith to enter into salvation
The faith to enter into salvation, how does it come? Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God (Rom 10:17, KJV). For a non-believer to come into salvation there has to be faith in him, for Eph 2:8 said that, one enters salvation by grace, through faith.

The way a non-believer come to possess the necessary faith, according to this Rom 10:17, is by hearing the word of God; that is why there is a necessity to share the gospel with non-believers so that they get to hear the word of God. More can be said, but more importantly we need to take note that ultimately, the non-believer has to believe in Jesus in his heart, and confess with his mouth (by choice), that Jesus Christ is his personal Lord and Savior. This is typically, how a person enters salvation (by grace) through faith (Rom 10:10).

Exercising is crucial, for both, pre & post entering into salvation
I am NOT saying that we cannot pray to God for more faith, but I am saying we should be conscious of the correct attitude that there is that “our part” that we need to play. Even in the entering into salvation above, we see that one needs to exercise whatever little faith that is possessed. The exercise is in the exercising of his free-will (a choice) to confess with his mouth to accept Jesus as his personal Lord and Savior.

In Luke 17:5, we read of the apostles of Jesus asking the Lord to increase their faith when the Lord told them that they had to repeatedly forgive others who had sinned against them repeatedly, despite their claiming that they were repentant each time. The apostles feared that, that would be too hard, and thought that they had NOT the faith to do it {not enough faith}, and so, they asked Jesus to increase their faith, so that they could do it, to repeatedly forgive the same people. Jesus did NOT reply them that He would give them more faith, instead He said this:

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.  (Luke 17:6, KJV - I have replaced the NIV of this verse with the KJV; "faith as small as a mustard seed" is NOT a good translation, in my view {1 Mar 2013}).

In other words, Jesus was saying that they had to exercise whatever faith that they had; NOT to be overwhelmed by the odds stacked against them; the mustard seed/seedling does NOT freeze at the external odds against it.

By leaving the reply as that, I believe, what Jesus was trying to tell the apostles was that when they exercised what faith they had, it would grow or increase. The point is that the apostles asked for increase, and assuming, and it is logical to assume, in this case, that Jesus was answering them; the increase must have been found in the answer - exercising!

A lot more can be said concerning how faith {normal faith} can be nurtured, but the short answer is that we have to subscribe to the never-ending cycle of exercising faith that comes from the hearing of the word of God. And in this never-ending cycle of exercising faith, we are in fact, going about good works.

Faith and good works
What is the relation of the two? In the above paragraph I said in the never-ending cycle of exercising faith, we are in fact going about good works. Good works in Scripture is NOT just simply good works, like the world understands it to be, like being charitable, per se.

Essentially, it is good works of faith or good works in exercising of faith. Precisely because without faith it is impossible to please God, good works is not good works to God if it is NOT done with exercise of faith (Exception is possible, but exception acceptability is contingent on grace and sovereignty of God {as in the case of centurion in the gospel}).

The Book of James has more to say about putting faith into action as evidence of our true faith. I think it is an exception rather than a norm, for believers to just bask in grace; such understanding of the “overly grace” believers are too skewed. Eph 2:10 clearly stated that we are God’s workmanship, created in Christ Jesus, to do good works. We are commanded to do good works, and through them, bring glory to our God (Matt 5:16). For better understanding of what good works is, and the detailed exposition of the link between good works and faith, read my separate article, "Good works explained (Part I)".

How is grace connected with faith and good works?
The good works that the world understands can be just being charitable. For example, one donates $100K to a university/educational endowment fund. But the good works in God’s eyes are often deeds He wants done; in other words, it is connected to Him. Faith makes that connection to Him.

Salvation and Lordship are together (for greater understanding of this, read my separate article, “Luke 6:46 - PART I – Salvation and Lordship are together”), and in the living of our lives as believers, Lordship of God is everything. Our faith is tied to the Lord, and so, in the exercising of our faith, God gets into the picture. As submission is NOT blind and Lordship is NOT accidental (read the article if you want the exposition), faith is also NOT blind and accidental. When, despite our lacking circumstances, we are able to accomplish the good works through the exercise of faith, the grace of God {unmerited favor} is likely to be that, which made the difference, being extended for the situation.

Although it is NOT always that a Christian hears from God directly for a deed, but if he always sets the Lord {and His ways} before him (Ps 16:8), and stays righteous, his steps (and therefore, his deeds) can be expected to be ordered by the Lord (Ps 37:23), and God’s grace {unmerited favor} can be following his deeds.

What about good works and salvation?
This is probably what many are wanting to know – any direct relation between good works and salvation? Sorry, folks, digest the above, and wait for a separate article!



Anthony Chia, high.expressions – Lord, may more of us understand that in our salvation, we are not JUST to bask in grace, and JUST to do our own things. Cause in us such a stirring Lord, that we will awake from our slumber. Amen.

Comments are welcome here. Alternatively, email them to me @ high.expressions@gmail.com.
Or just email me your email address so that I can put you on my blog (new entry) notification list. To go back to blog main page, click here.