Job 4:1-6 – Eliphaz questions Job’s character

In this chapter, Eliphaz begins his debate with Job. Eliphaz questions Job’s character and innocence. Eliphaz then proceeds to find Job guilty of some unnamed sin because of the great amount of suffering Job is enduring.

Vs 1-2, Eliphaz begins to speak to Job. Evidently Job’s complaints in the previous chapter have moved him to a response and rebuke. Eliphaz believes that Job is in this predicament as a direct result of something sinful that Job has done. And so he doesn’t believe that Job’s desire for relief is justified. He believes Job is getting what he deserves. Hence, Eliphaz begins with the question of whether or not speaking to Job in this regard would cause him to be “grieved” or “impatient.” It’s not that Eliphaz cares whether Job feels this way or not. The question is more really of a design to mean, “If I respond to you Job, are you going to take this in the right way?” Eliphaz then makes it plain that he is compelled to comment upon Job’s situation after the words of complaint that Job has just spoken.

Vs. 3-4 – Eliphaz acknowledges Job’s role in this society. Job was a man who was esteemed and admired by all. He was a counselor and a man of the gate. He was one of the city elders to whom disputes were brought so that they could be settled. This place of honor would be equivalent to our city counsel or perhaps an eldership in a local church. Religion was not so much separated from matters of government in that day and the distinction is not observed by either Job or his friends. Job himself recalls this position of honor in Job 29:7-17. Job had indeed instructed many and Job had also strengthened the feeble and weak. In Job 31:16-23 Job claims that he was always fair to the poor and those in need and he never took advantage of them. And, no one ever questions Job in this regard. It is thus only right for Eliphaz to acknowledge Job’s honors before he begins criticizing him. Yet those few words of praise in Eliphaz mouth don’t appear to mean very much during and after the criticisms. Proverbs 17:17 says “A friend loveth at all times, and a brother is born for adversity.” When one is truly a friend, he will stick with you through thick and thin. Job’s friends may have been physically there for him, but spiritually, they abandoned him in his time of need.

Vs. 5 – Eliphaz words seem to contain a touch of purposeful irony. Yes, he recognized that Job was at one time in a position to assist others, but now Job, here you are in this situation where you now need the help of others. It’s almost patronizing in its content. Eliphaz’ statement regarding Job’s current situation reveals to us that he though Job to be somewhat hypocritical in his behavior. It is almost as if Eliphaz is saying, “Job helped others in the past, but now that he is suffering, he can’t help himself. When adversity comes upon him, he faints; he is troubled.” This is unfair criticism of Job. It is natural for someone in Job’s circumstances to feel down trodden. Eliphaz ought not to point out what is clearly evident here, emphasizing Job’s sufferings, but instead offer words of comfort. How many of us would walk into the hospital room of a patience whose body is disease ridden and is clearly suffering and say something like, “Well, it’s finally come upon you now.” Not only is it rude, it’s just not necessary to say. Both the one suffering and the one visiting know what the circumstances are. They don’t need to be so repeated so as to emphasize the obvious.

Vs. 6 – Again, Eliphaz appears to be mocking Job’s life. Job was indeed one who had feared God and one whose ways were filled with integrity. Thus, Job had reason to hope that his relationship with God was a good one. Eliphaz seems to be saying here, “Considering your suffering, Job, do you still believe that your fear of God and your personal integrity are reasons to hope that you have a good relationship with God?” This becomes a common element in these three’s criticism of Job. Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar all question the necessity of man’s righteousness in relationship to his salvation. They don’t seem to believe that man’s righteousness ultimately makes any difference because man’s sins completely eclipse any good that a man might do (see Job 25:4-6). In that regard, they are similar to modern day Calvinists who state that there is no good thing that a person may do that would affect one’s salvation. Well, the Bible teaches otherwise. John states in 1 John 3:7 “Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous.” Man has a personal responsibility to fear and obey God; this fear and obedience are part of God’s plan for man’s salvation (Ecclesiastes 12:13, Hebrews 5:9). Job’s friends, however, did not believe this. Hence they must conclude that Job deserves every bit of his suffering due to his own personal sins.

Posted in Kevin Cauley | Tagged | Comments Off on Job 4:1-6 – Eliphaz questions Job’s character

Job 3:20-26

Please open your Bibles to Job 3:20-26.

In this section, we find the key question to the entire book of Job. Rephrased into today’s vernacular we would ask, “Why do good men suffer bad things?” or “Why is there suffering in the world?” The burden of the book of Job is to answer this question and we don’t get the answer in a short simple statement, because it’s not that kind of answer. There are many things that go through an individual’s mind when he is suffering. Is God mad at me? Is God punishing me? Why doesn’t God explain what He is doing? What will be the results of all of this? Why haven’t I died? Why shouldn’t I kill myself? What role does sin have in my suffering? These are all questions that are answered in the book of Job, but one must take the time to look at the book as a whole. The question of “Why do good men suffer bad things?” is a question that can’t be answered in just one sitting. It can only be answered through reasoning and contemplation, prayer and meditation of God and His word. This, and all the other attendant questions, will be answered in this book.

One thing we should note here. Neither Job nor his friends ever question God existence in regard to this problem. This is, of course, one of the great arguments today levied by those who do not believe in God. But the fact of the matter is that if there is true “evil” in the world, then God must exist. How so? In order for their to be something that one can objectively categorize as evil, then there must be a standard by which one may categorize such as evil – a standard of right and wrong. But if there is a standard of right and wrong, then there must be someone that has a right to levy that standard and require justice of those who violate it. No mere men or group of men contain the authority within themselves to establish such a standard. The only place from which such a standard can come is from Someone who is over and above the provincial and transient standards of men. God is really the only one who satisfies these requirements. The problem of evil doesn’t disprove God; it proves God. Job nor his friends ever question the existence of God because it would be a self-defeating proposition.

Vs. 20 – Job wonders why God is still keeping him alive when he desires death so much. Why allow him to suffer like he has? Wouldn’t it be better for Job to be “put out of his misery” so to speak? This is a suffering man talking. Many who suffer reason this way. But the fact of the matter is that this is the pain talking, not the reasoning part of man. This is the emotion of suffering speaking and not the clear intellect of intelligence reasoning.

As we’ve mentioned, there is a more fundamental question here. Why is there suffering in the world at all? The book will examine various answers to this question and we can actually come to some conclusions about it in the end.

“Light” is symbolic of being able to “see.” If one can see, then one is alive. The one who is in misery is the one who is suffering. The one who is “bitter in soul” is also the one who is suffering. Hence, why do living people suffer?

Vs. 21 – Job describes the depth of the suffering. They are suffering so much that they would rather die. The symbolism that Job uses is that they desire death so much that they would mine it out of the earth as gold, silver, or other treasures in the earth. But we ought not to think from this that Job meant that if they had the opportunity to take their life, then they OUGHT to do it, merely that they would do anything to have it happen to them. There is a difference between actively pursuing death and passively pursuing it. This is intense and deep suffering.

Vs. 22 – Job describes those who desire death to rejoice when they find the grave. Well, one can’t literally and physically rejoice when one dies. This is again, figurative language describing the depth of suffering that Job is experiencing. It would be, in Job’s mind, a relief and a joy to be dead because that would mean that he wouldn’t be undergoing this intense suffering any longer. Of course, Job didn’t have the benefit of the revelation on this subject that we have today. We know that death is NO relief for the wicked, but that punishment awaits them (Matthew 25:30, 46). For the righteous, of course, there is a rest that is awaiting (Hebrews 4:9-11).

Vs. 23 – The same question is again repeated as was asked in verse 20; it is really an extension of the question asked in verse 20. Again, this question is the central theme of the book of Job. Why is there suffering in the world? The expression “whose way is hidden” here indicates someone who has an uncertain future. In Job’s particular case, it means this as a result of the great loss that he has experienced in losing his wealth and family. “Whom God has hedged in” in this context isn’t referring to great blessings (as we found in Job 1:10) but rather, to limitations. Job had a great hedge of limitations around him now. He couldn’t move due to his disease (Job 7:4); he couldn’t eat (Job 6:7, 33:20); he had no wealth; he was in great pain (Job 33:19); he had no friends or family to comfort him. He was now hedged with suffering instead of blessing, just the opposite of the condition in which he was in previously.

Vs. 24 – Job emphasizes that he does not have the ability to eat here. A better reading of this passage is in the ESV which says that Job’s sighing comes instead of his bread as opposed to the KJV, his sighings come before his bread. The idea is that Job hasn’t the strength to eat. It is a monumental effort to simply get bread, chew it, swallow it, and repeat the process. Job also would later say that he can’t even taste the food that he is given (Job 6:6,7).

Job’s “roarings” or “groanings” are “poured out like water.” The idea is that they come out fluidly and easily. There is no interference with them. They are freely given voice. Man normally suppresses his little aches and pains, but in Job’s condition he could not so suppress the voice to his sufferings. If one has ever visited a nursing home or hospital, then one can understand what Job means here. Frequenting the halls of such places one oft hears the sighs and groans of those who are in pain.

Vs. 25 – What is the thing that Job fears and dreads? The word “fear” isn’t used here as a verb, but as a noun. Hence, this must be referring to his current physical condition and sufferings. We shouldn’t take this statement to mean something that Job fears in the future, but rather something that he currently is experiencing. The thing that he fears is the condition that he is currently in. It is his intense suffering. He fears that it will continue moment after moment and that he will get no relief. Eliphaz expresses the same sentiment in Job 22:10 “Therefore snares are round about thee, and sudden fear troubleth thee.” The calamities that Job had experienced were his “sudden fear.”

Vs. 26 – Job describes his physical state, which we have already alluded to above. He isn’t “at ease” because of the great pain that he is in. He isn’t “quiet” because of the moanings that flow out of him like water. He doesn’t have “rest” because his pain won’t allow him to sleep. The best that can be said of his situation is “trouble comes.” He’s had plenty of it and for the foreseeable future, that is all that he can expect; he sees no light at the end of the tunnel.

When we suffer, our situation may seem similar to Job’s. We may not see that light at the end of the tunnel. Nevertheless, with God, there is always hope. Psalm 71:5 says, “For thou art my hope, O Lord GOD: thou art my trust from my youth.” Jeremiah penned these words, “Be not a terror unto me: thou art my hope in the day of evil” (Jeremiah 17:17). God is our only hope in this life; let us trust in Him always!

Posted in Kevin Cauley | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Job 3:20-26

Job 3:11-19

Please open your Bibles to Job 3:11-19

Vs. 11-12 – In these verses, Job questions why he didn’t die at or near birth. He indicates this in several manners. First he wonders why he did not die in the womb from complications of pregnancy. Second he wonders why he didn’t die after childbirth perhaps due to complications in the delivery. Third, why was his mother (or nurse) such a good caretaker to prevent him from dying prematurely. This is the significance of the question, “Why did the knees prevent me?” Fourth, why didn’t he die from malnutrition, that is, from lack of milk as a babe. Job, in his suffering, reasons that it would have been better for him to have died in one of these ways than to have lived until the day when he would have to suffer so. Suffering can cause us to want to be dead rather than alive.

We must note, however, that Job never acted upon these desires for death nor did his friends. If such sentiments had been expressed in our day and age it wouldn’t be too long before someone obtained a court order and had Job’s food and water taken away from him so that he would starve to death. Or perhaps they would have called for the suicide doctor to come administer a deadly dose of poison so that Job’s life would expire. Even in the midst of this suffering, there was a line that Job and his friends knew not to cross. Regardless of how fragile a life may be there is no excuse for causing the death of an innocent person (Proverbs 6:16-17). Nor is there any excuse for committing suicide, which is really just self murder (Romans 1:29).

Vs. 13-16 – In these verses, Job wants to know why he couldn’t have had rest like the kings and princes of old or like a still born child. Job seemingly would prefer the rest of death rather than the anguish through which he was going at this time. Of course, Job, had he died as an infant, would have had spiritual rest, but this is not the kind of rest to which Job refers. He is referring here to the physical appearance of rest in that of a corpse.

Job reasons that the kings, counselors, and princes of the earth who have built for themselves tombs in the desolate places where their bodies could rest would indeed be the place that he desired at this time. Whether they were ornately furnished or not matter not to Job. It was simply that they had places of rest that tempted him so. Having one’s body ravaged by disease and receiving no rest during either night or day due to the intense pain in which one is suffering (Job 30:17), the grave must have looked like an appealing sight to Job.

Job even considers that he would have been better of if he was miscarried or still born. Even that would have been better than the suffering what he is now undergoing.

Vs. 17-19 – In these verses, Job posits that in death one is free from such wretched suffering as he is undergoing and can have rest. It is in death, Job reasons, that one no longer has to worry about persecution by the wicked. It is in death that those who work and toil and labor and from which their weary bodies are worn out, no longer have concern over such travail. It is in death that prisoners and slaves no longer must bend to the rod of their master’s oppression. Death offers no exceptions; both the small and great succumb to it eventually. There is no respect of persons in death.

We must note that in Job’s day and age not as much revelation had been given regarding the state of the soul at death. Perhaps Job thought of death as a place of rest for all, both righteous and wicked. From the physical appearance of death, it certainly appears that way. We know, however, that the Bible teaches that death isn’t a place of rest for the wicked (Revelation 14:11), but only for the righteous (Revelation 14:13).

The wise man declares in the book of Ecclesiastes 7:2-4, “It is better to go to the house of mourning than to go to the house of feasting: for that is the end of all men; and the living will lay it to his heart. Sorrow is better than laughter; for by the sadness of the countenance the heart is made glad. The heart of the wise is in the house of mourning; but the heart of fools is in the house of mirth.” Certainly more would do well if they would consider death seriously more often in their life than the callous and frivolous attitudes that many display toward the subject. How ought we to consider death today? It is certainly appointed for all men (Hebrews 9:27) and it is not something that we ought to desire if we haven’t lived the kind of life that God wants us to live (1 Corinthians 15:56). For such, only misery awaits after this life (Matthew 25:46). The Christian, on the other hand, has nothing to fear from death (1 Corinthians 15:57) and so does not sorrow at death as those who have no hope (1 Thessalonians 4:13). The Christian has great hope for eternal life and so death is welcome to him and is a blessing (Psalm 116:15).

Posted in Kevin Cauley | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on Job 3:11-19

The Parable of the Two “Waters”

Suppose that you were dying in the desert and you came upon a tent. Inside the tent were two people. One of those people appeared friendly, warm, and inviting. The other person appeared ugly, cold and repulsive. In front of both people were large baskets and inside one of those baskets was life giving water, but inside the other basket was deadly poison. The one who appeared friendly said, “Come and drink the water that is in my basket.” Then the ugly person said, “No, he is a liar. Do not drink of that bowl for it contains poison.” The friendly person replies, “I can’t believe that you are so unloving and impatient. Can’t you see this man is thirsty. Can’t you see that he needs a drink? Where is your love and compassion for this man.” So you ask this person, “Do you know if there is water in your basket” and this one replies, “I don’t claim to know everything, I’m just on a journey like everyone else.” So you ask the other one, “Do you know if there is water in your basket?” And he replies, “Yes, I know there is water in my basket.” Then the friendly person says, “I can’t believe that you would be so arrogant as to claim that you have the only water in your basket.” So this person turns to you and says, “Surely you are an educated man who understands that we are all in this journey together and that there is not really anything that we can truly know.” So the unattractive person says, “If you drink of the bowl that he offers, you will die.” Then the attractive person says, “I can’t believe that you would be so self righteous as to think that someone would die from drinking out of my bowl. Do you think that I am some kind of idiot or fool? Where is your love, your compassion, your concern for this poor soul.” So he replies, “I love this man enough to tell him the truth. I want him to live. If he will but drink of the bowl that is in my basket he will.” Then this man says, “Why don’t you test both substances with this litmus paper and see which is which.” The attractive person says, “I can’t believe you would ask him to do that. I’m offended that you would even suggest such.” Then he turns to you and says, “If you do that, then I will be offended.” So being persuaded by the words of the attractive person who obviously loves you (you know because of the words that he spoke, don’t you?), you drink of his bowl, but before the liquid reaches the back of your throat, you realize that it is poison and it is too late. As you lay dying, the unattractive person comes over and says, “you could have tested both of the substances that we had and known which was water and which was poison.” The attractive person lies dying next to you and says, “I’m so sorry. I was deceived. I just did not know,” but it is too late. Who was truly the most loving out of the two?

We each have something in our possession. Some have truth and some are deceived by lies. But there is a way to test who has truth and who has lies, by comparing the words that we speak with God’s words. The outcome of our decision is no less critical than the situation above; in fact, it is even more grave, because we are not merely speaking about our physical life, but our spiritual one and eternity hangs in the balance. When it comes to questions that affect our salvation, why would we seek to gamble with that by trusting someone who says, “Well, I don’t know all the answers, but this is what I believe, but I don’t really think that we have all the answers” yet appears warm, caring, and sensitive. On the other hand, there are others who say, “This is truth and you ought to believe it. And here is the way that you can test that what I am telling you is truth or not.” They give it to you straight, because they understand that if you do not accept it, then your soul will be in jeopardy. They warn you of the terrible consequences that await those who fail to believe the truth, and they point out the fact that others are out there, deceived and speaking lies about God’s plan for man’s salvation. Yet some criticize them and say that they are unloving, unkind, and lack communication skills. So it is in your power to test which one is speaking the truth and which one is not. Will you, fearful of offending someone, follow your emotions and make your decision based upon the appearance of love, sensitivity, and concern? Or will you, regardless of who you may offend, test the things that are said against the standard of truth that God has given to ensure that your beliefs are in harmony with reality? I hope that you would choose to test the things that have been told you by others, by comparing them to God’s word and concluding based upon truth that you can believe one and not believe the other.

Posted in Kevin Cauley | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on The Parable of the Two “Waters”

Matthew 3:7-12

Please open your Bibles to Matthew 3:7-12

Vs. 7 – The Pharisees were the dominant religious party among the Jewish people. Their views of scripture were often distorted by the fact that they allowed religious tradition to dominate their thinking as opposed to the actual scriptures themselves (see Mark 7:3-13). They were hypocrites because they would teach one thing and then behave in the opposite way (Matthew 23:13-33). For these reasons, Jesus condemned them severely on multiple occasions.

The Sadducees were the second most dominant religious party among the Jewish people. Together, the Pharisees and the Sadducees composed the council of the Sanhedrim. The Sadducees, unlike the Pharisees, didn’t believe that man had a spiritual nature and also didn’t believe that there would be a resurrection. Jesus comes in conflict with them in Mark 12:18-27 and shows that they had grave misunderstandings regarding the resurrection and man’s future state.

In coming to John’s baptism, the Pharisees were concerned about this “preacher” that many had been discussing. They were jealous of any who they saw as a threat to their authority and sway over the Jewish people. This jealousy is reflected in John 11:48 when they said regarding Jesus, “If we let him thus alone, all men will believe on him: and the Romans shall come and take away both our place and nation.” Pilate well observed in Mark 15:10 that it was “for envy” that Jesus was delivered to him.

No doubt the same motives and attitudes were fostering under the surface in regard to John’s baptism. We know that they did not believe in John as a prophet for the words that they spoke to Jesus in Mark 11:31-33. We also know that they refused to be baptized of John according to Luke 7:30. In that regard, they rejected the counsel of God. So we can reasonably assume that they were up to no good in coming to see and hear John.

John also rightly deduces that they were up to no good. The initial words out of his mouth to them are not words of blessing, but rather, condemnation. He calls them a “brood of vipers.” They were a nursery for deadly serpents; they weren’t content to merely be deadly, they had to breed more.

John then asks them, “Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come?” The question was both a positive and condemnatory in the same sentence. If they continued in their present course, they would certainly experience God’s wrath and vengeance for so mutilating and damaging His word for His people. Such is the condemnation for all who would so act. At the same time, they were given “warning” regarding their ultimate end and they were to be commended for heeding that warning and coming to the appropriate place. They would be correct in trying to “flee” from that great wrath that God has in store for all of those who refuse to know him or obey him (2 Thessalonians 1:7-9). This leads us into John’s instruction for them in verse 8.

Vs. 8 – John now focuses upon what these errant leaders needed to do in order to demonstrate their sincerity in coming to John’s baptism. They needed to “bear fruits worthy of repentance.” The word “repentance” literally means to change one’s mind toward something or another. However, when looking at repentance as a Christian concept the thought goes much deeper than a mere “change of mind.” The word involves not only a change in thought and attitude, but a reformation of life as well. This is what John demanded of these religious leaders. Not that they merely say they have repented, but that they demonstrate their repentance by a reformed life. Luke gives us additional detail into what John said on this point in Luke 3:10-14. There, not only were the religious leaders addressed, but also soldiers, publicans, and everyday people. John tells each group how they were expected to behave as a result of their repentance. Paul also expected this out of converts to Christianity. He said in Acts 26:20 that when he began preaching the gospel that he “?shewed first unto them of Damascus, and at Jerusalem, and throughout all the coasts of Judaea, and then to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance.” This is a good lesson for us today to note. Gospel preachers not only have the obligation to preach the word, but also to make appropriate application even to the point of instructing individuals on how and how not to behave according to God’s word.

Vs. 9 – John did not want these religious leaders to fall back upon their heritage for self justification. Just because one was of Abraham’s seed didn’t guarantee one’s salvation. Here was a dangerous presumption on the part of these religious leaders. Jesus refutes this presumptiousness in John 8:33-37 with the fact that it is the one who sins who becomes the slave to sin. Religious heritage doesn’t guarantee personal salvation.

Sadly, there are many today who hold to a form of this same doctrine. They believe that once they have “accepted Jesus into their heart” that they are saved and that nothing they do will in any way affect a change in their salvation. Those who hold this doctrine of “once saved always saved” in essence make the same argument as the Pharisees and Saducees. They claim that because they have a religious heritage they are personally secure. Jesus’ words rebuke them as much as he does these religious leaders. It is personal sin which will cause us to be condemned on the day of judgment. There is forgiveness in Christ, but that forgiveness is contingent upon repentance and obedience to Christ’s will. Those who willfully sin have no sacrifice on their behalf (Hebrews 10:26).

John calls these religious leaders to sobriety when he states that God is able to change stones into Abraham’s seed. It was no reason to boast that they were of the lineage of Abraham. That carries no weight in the eyes of God; He can make descendents of Abraham from rocks, stones, or even dust. God is no respecter of persons (Romans 2:11). God sees all such boasting as foolishness (1 Corinthians 3:19, 2 Corinthians 11:22,23). What matters today is not whether we are of the physical lineage of Abraham, but whether we are of his spiritual lineage. Those who belong to Christ are Abraham’s seed today and heirs of the promise (Galatians 3:29).

Vs. 10 – John prophesies regarding the termination of the old economy. Judaism was not to last much longer as an authorized religious entity. Hence, the axe was at the root of the tree, indicating that it was about to be used to cut down that tree. Judaism was limited in its scope (it was originally intended only for the nation of Israel, see Deuteronomy 5:1-3) and hence, religiously, it could not serve God’s purposes in extending salvation to the entire world. Thus, it had to be brought to an end in order for God’s purposes for all men to go forward. Jesus brought this economy to an end when he died and nailed the law to the cross along with our sins (Colossians 2:14). Paul tells us in Ephesians 2:15 that Jesus abolished the law. Jesus himself said that the law wouldn’t be destroyed until all things were fulfilled (Matthew 5:17,18), and they were fulfilled. Jesus also told numerous parables regarding the cessation of the Jewish economy and the inauguration of the kingdom (see Matthew 21:28-46 and 22:1-14). No longer did the Jewish nation bear “good fruit” and hence it was only fitting for it to be “cast into the fire.” Jesus said in Matthew 15:13 “Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up.” This is exactly what happened to the Jewish nation as it had been corrupted by Rabbinical Judaism.

Vs. 11 – John makes reference to the element which he used to baptize, namely, water. The purpose of John’s baptism was “for repentance.” Hence, John sought to bring the wayward Jew back to a state of favor with God. John’s baptism was thus limited in that it could only cleanse the Jew who repented and obeyed God’s counsel in being baptized. This is one reason why Paul did not accept those who were baptized with John’s baptism after the cross (see Acts 19:1-7). John’s baptism was thus limited to the time prior to Jesus’ death, burial, and resurrection. Hence, belief in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus was subsequently required. John’s baptism didn’t require such and could no longer be valid for the Christian era.

John prophesies that One is coming who will administer a different baptism. John says this One would be mightier than he. In what sense? Mightier in scope of message; mightier in authority; mightier in power over the elements; mightier in personal purity, mightier in lasting results of His work; the list could go on and on. Because of these facts, John was not worthy to be such a One’s sandal valet. In this culture, it was customary for the servant of the house to handle the footwear of the house guests. John’s statement shows reverence and humility. He did not even consider himself worthy to be His servant. And such ought to be the attitude of all who have been redeemed by the love, grace, and mercy of God through Christ (Luke 17:10).

The nature of this Mighty One’s baptism was to be with the Holy Spirit and with fire. Many have been confused regarding this pronouncement. Some have considered that the fire and the Holy Spirit are the same baptism. But the immediate context (vs.12) forbids such a thought because being baptized with fire is obviously not desirable.

Some have also misapplied the scope of the baptism of the Holy Spirit saying that all Christian baptism is Holy Spirit baptism. Such ignores John’s statement that it would be Jesus himself who would administer such baptism. It is clear from the New Testament that many of Jesus disciples were involved in administering baptism, but these baptisms were not Holy Spirit baptisms! Hence, we must come to the conclusion that Holy Spirit baptism was an affair limited only to those whom Jesus personally chose to be baptized in such a way. John no where says that everyone would be baptized in the Holy Spirit; he simply states that Jesus would administer such and Jesus did as recorded for us in Acts 2:1-4 and Acts 10:44-46 as explained in Acts 11:16. No other time in the New Testament do we read of Jesus’ administering Holy Spirit baptism than these two times. Men have tried to suggest such, but there is no reason to conclude that simply because a passage mentions baptism that it is of necessity Holy Spirit baptism. And those who believe such do so without any contextual evidence. The most common administration of baptism in the New Testament was water baptism and such ought to be the assumed regarding any passage that mentions baptism unless there are contextual reasons to believe otherwise.

Vs. 12 – A winnowing fork is an instrument designed to toss grain mixed with hulls into the air so that the wind may catch the hull and drop the grain. In this manner the hull was separated from the grain. The hulls (chaff) then drifted off in the direction of the wind and were eventually burned. The grain was then collected and gathered into the barn where it could serve its good purpose.

John explains Jesus’ work to be similar in nature. Jesus teaching separated those who would believe and obey the Lord from those who would not. The wheat (believers) would be gathered into the barn (presumably heaven). The chaff (unbelievers), on the other hand, would be burned with unquenchable fire (hell). There are only two eternal destinies for man. Man may either choose to live a holy life in harmony with God’s will and be forever in fellowship with God in heaven, or he may so choose to live in rebellion to God and spend eternity in hell. Moses spoke of the way of life and the way of death (Deuteronomy 30:15-20). Jesus spoke of these two ways as well in Matthew 7:13,14. Jesus also spoke of the sheep being separated from the goats for all eternity in Matthew 25:31-46. Where will we spent our eternal destiny? The choice is up to each of us.

Kevin Cauley

Posted in Kevin Cauley | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments Off on Matthew 3:7-12