![]() |
||||||||||
The last three weeks or so have not been good ones for America. Even though we as a church do not become involved in politics necessarily, most of us are still Americans. We were born here. We are involved in our communities in some way. We live and work within it, and what happens in the country affects us. If we're not Americans, we're at least interested observers. Those of us to the north in Canada have to deal with America on a fairly regular basis because they get our television, they get our movies. Things that happen in America have an effect on what happens in Canada. I know in many cases that is not a good thing. We've transported our culture to them, and there are quite a few Canadians who resent that because they have a unique culture of their own. It is disturbing to me, even dismaying, to see what is going on in Florida, and now what is going on in all of the United States because they've brought the United States Supreme Court into the matter. This is a situation that should have never gotten that far. I think, to me, and probably to many of you, the matter seems very clear in terms of the law, in terms of the Constitution, in terms of just simple common sense. But the lawsuits and the heated rhetoric, and the anger and the partisan politics and the hate keep ratcheting up as it goes further and further into this mess. Whenever I think of this situation for any length of time my thoughts almost invariably wind up wondering how poorly America chooses its leaders. Not only are Bush and Gore mediocre as politicians, and as people I would not rank them in my top thousand people in America. But that's whom this nation had to choose from, because it all comes down to two normally, and not even counting Pat Buchanan and Ralph Nader who got less than just a few percent of the vote. Think about it. Over the past twenty years or so have we had any stellar leaders? Clinton is the bottom of the barrel. He's below the bottom of the barrel, if you ask me. Dole, a liberal Republican, would not have been much better. As for the elder George Bush, sometimes I wonder where his loyalties lie. He didn't do a whole lot for America. The Democratic losers in the two elections of his time, (Dukakis and Mondale, and I should probably say a thirdCarter who lost an election in there too), weren't great in any way. Even Ronald Reagan, who has been put forward by many people as the greatest President we've had since Eisenhower, or maybe since Lincoln, at least stopped the pell-mell plunge this nation was on into liberalism. But he had his faults too, didn't he? There was the Iran-Contra, and a burgeoning national debt among other things, and a very poor way of controlling people under him. There were the old jokes about him sleeping during cabinet meetings and forgetting very important things. When was America's last great leader? It's hard to say. Things that we know about our President and military generals, and whoever it is that one considers a leader in this country, we could say weren't great men. You might pick somebody out like Douglas MacArthur, but I hear that he was no picnic to live with. He wasn't converted was he? Winston Churchill had a lot of strange proclivities, but he rallied Britain. But how long ago was it that America ever had a truly great leader? Now people are digging up things on Abraham Lincoln that make him less of a light. Do we have to go all the way back to somebody like George Washington? I don't know. I'm just kind of thinking off the top of my head about American leadership in the past. I don't know how far back we have to go to get a truly great American leader, but it's something to think about. Thinking about all this made me realize that in terms of all of history, in all nations, the record of leadership, whether it was chosen by the people in some democratic way, or whether it was by force of arms, or whether it was by inheritance because daddy or mommy was monarch, has been dismal. Think about it. Name to me even a handful of great leaders. Don't mention any of them that are in the Bible, because you can get more than a handful from the Bible. Just think about all the world history and all the nations. Was Genghis Kahn a good leader? Was Alexander the Great a good leader? What about people like Ghandi? It depends on your perspective I guess, but were they really great or good men, and women? I have to say, that if we're going to judge by God's standard, the answer is no. They weren't great people. There have been a few good leaders who rallied their nations in times of trouble. There have been a few that have tried to rule their nations for the good of the people, but overall I think they are a very small percentage of the total of all the leaders that have marched down through history. Let's begin in Daniel 4:17. Nebuchadnezzar makes a statement here. He's actually quoting an angel in verse 17. This whole scenario that happens in Daniel 4 in a way is to show this, that it is God Himself who puts rulers into position, or allows them to be in those positions of leadership.
Here we have testimony from God Himself, through an angel, that our leaders, going back as far as Adam and Eve, are going to be among the lowest of men. They are not going to be the "cream of the crop" necessarily. They are not going to be paragons of virtue. They are there for a purpose, and God sets them up to do what He needs to get done in His plan, but for the most part they are not going to be real beauties. We just have to take them as they are. I think it will be instructive at this juncture in America's history that we review biblical history to see that people frequently make poor choices when it comes to picking their leaders. I think God just allows this, because it shows basically the heart of the people. The way that the people are usually ends up determining how they pick their leaders, and what leaders they get. In Bill Clinton, I think we got two terms of a man who reflects America in many cases, and it's sad. That's why I said it's dismaying and disturbing to look at that and to think that is where America has gone, where America has fallen. My "SPS" [Specific Purpose Statement] today is that peoplemenchoose their leaders very poorly. We should not be surprised then if this election turns out differently from the way we think it should. I guess it really doesn't matter who wins. America will get the leader it deserves. No matter who wins, I think their choice is poor, unfortunately. Let's go to Proverbs 29 and just lay a basis for the way I look at this. This is kind of a black and white way of looking at things, but it sets out the boundaries of this very neatly.
Isn't that true. A righteous person in power, one who is really trying to do what is right, one who wants to do the things that God says should be done, will put things into practice by government power that make people happy, that gives them joy. That is just the automatic result of doing things right, properly, and godly. Because people live in an environment where things are being done well, they usually prosper, they are peaceful, and so they are happy. They rejoice. But when the wicked is in there and tearing down the foundation of what God has established as good, the people moan and groan because they are in misery. I think we can see in this country that because our leaders haven't had the backbone to stand up for what is truly right and good, at least to the level of the American Constitution and our Founding Fathers' ideal, America has steadily gone down hill, at least since the First World War. We can see this in our own land, that when the righteous are in power things go well, but when the wicked get into power, we feel it. We moan. We groan. Let's start looking at this from the very beginning. Turn to Genesis 2:15. This was the first time humanity was given a choice as to who it's leaders would be. There were only two representatives of humanity on earth at the time, but they had a very clear choice.
In a way you might say this was God's stump speech for His election. He was candidate. Now let's go and hear the other side.
You might say they voted with their mouths, and they chose poorly. Very poorly. They were wrong altogether. Here was the choice between God, who had created them and had given them every good thing, and Satan on the other hand who lied to them, who deceived them, and wanted to undermine God at every turn. And they chose the scoundrel. It's as simple as that. When faced with a choice between God or a righteous man, and a scoundrel, humans, with the carnal mind, will almost invariably choose the scoundrel. It's just the way it works out. The reason is they feel free by choosing the scoundrel, because then their leader is not better than they. He's not teaching them to change and grow. They can point to him and say, "Hey! He's doing it. I can do it too." And so they are much more comfortable with the scoundrel in office because it makes them feel good about themselves and it gives them an amount of freedom that the carnal mind fools us into thinking we have to do, whatever it is that we want to do. In Rudyard Kipling's poem, Mandalay, one of the soldiers said, [and I'm paraphrasing here], "Send me beyond India where there is no Ten Commandments." He said this because he wanted to do what he wanted to do. He didn't want to be sent to a place where his regimental commander was a man of God let's say, and would enforce proper discipline, the proper living. He wanted to be sent to a place where he could be wild and free. I thought that was interesting. Here it is, the garden of Eden, and the first time that anybody had a choice, and they failed. Well, sixteen hundred years or so passed, and God decided to wipe the slate clean, because the record of history shows that their choice was really the wrong choice, and it resulted in death and destruction. In Genesis 9 God had given Noah the command to "be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth," ...not only with the animals, but with mankind.
Here we have the first ruler that was chosen by the people. The tradition says that they chose him because he was able to fight off the wild beasts, and he gave them a sense of security. He would make sure that these people were fortified in some way and then he would go out and kill the wild animals that were plaguing them. They glommed onto him because he appeared to be a leader, no matter that his reputation far and wide was that he was a rebel against God, that he was the number one hunter, let's say, of God's good people, and against what God wanted to do. This resulted in the tower of Babel.
This maybe taking it a little bit before what we just read there in Chapter 10, because its says that Nimrod built Babel in Shinar. Evidently what we have here is a little bit of a flash-back to show you that when people migrated eastward from where the ark had landed and where they had begun to settle, that they built this city in the land of Shinar.
What was it that God had said to Noah in Genesis 9:1? "Be fruitful and multiply and fill the whole earth." What they wanted to do was to build a tower in defiance of God, and build a city in which they could all gather so that they wouldn't have to scatter themselves over the whole earth. Who was the one that they chose to lead this? Nimrod.
They chose Nimrod, who was against everything that God did, to thwart God's plan of scattering them abroad over the face of the whole earth. That was their choice. They could have chosen Shem, or Noah and Shem, depending on whether Noah was still alive at the time, because it was Noah's job, and Shem's after him, to fill the whole earth with the people. But instead they chose Cush and Nimrod because their platform was, "No. Let's stay in our own little cities and stay united and build house to house (let's say) and be here cheek by jowl, and not let God tell us what to do." Instead they chose to rebel against God. They chose self-determination. What happened is that God said, "I'm going to do what I told you to do anyway," and He confused their language and scattered them abroad over the whole earth. But they chose. That was their choice, and their punishment was a scattering and an inability to understand one another. Confusion. That just fits the mold of what we saw there in Proverbs 29:2. If they had followed the righteous leader, they would have been happy, but instead they followed the scoundrel, the wicked, and what did they have but misery. Since then things have not gotten much better. We're now going to skip over quite a bit of history. This will take us past the time when God had brought Israel out of Egypt. We'll go all the way to Numbers 16, because there was a rebellion in the wilderness in which they made another choice, and it ended up once again that they made the wrong choice. It always seems to happen this way. It's almost invariable that the wrong choice is made when carnal people have to make this choice.
I want you to notice a few things. You might think that this rebellion was just Korah, Dathan, Abiram, and On; but they also had 250 leaders of the people with them, so at least this is 254 leaders of the congregation. But there is one interesting little phrase in here. These 250 leaders were representatives of the congregation. How many people did these 254 men represent? It's hard to say, but we can get stuck here if we think it was just the leadership that was having this problem with Moses, but it isn't. We'll see later that it affected at least 14,700 people. I would imagine, that because Aaron stopped the plague, that there were far more that were involved and on whom God had mercy. Let's look at this. What was it that they were upset about? Well, they said that Moses was exalting himself, that Moses was taking too much upon himself. "Don't you know, Moses, that the whole congregation is holy? We're all equally holy. We all deserve our say in things." When Moses heard this he fell on his face because he knew what was going on, and he knew that if he didn't get down he was going to get hit.
We see now who was mainly the problem here.
This was a rebellion by the upper-management against the priesthood. These people who had been given the jobs that Moses mentions here wanted more. They wanted to be the priests. They wanted to lead Israel because they weren't satisfied with the positions that God had given them.
Moses didn't take this personally. He knew actually beyond himself what it was that they were rebelling against. It was not against Moses, but against God, because God had been the One who had placed them where they were, and He was the One who had placed Moses where he was, and all the priests.
"We're not going to do what you say. We're not going to bend a knee to you."
Look at how they turned things around here. Egypt was a desert. It still is. They called Egypt "a land flowing with milk and honey."
See, that was their problem. Moses was in charge. They were upset that somebody else was in charge instead of them.
Ah-ha! They were impatient too! They were saying that Moses hadn't fulfilled his end of the bargain.
This is a Hebraism that means, "Will you throw dust in the eyes of these people? "Will you add insult to injury by lording it over us?"
Moses gets very angry because he knows what's going on.
Did you catch that? "Korah gathered all the congregation against them at the door of the tabernacle of meeting"?
Uh oh! Things are starting to get tense.
It was pretty good that He said that, otherwise a whole lot more people would have been dead after this.
Did you notice how he replied to them? "It's not me," Moses said, "who did all these things and who came up with all these things." Moses is saying, "Look. God was the One who told me to do everything that I have done. Your rebellion is not against me, but against God."
He puts it in very plain language. "If they die supernaturally, you will know I was right. If they don't and they die naturally in their beds, then you'll know they were right."
Just remember that the earth closed over them. It's very interesting later.
Why were they so afraid? Because they were guilty. Remember, all the congregation was in this rebellion. Two hundred fifty leaders represented all the congregation, and they were afraid for their lives because they were just as guilty as Korah, Dathan, and Abiram.
Not only Korah, Dathan and Abiram, but 250 representatives of the congregation were killed, ...the 250 being charred as they stood. It didn't end here though.
On the very next day! It just happened. It was still fresh in the memory. The smell of burning flesh was still in the air.
They missed the point altogether. Moses had just gotten finished saying, "If they die, you will know that it was the Lord that did everything through me." Moses didn't split the earth open and cause them to fall down in, and the earth close back over them. He didn't cause fire to come out of the tabernacle and kill those 250 men. But whom did they blame? Moses. You see whom they were choosing. Not God. Anybody but God, and anybody but God's representative, Moses, and his representative, Aaron. They were making a very poor choice again.
This is at least the second time He has said this. "I've had it past here now. These people need to be snuffed out. They're not worth it." And then Moses and Aaron did the falling on the faces bit again. They were doing quite a lot a that these last two days. God wasn't happy.
Moses didn't even need to get up and look around to see that God was acting on what He had just said, that He was going to wipe them all out.
And you know, they still didn't get it because God had to do another miracle in Chapter 17, to make Aaron's rod bud before they finally got the fear of God in them. After they saw this, ...
And the answer was "Yes." They all died in the wilderness because they had rebelled against God. Very soon after they made their choice the results happened, and disaster struck them. It was one of the most awful things that happened in that whole trek through the wilderness. It's really something to behold. When you make the wrong choice, it bites you. There is another one in Judges 9 which I think I will skip. It's the story of Abimelech who killed his brothersall the sons of Gideon. He only reigned three or four years. The men of Shechem who chose him to be their leader didn't wait for God to raise up a judge of His own, and it all ended up in civil war. Who knows how many hundreds of thousands of people died. They made the wrong choice, and it caused so many problems. Let's go now to I Samuel 8. My New King James has a heading on this section which says: "Israel Demands A King." Here is another time in which Israel made a very poor choice.
They had a point, that Samuel's sons were corrupt. They were not good leaders, but they made a mistake in asking for a king. Now God allowed it, but you will see that Samuel was upset.
"Look. It's no different from what they've been doing these last four hundred or so years. It's the same pattern, Samuel." I could just hear God saying this in a kind of weary voice.
And so he does. Samuel tells the people how a king will take their money, take their produce, take their sons and their daughters for his own use. In a sense he says, "A king is going to drain you dry and make you miserable."
He said, "I'm going to let you suffer your own choice."
And of course he chose Saul. That's the one God had chosen for the people. If you think about verse 18 where it says, "and the LORD will not hear you in that day," and you think over the kings of Israel and Judah, you can see how that played out. Israel and Judah suffered under most of their kings. There were only a few good ones. There is none in Israel that I can think of, but there was David, and Solomon for a while. Some of the first kings of Judah were not bad. Jehoshaphat was okay. And then you got a bunch of scoundrels, and then finally you got down to Hezekiah and Josiah. But after that the kings didn't help Israel very much at all. The only good thing that came out of it was the line of David, and Christ from that line. This is all God's plan. That is why He allowed them to have a king. He was setting all this up so that it would happen, but that doesn't take away from the consequences that such an action brought. A poor choice ends up in very bad consequences. We see it all the time. Go now to I Samuel 10:17.
No one in Israel even came up more than his shoulders. He was literally "head and shoulders" above everyone in the kingdom. He looked every inch a king, commanding presence. He towered over the people. "This is the man that will lead us into battle." But there he was, hiding among the equipment.
I get the impression that he maybe put it in the ark as a witness against them, like Aaron's rod, like the manna that was in there, like the Ten Commandments that were in there. All these things are witnesses showing what Israel should have done for what God had provided, and that the people had rejected.]
God had inspired some to support Saul. But listen to this. Immediately after Saul was crowned king, ...
Immediately after a king was crowned, they had rebellion. You get the impression that Saul held his peace so he could crush them later when he was strong, and he was already beginning to show the signs of kingly behavior about which Samuel had warned them. He was just holding his peace, biding his time. Let's go to I Samuel 15. This is with Saul and King Agag, where Samuel told him specifically what he should do, and he didn't do it.
He twisted the command. Samuel had told him to slay everything.
Samuel wasn't in too good a mood. Not only had he heard this from God, and had stayed up all night beseeching Him to spare Saul, but then Saul went hither and yon all over Israel, and then he had not obeyed the commandment that he had been given, and so by this time Samuel was in a fit.
And then Samuel goes on to explain that obedience is better than all these things that Saul thought he was doing.
At least he was honest enough to admit what it was actually that had happened.
I get the impression he hadn't done it in a while.
Israel's choice to have a king ended in utter failure. The end of Saul's reign was constant warfare, ...here against Amalek, against David, against the Philistines. He, in his own reign, fulfilled most of those things that Samuel had written in that book about the behavior of kings, and that's why God said, "I don't want this man anymore. I regret that I ever put him in this position," and He got rid of him. Notice in Chapter 16 something very interesting.
Samuel had probably invested a lot in the man, and he had seen his project end in ruin. God says, "Get over it, Samuel." "How long will you mourn for Saul, seeing I have rejected him from reigning over Israel?" What God has rejected, we can forget.
And then God tells Samuel what to do.
This is interesting, because not only did more sons of Jesse pass before Samuel, and each one seemed to be just as good to Samuel to be king, but none of them fit God's bill. David, the shepherd, the little one, was the one that God wanted. Even Samuel made the wrong choice. A converted man looked at the outward appearance instead of on the heart. Of course he never saw David until they brought him in, but immediately, when Eliab came, he looked and saw this strapping young man who looked kingly to him and said, "Surely this is the one that will lead Israel." And God said, "No, Samuel. You still don't get it. I don't look at how these people appear, whether they're tall, whether they're strong. I look at their character, at what's in their heart." Chapter 16 is juxtaposed against the previous eight chapters. Remember, it was in Chapter 8 where they asked for a king, and then a king was chosen. It was this hulking Benjaminite named Saul who looked every inch a king. I think that's what Samuel was looking for, and the people. But God finally tells Samuel here, when he's anointing David, that the real way to find a king is to find one who has a heart just like God. And that's what David was. He was "a man after God's own heart." David was a man who made a lot of mistakes in his life, but he repented of them and always strived to do what God wanted him to do. He was thick-headed at times. Sometimes he didn't get it right away. Sometimes we shake our heads and say, "Why in the world David did you ever do that?" But he had the right attitude, the right heart. His heart was soft and malleable, and he made a great king because God was with him, and he was with God. It was the heart that made the difference. There is the account of Absalom. David wasn't even dead before the people made another wrong choice. This time the choice was between "old" David, who was probably in his sixties at this time, and young strapping Absalom, who had gotten the heart of the people by giving them what they wanted. He too probably looked every inch a king, but they made the wrong choice. The throne of David was to go to Solomon, not to Absalom. That episode ended in civil war, Absalom dead, and Ahithophel, David's chief counselor, dead by suicide. David's heart was broken because he loved Absalom. And then finally the seeds of national division were sown, because it was just after Absalom's rebellion was put down that the Judahites and the rest of Israel began to quarrel. David was still strong enough to keep them together, and so was Solomon, but as soon as Solomon died, another choice was made. This choice was whether to choose the line of David to Rehoboam, or whether to choose a new man, Jeroboam. What did the Israelites do? They chose the wrong one. They chose Jeroboam. What was the first thing Jeroboam did? He changed the priesthood. He changed the Holy Days. He set up two golden calves and changed the religion of Israel into idolatry, and that nation plummeted like a rock. Something very interesting can be seen in Matthew 27. Here was another choice that was made. Maybe you never thought of it in this way, but I think it's very significant.
If you look in the other gospels regarding this notorious prisoner, one calls him a thief, another calls him an insurrectionist, and another calls him a murderer. He was all those things. He was a brigand of the first order. He was someone you wouldn't want to live anywhere near. You would want him incarcerated. He was not one that should have been even in a position to be chosen along side Jesus Christ. But he was. My New King James has a marginal reference which says that his name was Jesus Barabbas. That comes from a very old text. It's called the Caesarian Text, and the word "Jesus" is in the text thereJesus Barabbas. It is thought that the word "Jesus" fell out of the text somewhere a couple centuries after Christ because they thought it was blasphemous that Barabbas had the same name as Christ, and so they dropped it. That's the thought of the scholars who go over this. I'm not saying that his name was Jesus Barabbas, but it is very interesting if it was. I'll tell you why. Let's go on and read this before we do that.
This is why they say they're pretty sure that there was "Jesus" in there because of the way Pilate said this. "Whom do you want me to release to you?" They were all shouting "Jesus!" "Jesus!" "Jesus!" And so Pilate said, "Which one do you want me to release to you? Barabbas, or the Jesus that is called Christ?" Does that make sense? Actually they would have been saying "Jeshua" or "Joshua,"something along that lineand Pilate was saying, "I don't know which one it is that you want me to release, ...this innocent man, or Barabbas, the insurrectionist."
He knew that the Jews had done this because of their own machinations, that they coveted their positions.
They were going out among the crowd which was there to try to get a prisoner released for the Passover, and they were stoking the flames against Jesus of Nazareth, and for Jesus Barabbas.
This is another indication that both were named Jesus.
After Pilate washed his hands of it, ...
This may be the ultimate choice. The people represented mankind in general. Pilate represented the leadership of government. The rabbis and the priests and the elders represented man's religious leadership. Government, religion, and the people all made the same decision, and they chose Barabbas instead of Christ. I already mentioned that Barabbas' name was probably Jesus as well. Do you know what Barabbas means? It's a Greek transliteration of the Aramaic bar-abba. Do you know what bar-abba means? Have you ever heard of Simon bar Jonah? What does that mean? It means "Simon, son of Jonah, or John." Now what does "Jesus bar-abba" mean? It means "savior, son of the father,"an exact opposite of the true Savior, Son of God. It kind of like black and white facing each other. Which one would the people choose to be released? It's very interesting they chose the rebel, the sinner, over the sinless One, the One who perfectly conformed to His Father's will. They chose the murderer over the Creator and Life-Giver. They chose thief over the One who gives us all good things. They chose a physical messiahone who they thought might free them from the Romans, instead of the spiritual Saviorthe One who could free us from sin and give us eternal life. Mankind, when faced with a choice between a righteous man backed by God, and a wicked man who is just like them, will invariably choose the one who is just like them. It's sad to see, but true, and it's happened time and time again since the garden of Eden. Let's go now to Jeremiah 17. I told you that this would be interesting to look at.
That's what we're talking about here, about people who choose a man rather than God, or the one whom God appoints.
Think back to Proverbs 29:2.
This person will grow, and produce, and prosper. And this is where that famous verse comes into play:
I found out today that this word "deceitful" comes from the same root as the word "Jacob." Supplanter. "The heart is supplanting above all things." The way I think Jamieson, Fausset & Brown put it is that "they always supplant God with something of their own devising," meaning the man's heart. Man's heart always supplants God with something that it devises of itself, or something like itself.
What we choose is how we will be judged.
At the end of our lives, we'll see whether we chose correctly.
This is where I said that I wanted you to remember this about Korah having the dirt and the earth come over them.
Very interesting. Those who forsake God will be written in the earth. Korah was a very vivid illustration of someone being "written in the earth." It's like saying, "You're dust, and that's as high as you'll ever get. That's your destiny. Dust." It's kind of interesting too if you just want to think about this that when the Jews found the woman caught in adultery, what did Jesus do? He wrote in the dust. Some people think that what He was doing was writing her accusers' names in the dust, and it is a reference back to this being "written in the earth." It's very interesting to think about. There's another choice that's cominga choice of the Beast.
I don't want to get all caught up in when, and who, and all that, but the people of this earth are making a choice right now. Don't get caught up in the fact that this is going to be a man. The man is simply the culmination of six thousand years of Satan's rule that began in the Garden of Eden. This man will be the epitome of that system that Satan has forced on mankind who has rejected God. It says that everyonethe whole worldwill worship the Beast; not just the Beast, but the system that is produced. We should think about this very deeply because we live and work in this system. All our activities, outside of church functions (our prayers, our study), are caught up in this system. We can't really look at these things that I've been talking about today and say, "Look at those people. They're just terrible choosers. They can't make decisions. If I were there, I would have picked Jesus instead of Barabbas." We can't do that. Remember, Samuel picked how many sons of Jesse before God said, "Come on. I want the last one. I look on the heart." Not even Samuel was wise enough to make the right choice. Now that was a particular situation. Mostly he made the right choices in his life. He missed the one about the king. But we are faced with choices every day, not of this magnitude, but with every choice that we make we choose either God or something else. Every choice we make will tell God where our heart is. Is our heart for Him, and steadfast with Him, or are we willing to sometimes take it easy and choose poorly just for our own fun, aggrandizement, or what have you, for our self-interest? That is what I think we have to take out of this sermon. It's not that man has always chosen poorly, but that we everyday have a chance to choose wisely.
It's not something that is esoteric and not understandable. It's not far off. It's not something that we can't grasp.
No. It's not something that is beyond us.
It's not something unreachable.
That is, make the right choice.
Don't get all bogged down in the distractions that Satan puts up to confuse us about this choice. Always choose life. Choose, decide on the thing that will make for eternal life, that will please God, ....
RTR/smp/
|
You Will Only See This Once | ||
|
The Bereans "received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so" (Acts 17:10-11). This daily newsletter provides a starting point for personal study, and gives valuable insight into the verses that make up the Word of God. See what over 40,000 subscribers are already receiving each day. |
|
We respect your privacy. Your email address will not be sold, distributed, rented, or in any way given out to a third party. We have nothing to sell. You may easily unsubscribe at any time. |
||