![]() |
||||
All of the feasts of the Lord are events that we look forward to with a great deal of positive anticipation, and well we should because they are very enjoyable and they can be very spiritually rewarding. It is interesting that Adam Clark made this comment in regard to one of these verses. I do not remember which one it was but he said "the Mosaic law made ample provision for the comfort and happiness of the people." And that is surely true. We all seem to enjoy the feasts - especially the Feast of Tabernacles - very much. But there is kind of an enjoyable dark side to Tabernacles because it can easily be perceived as a vacation, or a substitute for Christmas. There is also a share of trouble in preparing for them, and traveling to them, and that contributes a measure of stress to the keeping of them. Tabernacles especially, of all of the Feasts, can be wearying and sometimes people have even gotten quite sick from the stress of it and have had a miserable time. I know that in my keeping of it, or let us say even since we have had the Church of the Great God, I know of a couple of people who went to the Feast and maybe never left their rooms because of being sick with something that was pretty contagious. Sometimes the Feast of Tabernacles seems to be a catalyst for family problems as well. But overall most of the time we enjoy them immensely. We cherish the memories we have of the activities, eating fine meals together, nice locations, or spending time with our family that we might not feel we have the time to do when we are at home. But we do have to be somewhat cautious of this (I mean all this enjoyment) because it is possible to have enjoyment doing similar kinds of things apart from the Feast, I mean at home. "We're going on a vacation." The enjoyment of positive experiences apart from the Feast, I feel, happens very frequently. The danger inherent here is that though God wants us to rejoice in keeping His feasts, it is very easy to think that because the Feast was indeed enjoyable, that we had a good Feast. But judgment of things of that nature is highly variable. Several people can attend the same site, hear the same messages, take part in the same activities, and still have quite a different evaluation of the Feast. We know this is true because I think that everyone of us has experienced this. This happens because of personal preferences and perspectives that we have of what we feel is enjoyable. There might be disappointments with accommodations, or maybe we ran into a bad meal or bad service somewhere. Maybe we had a wreck on the way to or from the Feast. Maybe we were offended by somebody or we offended somebody. There are a multitude of reasons that can ruin the Feast or, let us say, color it in such a way as to make it not a very memorable one. I know that there is one particular Feast that I did not enjoy very much. It was all the way back in 1974. We kept it at St. Petersburg, Florida and it was the all-time low for Feasts, as far as I am concerned, and I think that the major reason is because I did nothing to make it a good Feast. I was just there. I attended and I was served. The weather was good. I guess we had some good meals. We met some people we had not seen for quite a long time who were from the Pittsburgh area who had moved there. It was good to see them again. And I guess the music that the choir sang was good and I guess that there was a measure of teaching from the sermons as well. But for some reason that Feast was not enjoyable and I think it was because it was the first Feast I ever attended that I did nothing to serve in any capacity. I chose these two verses in Deuteronomy because they seem to be the ones that we turn to most frequently when we make reference to the Feast. (By "we" I mean the ministry.) But the emphasis in these contexts is mostly on the enjoyable physical aspects of the Feast of Tabernacles. But other scriptures touch on the spiritual aspects of the Feast and they are considerable in number. Even though they give a great deal of specific detail or they fail to give a great deal of specific detail, there is enough to know what God expects of the Feast of Tabernacles. I think that I can tell you without finding contradiction in the Bible that God expects the Feast of Tabernacles to be the spiritual high of the year.
I did not read any of the other verses before that because I think that you understand that this is talking about the Feast of Tabernacles and the Last Great Day.
The mention of offerings in a setting like this is indicative of worship. They represent the spiritual part of observing the days. I do not mean that there were no sermons. I do not mean that at all, but God's Word keeps words to a minimum, and offerings indicate spiritual things that have to do with the worship of God.
That is the opening verse for the instructions as to when and what was to be offered to God every year. The offering was not limited to this, but these were commanded offerings. It included sacrifices that were made every day plus special ones that were made on the weekly Sabbath, and then in addition to that, special instructions for each and every holy day.
Not one day, two days, three days, four days, five days, or six days. Seven days. And if we do not keep it for seven days, plus the Eighth Day, we have not kept the Feast of Tabernacles. We have not fulfilled that commandment.
This is the meal offering that always went on top of the burnt offering and it goes right on through that. That is the offerings for the first day. Verse 17 introduces the offerings for the second day, and this continues all the way up to and including verse 34. If you have enough time on your hands and you care to search this out by counting all of the offerings required by God, you will find that there are more offerings required for the Feast of Tabernacles than all the others combined. Remember what I said. The offerings indicate the spiritual aspect of the Feast. There is more required spiritually of the Feast of Tabernacles than all the others combined. That ought to tell us something about what God expects the Feast of Tabernacles to be spiritually. It should be both a spiritual and a physical Feast whose fruit is the rejoicing of both. If we go to the Feast purely to enjoy, I do not think we are going to have a very good spiritual Feast. If we go to the Feast to really worship the Lord and allow the enjoyment to be the fruit, I think we will have a good Feast. I mean a truly good Feast. It may be that we would not consider it because our perception of enjoyment tends to be hard on the physical side, but I will tell you this, I think on the authority of God: whether you feel it was a good Feast, if you go there to have a good Feast by putting your efforts into the spiritual things, you are going to have one whether you feel it or not. Feelings are highly variable and what we are looking for is spiritual profit. What I am talking about here is something that cannot be forced. The rejoicing is the fruit of the right approach and use. I think that the emphasis is clearly on the spiritual. Let us turn to an example in Nehemiah 8. While we are reading I want you to notice the emphasis on understanding. God does not want mindless observance. The seeking of enjoyment for enjoyment's sake is not what God has in mind for any of His feasts.
I wonder if we could just reflect back for a minute to the sermons I gave on coming out of the world (that were extracted from Matthew 6) where it says that they eye is the light or the window of the body. What is it that gives vision to the mind? It is understanding. Understanding gives light to the mind, and if we do not understand what is going on, what good is it going to be? It will not. Mark that down in your mind. You go to the Feast of Tabernacles (any of God's feasts, but we are heading towards the Feast of Tabernacles now) for understanding.
This occasion began on the Feast of Trumpets during the re-establishment and rebuilding of Jerusalem and the wall by those Jews who chose to emmigrate back there from their Babylonian captivity. So, it just seems that there was undoubtedly good reason for the people's emotional response to keeping this particular Feast of Trumpets in this particular location at this particular time under the stresses that they had gone through up to that time and certainly were not over yet.
"Not since the days of Joshua the son of Nun." Now I take this to mean that they were not kept prior to this time with all the combination of all of the elements in the right proportion. They were obedient in the right place in the right attitude with the right emphasis. I know what I have said is true because both Kings and Chronicles give us a record of feasts being kept by the Israelites during the period between Joshua and Ezra, but they did not keep them consistently, nor when they did keep them did they always keep them correctly, especially in regard to attitude and purpose in observing them. You can tell these people were in a very receptive attitude to hear the Word of God and God gave them understanding. Let us keep advancing through the book here to Isaiah 1. We are advancing through the book up to our time, at least as far as it appears, but actually the time of Isaiah is before what happened in Nehemiah.
To whom is he speaking? He is speaking to Israelites there and it is very likely that he is doing it in Jerusalem.
"Get your dirty feet off my carpet," I guess you might say. Were they literally dirty? Probably not. What was wrong here? We get a pretty good indication from Him calling them Sodom and Gomorrah, two of the most sinful places that ever existed on the face of the earth.
This was spoken about one hundred years before the Jews went into captivity to Babylon. There is no reason to believe that just because God says "your new moons" or "your feasts" that they were not the ones He appointed, at least in terms of the time that they were being kept. Because He could rightly call them "yours" because their keeping of them was so abominable it bore no reference to His intent and His command for them to observe them. These people were completely out of sync with His character, as the list of their sins show. We could go on further because He called the giving of their offerings which were part of the spiritual aspect of keeping the Feast as being vain. That means useless. And trampling in His courts, treading in His house, their prayers were an abomination. Their keeping of the Feast made Him weary. God had "had it up to here," we might say, with them. I think that there is no doubt that they were going through the motions but their attitude in keeping the feasts combined with the conduct in daily life did not even come close to what God wanted and therein was the problem. We are going to leave this and go to the book of Amos. Remember Isaiah was about one hundred years before Judah went into captivity and during that one hundred years Judah had at least one really good king. That was Josiah and he restored the worship of God. That is how I know that they kept the feasts and it is very likely that they were keeping them at the time of Isaiah too. The book of Amos is written/spoken by a Jew, but he spoke it to Israel.
This was spoken about, I would say, forty years or so before Isaiah, at least that much. I do not know whether this involved God's feast days, but the chapter, when you read the whole thing in its context, seems to indicate that God might have accepted whatever it was that they were keeping and their offerings if everything else were okay. They seemed to be, whatever it was they were keeping, at least somewhat patterned after God's, but my strongest feeling about this is that they were not God's feasts because Israel went down the tubes long before Judah did, even though Judah ended up lower according to Ezekiel. "You've done worse than Israel did." But this occurred after Jeroboam I was king and you will read there in II Kings that Jeroboam was the one who changed the feasts in the seventh month and he put it in the eighth month. He did away with Sabbath worship and I think what he did is that he copied the pattern, but he had them observed at different times so that the people then would be attending the feast at different times than the Jews and they would not be wanting to go down to Judah, down to Jerusalem to keep the holy days. When we read the chapter you will find again it is not against the feasts per se that He is railing against here, but the attitude, the character, and the conduct of the people keeping them that receives the brunt of His anger. Whether or not they were actually God's holy days is less important than the principles that are contained within their context because the whole chapter revolves around keeping feast times. This is a very interesting and instructive chapter in relation to what God expects the keeping of the feast days to do to and for His people. We are going to search this out with a bit more detail in the hope that it will help us to keep the feast a little bit better.
This chapter begins with a funeral dirge. It was a song. It was a lament that Amos sang before these people. What he sang there had not occurred yet, but it is sung in the past tense as though it had already happened. I want you to get that because it sets part of the tone for the chapter and what we have here is a listing of why Israel's fate (if I can put it that way), was already sealed. God was just waiting for the time to bring it to pass and I am sure if He wanted to see if they really would do anything. So it is read in the past tense. Well, they did not do anything. They never repented and forty years later Assyria came down and they defeated Israel and took them off into captivity and the words of Amos were fulfilled.
The first element central to understanding this section is the word "seek." It appears four times - three in relation to God Himself and one in relation to seeking good. The second important element is the listing of their sins. Every one of them is what we would call "social sins." The poor are mentioned twice. Here "poor" does not mean a person without money at all. Maybe they do and maybe they do not have any money. In this social context it means weak, the defenseless, those who have no clout, those who have no political pull, those who are not part of a clique, business or political. What we have here is a matter of the strong taking advantage of the weak. He mentions other sins that afflict: bribery, the rejection of fair judgments in the courts, those of having truth ridiculed and their testimony being unacceptable. So we see also a corrupt court system. But undoubtedly the most important element, the centerpiece of this whole chapter, is the mention of Bethel, Beersheba, and Gilgal. That is all in verse 5. They were mentioned because that is where they were holding the feasts. Do not seek Bethel, seek God. Do not seek Beersheba, seek God. Do not seek Gilgal, seek God. Is there a clue there that He is telling them that when they go there He will not be there? I think a pretty strong clue. The mention of those cities has to do with why He will not be there. There is something about those cities that is important to their understanding. So do not go there. Seek God instead. Now the rest of the information in the chapter is telling why God is not there; why what they are doing is unacceptable to Him and what He is going to do about it. Why specifically mention Bethel, other than they were holding feasts there? There was a reason they chose Bethel as a feast site. Why did they not go to Bethshea? Or why did they not go to Dan? Why did they not go to Meggido, Jezreel, nice areas, but instead they chose to have the feasts in Bethel, in Gilgal, and in Beersheba? The reason was because those three cities were shrines. They were shrine cities that were very important to the history of Israel. Significant things took place in those cities, especially those things that were significant in terms of worshipping God - important to religion. So why not have a feast at a place that was important in Israel's past where something spiritual occurred and it occurred to somebody as significant in the history of Israel? Bethel was important in the life of Jacob and Jacob was one of the patriarchs of Israel. I want you to turn with me back to Genesis 28. I have to read more than usual here because we are looking at something historical rather than just pulling a principle out.
On the first occasion that Jacob went to Bethel he was fleeing for his life. He had just pulled that dirty deed on Esau, taking advantage of Esau's weakness. He got the birthright and the blessing and Esau was rip-roaring angry and wanted to kill his brother and so Jacob was fleeing for his life when he came across Bethel. I do not know whether Jacob knew it at the time, whether Isaac had ever told him about the strange circumstances of their birth, but God had made His choice of the twins - Jacob, from the very beginning. Bethel is significant not merely because God appeared to be dwelling there, but because of what happened to Jacob there. Jacob came to Bethel as a man with a past, a bad past, a rotten past. He was a sneaking, deceitful, conniving, grasping person, a great sinner. Bethel represents Jacob's calling. It was the turning point of his life. So significant was the impact of his calling there that this conniving, grasping man said he was going to tithe! This was the man who wanted to grab everything and pull it into himself, but already a change was beginning to take place within him. Undoubtedly, some of the instruction of his father and grandfather suddenly came into his mind and God was much more real to him now than He had ever been before and he left there convinced that God was going to be with him. Jacob was far from perfect. He still had a great deal of the old nature within him. He had a lot to learn and I believe that twenty-one years later he was on his way back. He had just had a reconciliation with Esau another chapter before this when God told him to go to Bethel again. And when he got to Bethel the second time, God spoke to him, He appeared to him, and He changed his name. Now what this was, it was confirmation that Jacob was growing, he was overcoming, he was growing to the stature of the kind of man that God wanted him to be. Very significant to Jacob, one of the fathers of Israel and it of course became important to the Israelites. What is Bethel then noted for? It is noted for transformation, meeting with God, and a person changes because of meeting with God. So Bethel then became associated in the Israelites minds as a place of renewal, a place of reorientation, of transformation that comes from God working through a person. That helps us to understand why Bethel is named there in Amos 5. God is asking, "Why aren't you Israelites being transformed in the conduct of your life when you keep the feasts?" That is what God expected. That when a person goes to keep His feast, transformation takes place. It does not mean that there is some great sudden alteration in a person's life, but there is enough experience there that it fills the person at least with resolve to overcome. He says, "You people go to Bethel and you keep the feast, but no transformation occurs." And so He asks, "Are you going there to seek God, or are you going there to seek enjoyment and having a good time?" One of the primary evidences that God is making a difference in a person's life, that a transformation is taking place, is that he loves God's law. The carnal mind is at enmity against God for it is not subject to the law of God, but if a transformation is taking place, the attitude toward the law of God changes, and the person begins to see it in an entirely different light. Look what happened to Jacob. From a grasping, conniving man, he suddenly decides he is going to give God a tithe. His attitude toward the tithing law changed. His attitude toward money was changed. He was still very vigorous in the accumulation of it, but a lot of the grasping and conniving was leaving from him. So there was a change in attitude toward law. You look back there at Amos 5 and what do we see? We see people breaking laws all over the place, especially those things that had to do with the treatment of a brother, those things that had to do with the operations of the courts. It was virtually impossible to get a fair trial in Israel in those days. I am sure that they had a lot of lawyers then who were playing semantical games with words, like we see going on in the United States here today, shaving the truth, and shaving the meanings of words so that all of their sin would somehow be hidden. So these people were going to the feasts and they were returning to their homes still ungoverned by God's truth. But when Jacob met God, his life began changing immediately. So these people's lives should have changed according to the dictates, principles, and examples of God's Word. They should have come home singing and exemplifying, "Oh how love I your law. It is ever with me. It is my meditation all the day." But they were not. I think that we can reach some sort of a conclusion here that these people had turned the Bethel feasts into nothing more than a vacation. God's command, "Do not seek Bethel, seek Me, seek the Lord and live." The Bethel approach signifies death, not life. God is the God of the living. Now, what about Beersheba? Beersheba played a role in the lives of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, though the events in each case were a little bit different, each one had something significant occur to their lives in those places and maybe we will find this important to some of the sermons that I have been giving recently. Let us go to Genesis 21. In one sense this is the most insignificant of the three examples that I am going to give you and it is one that occurred to Abraham.
They bargained back and forth there awhile, but it is interesting here that a pagan king utters the words that become central to what Beersheba came to represent to the Israelites. "[I] am with you in all that you do." This pagan king recognized that Abraham was a different kind of man and he acknowledged Abraham's godliness by saying that the Lord is with you in all that you do. Abraham's life was one that reflected godliness. The central figure in this next set of verses is Isaac.
Here we have Isaac. In this instance, it was God Himself who appeared and uttered an assurance needful to him at that time, and it is needful for us too. We need to know that God is with us in what we do. We need to believe that God is with us or it is going to be awfully difficult to trust Him. In chapter 46 this one happened to Jacob, but this one in a way reflects back on Isaac because in the earlier part of chapter 26 Isaac was in a quandary about what to do about something and he was thinking about going down to Egypt and God stopped him from going there. We know what happened to Abraham there. God let him go down there and he got into a bushel of trouble. But in this case God intervened and He stopped Isaac from going there and He reoriented him and said, Instead go to Beersheba, which is where he went. And there He appeared to him to reassure him that he had done the right thing.
Jacob was on his way to meet with Joseph and I am sure that he had second thoughts about going there because he knew what happened to Isaac when he went there and he knew what kind of a land Egypt was and he was not all that sure that was a good move for him to go there. It is interesting that he went to Beersheba apparently because he felt that there would be some contact with God in that place, and sure enough God appeared to him in a vision. So three patriarchs received the assurance of the companionship of God. What might have been the reaction of the Israelites when Amos said unto them, "Don't cross into Beersheba, this holy place"? I am sure that it caused them to scoff. It might have caused some of them to wonder what Amos was driving at. But it is a pastor's responsibility, and that is what Amos was, to not only try to help build people's trust in God, but from time to time to sow doubt about their condition or their standing before God because it is very easy for us to assume that everything is okay in our relationship with God. Let me give you an example. In Paul's writings there were times when he just about battered the opposition's positions on something, and other times he asks questions, and usually preceded by, or followed by, some well-placed and incisive questions, and with good solid logical reason. In other words, Paul varied the approach of his teaching. It was not always given in exactly the same manner all the time. It depended upon the circumstance. That is what Amos has done here. He has suddenly stuck a knife, as it were, into the thinking apparatus of these people by asking them, or telling them, actually commanding them, "Do not cross over into this holy place, Beersheba." Why? Well, let us ask a question. Is it possible, thinking about what Beersheba is noted for, that these people had assumed that God was with them in all they did given the evidence of their sinfulness, even as they were keeping a festival in Beersheba? This was something that they needed to think about. These things were uttered to Abraham, to Isaac, and Jacob. All was well between them and God, but all was not well between Israel and God. The essence of the "God is with you" promise is that all is well and that there is peace between them. We can easily see from chapter 5 that there was not peace on God's side. So the thinking of the Israelites was an assumption. It was a presumption that everything was okay all the while they were committing the sins that were listed there in the center part of the chapter. Everything was not well. When things are well, there is no barrier between God and the person. There is no constraint. All is well and harmony reigns. When such a thing occurs two can walk together because they have an understanding. In fact, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob had a covenant, but these people Amos had every right to believe were on very shaky ground. We will not look at it but in Amos 5:6, Amos mentions the fire of judgment, God's judgment. It is a veiled reference to the Day of the Lord. Then in verse 18 he tells them something pretty shocking and that I want you to see. -
Amos said, "Hey, you had better rethink your position." "God is not with you," is what he is saying. Very interesting because it reveals that they did not really know the God that they claimed to be walking with. Look at verse 14 through 16. This is a prelude to verse 18.
Amos was making a very strong point by drawing their attention three times to the sovereign, omnipotent God of armies who is so far above us He is out of sight, as the saying goes, and these complacent people might choose to believe that they were walking with God, but the real question to ask is, Did this great God want to walk with them the way that they were? Well Amos tells us, No. Adam would have happily remained in the Garden of Eden provided he could hide and not be exposed to the holiness of God. But God knew such a condition could not continue because it would not be any good for Adam. Complacency has been telling these people in Amos that when the Day of the Lord arrived, God would side with them and it would be a day of great glory for them. Do you know what we call these people today? Laodiceans. That is why I spent so much time on it. They said to themselves, "We are rich and increased with goods and have need of nothing." God was saying through Amos, "You are wretched, miserable, poor, blind, and naked." He was not walking with them. They had deceived themselves through self-righteousness. Remember all of this is within the context of the Feast. They were going to face wailing and disaster. They thought that they were going to breeze right through. So the instruction to them is, "Seek good, and not evil, that you may live: and so the Lord, the God of hosts, shall be with you, as you have spoken" (Amos 5:14). God is telling them to seek holiness, and that is not just a way of life or a rule of life, but in this context the way that God put it, it is a means of life, eternal life. Did not the rich, young ruler ask Jesus, "What must I do to have life?" And Jesus said, "Obey God." I am paraphrasing, but that is what He said. Let us jump to Gilgal. Gilgal has a storied history with Israel and I will just give you the scriptures because I do not want to take us overtime here. Gilgal's position was established in Joshua 5 through 14. It was Gilgal that Israel first came to when they came out of the wilderness. They crossed the Jordan and they went to Gilgal. It was in Gilgal that they were circumcised because all those were uncircumcised during the wilderness journey. It was there that they entered into the covenant again, reconfirmed it, and in effect became the nation of God. It was there that they kept Passover for the first time in the land. It was there that they ate the fruit of the land. Chapters 9, 10, and 14 of Joshua show that it was from there that Joshua launched his military attacks against the people of the land in order to secure it for Israelite habitation. And I Samuel 11:14-15 reveals that it was in Gilgal that Saul, Israel's first king, was confirmed as king. In Israelite history, Gilgal then came to be the shrine that proclaimed inheritance and possession of the land. But again, Amos hit them with another sharply honed thunderbolt because he says in Amos 5:5 that Gilgal shall surely go into captivity, into exile. In Amos 5:27, Amos proclaims that Israel will go into captivity beyond Damascus. In other words, even though they were observing a festival in the shrine that commemorated possession of the land, they were going to lose the land and be taken into captivity. It is from this knowledge then that we can begin to understand the attitude that Amos was confronting. There is no doubt that generally apathy or complacency was the overriding issue. It is a generalization of the problem. But specifically the problem was much more narrow. The Bethel problem, as Amos pointed out, was that they were mistaken in believing that God was in this place and therefore their hope for life was a hollow one because He was not there. The Beersheba problem was that they assumed that God was with them, but He was not walking with them. There was a barrier between them and God. They should have been asking whether God was pleased to walk with them, but their pride was almost boundless. The Gilgal problem revolves around their assumption that because they were in the land and in possession of it, they had it made. That group-think thing again - "The temple, the temple of the Lord." "Oh, I'm in the church and, therefore, I have it made." It involves what the Protestants today call the doctrine of eternal security and it is very interesting. The context shows in Amos 5:21-23 that they had a wealth of religion. They had festivals. They had sacrifice. They had music. The Israelites went in for religion in a big way and I think that they probably went after it wholeheartedly and it was very likely emotionally satisfying when they went to these feasts. But what good is it if it does not get through to God? Now brethren, we should be assured that we are going to make it into God's Kingdom on the strength of God's ability to save us, that He can prepare us for that event. So what is the problem here?
Modern translations may change the word judgment into justice. Let justice and righteousness roll down. There is a clever play on words here because Gilgal means rolling. The people attended the festivals in Gilgal, but when they returned home, justice and righteousness failed to roll out into their everyday life. They went on with life as they had been before. There was no change. But they had a good time, singing, dancing, making sacrifices, indicating eating meals together, traveling there. They were just certain that everything was okay. Now very briefly, justice is the fruit of righteousness, and when they are linked in the Bible like they are here, justice stands for correct moral and ethical practice, and righteousness stands for the cultivation of correct moral principle. Justice is external, righteousness in internal. The change begins inside. But if there is a real change there, it will show in the conduct outside. So God gave them the evidence from their social life that nothing was changing. Justice was not rolling out from these people and the trouble was that the people kept their religion in a box with no way for it to be communicated into daily life. Going to Gilgal was just like going to a movie. It was like going to a stage play where the people were entertained. They were there. They enjoyed it. But life never changed. It may as well have been a vacation. Now you put the three of these things together, Bethel, Beersheba, and Gilgal, and I think that you will understand that as far as God is concerned our relationship with Him is not a game to Him. He has revealed Himself to us for the purpose of creating His image in us and we are required to use our free moral agency in order to allow Him to work with us to produce what it is that He wants. He has ordained, created, appointed the feasts to be major events where something of this nature can be concentrated upon. The Feast of Tabernacles is the prime place, the environment - it is almost like a Garden of Eden - where our relationship with God can be enhanced more than at any other time during the year. There is the right fellowship. There is the right circumstance. There is spiritual food every day, sometimes twice a day. There is all the opportunity for eight days, at least, to talk about God, talk about His Word, communicate the blessings with gratitude to one another. The things that God has done in His life for you in behalf of the church. The things that are taking place that involve His activities in terms of miracles, correction, and instruction in righteousness. It is the high time of the year, every year. The church exists to serve Him in witnessing the gospel to the world by our lives, and in preaching too, and we cannot witness well without preparation, and the festival plays a very important part in this. So let us resolve to make sure that we go to this year's Feast of Tabernacles with the Spirit having priority in our minds and let rejoicing be its fruit. I do not think that we should say that we cannot seek any rejoicing. I do not mean that at all. But it is very easy in that circumstance to allow rejoicing to be the thing that dominates our time and attention at the Feast. The Feast is not a vacation. The Feast is not a gospel concert. It is not a social tea party or a substitute for Christmas, or a Christmas shopping binge. And even though some element of each of these may accompany it, do not let these things dominate. Make sure that the Feast is a springboard for significant positive change. JWR/jjm/drm
Start Your Day with ScriptureBegin each morning with God's Word the Berean delivers a daily verse and insightful commentary to spark reflection and growth. Join 135,000+ fellow believers on this journey.
|