I was ready to tell you that this one might be difficult to find, that you might have to look on used book sites like Thriftbooks and Abebooks, or that you might have to scour used book stores, or perhaps the used book section in the Florida College Chatlos Library.  But guess what?  I found it on Amazon! 
            So what is it about?  The complete title might help:  Attitudes and Consequences in the Restoration Movement.  If, like me, you are a third generation Christian and wonder exactly how you got where you are, this book might answer the question.  It will also answer a few other questions you might have like, "Why have people called me a Campbellite?" and "Is the Christian Church related to us in any fashion at all?"  Yes, it is a history of the 19th century movement called, at first, the Reformation, but later, the Restoration Movement.  The point is, to not just reform Protestant religions, but to scrap everything and start over completely, restoring the New Testament Church and its pattern in worship, work, and living.
            The book does get bogged down occasionally with extensive quotations from various preachers, but no one can accuse the author of misrepresenting anyone that way.  He tells it warts and all, it seems to me.  In some cases I was a little aghast at statements those old fellows made, though they were not old when they made them.  These were zealous men in the prime of their lives who saw no religious group following the New Testament pattern and sought to change that in an effort to promote unity among everyone claiming to be a Christian, for the sake of spreading the Gospel.  But when people would not give up their cherished beliefs, no matter how wrong they were shown to be, they settled for gathering the ones who would and became a strong movement for the Truth of the Word.  They were ridiculed by many, but many others joined the choruses we have heard all our lives:  "Where the Scripture speaks, we speak; where the Scripture is silent we are silent," and "For every action we must have a 'Thus saith the Lord.'"  It is the development of that attitude that the book follows.
            As was even the case in the First Century, there was a falling away, and the author chronicles that as well.  Those who were born after the original printing of this book (1945) can tell of similar problems that have risen in their own lifetimes.  If nothing else, the book encourages us to stay faithful.  It may not be for everyone, but for those of us who "have always wondered," it could be a profitable read.
            Attitudes and Consequences was republished by Truth Publications in 2011.
 
Dene Ward
 

Today's post is by guest writer Lucas Ward

Moses was the leader of the children of Israel as they wandered through the wilderness.  He was the law-giver, the one who judged between the people and the one who consecrated the priesthood.  To worldly eyes, he was in all intents and purposes a king.  In fact, that was the gripe that Dathan and Abiram had with him when they joined Korah in his rebellion.  They thought Moses had gotten too big for his britches.  God, of course, showed them otherwise.  One might look at all this and think, "Wow, what authority!"  But look at these passages:

Num. 9:6-8  "And there were certain men who were unclean through touching a dead body, so that they could not keep the Passover on that day, and they came before Moses and Aaron on that day.  And those men said to him, “We are unclean through touching a dead body. Why are we kept from bringing the LORD's offering at its appointed time among the people of Israel?”  And Moses said to them, “Wait, that I may hear what the LORD will command concerning you.”" 
Num. 15:32-35  "While the people of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man gathering sticks on the Sabbath day.  And those who found him gathering sticks brought him to Moses and Aaron and to all the congregation.  They put him in custody, because it had not been made clear what should be done to him.   And the LORD said to Moses . . ."
Num. 27:1-5  "Then drew near the daughters of Zelophehad the son of Hepher, son of Gilead, son of Machir, son of Manasseh, from the clans of Manasseh the son of Joseph. The names of his daughters were: Mahlah, Noah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Tirzah.  And they stood before Moses and before Eleazar the priest and before the chiefs and all the congregation, at the entrance of the tent of meeting, saying, “Our father died in the wilderness. He was not among the company of those who gathered themselves together against the LORD in the company of Korah, but died for his own sin. And he had no sons.  Why should the name of our father be taken away from his clan because he had no son? Give to us a possession among our father's brothers.”  Moses brought their case before the LORD." 
Num. 36:2-5  "They said, “The LORD commanded my lord to give the land for inheritance by lot to the people of Israel, and my lord was commanded by the LORD to give the inheritance of Zelophehad our brother to his daughters.  But if they are married to any of the sons of the other tribes of the people of Israel, then their inheritance will be taken from the inheritance of our fathers and added to the inheritance of the tribe into which they marry. So it will be taken away from the lot of our inheritance.  And when the jubilee of the people of Israel comes, then their inheritance will be added to the inheritance of the tribe into which they marry, and their inheritance will be taken from the inheritance of the tribe of our fathers.”  And Moses commanded the people of Israel according to the word of the LORD"

            Do you see the common thread in all of these passages?  In each of these cases something came up for which God had not yet issued a commandment.  Surely Moses, in his wisdom and in his place as trusted servant of God, could be trusted to make the judgment himself, right?  Yet Moses never did this.  In every case we see him going to God to ask, or waiting for God to speak.  Moses never usurped God's authority, never added to what God had told him to say, never took anything away.  When Moses spoke, he "commanded the people of Israel according to the word of the Lord." 
            Most of the religious world needs to relearn the humility and dedication of Moses.
 
2 John 1:9  "Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son."
 
Lucas Ward
 

A few weeks ago we piled into the car and headed off for town.  As we reached the western end of the driveway, we saw a stack of pine limbs, 12-15 feet long and still green, as if someone had simply cut them off and laid them there.  Keith stopped the car and stared.
            "What happened here?"
            We went over it together.  I had been by the spot late the afternoon before and seen only the usual foot high field of grass shaded from the afternoon sun by the line of oaks and wild cherries along the west fence.  We had a few gray clouds that evening, as we do nearly every afternoon and evening in the summer, and maybe a quick shower, but no thunderstorm.  Once the evening deepened into pure night, all was still and warm and humid—nothing unusual at all.  It may be five acres, but the distance from the house near the eastern side and the pines on the west is not really that far.  How had this happened without us knowing it?
            Obviously, a small eddy had blown through the pines, and sixty feet above ground it was stronger than you might imagine had you been standing beneath.  I have seen those eddies before.  Sometimes they stir up the dust out in the field where there is no shelter from the trees, but where the trees are thick, they stay aloft.  For it to tear large green limbs meant it was a strong one, but also localized.  Spread out it would not have done any damage.  And so it left us with a neat pile of limbs that Keith hauled to the fire pit for the coming fall.
            When these eye crises first began to hit me, my whole world turned upside down.  I couldn't keep house or cook, I couldn't teach Bible classes, and I had to close my music studio.  Eventually I missed three months of assemblies because of the pain and the appointments and the surgeries and the medication schedule.  When I did make it back and the announcements began I had a bad moment or two.  That week was a baby shower.  The next week was a wedding.  In two weeks was a potluck.  My poor little me self said, "How can they keep on having fun like this?  Don't they know my world is a shambles?"
            Of course that didn't last, but it did come to the surface.  When you are having your own personal storm, you wonder how anyone else can remain unaffected.  Don't they see how miserable you are and how dire the situation?  Don't they care anything about you at all?  Something selfish inside you wants everyone to cry with you.  Maybe that's where the old saying comes from:  Misery loves company.  I was having my own little storm in a localized area and it wasn't affecting anyone downwind.  Or so it felt.
            Okay, so where do we go with this?  First, I am reminded of the injunction to "Rejoice with those who rejoice and weep with those who weep" (Rom 12:15).  We are all to share in one another's burdens.  If one member suffers, all suffer together; if one member is honored, all rejoice together. (1Cor 12:26).  Remember those who are in prison, as though in prison with them, and those who are mistreated, since you also are in the body (Heb 13:3).  Knowing that others care about what is happening to you makes the trials somewhat easier to bear. 
            But there is always, as I said above, the selfishness that must be overcome.  I may be having a storm in my life.  That does not mean that anyone who does not know about it and act like the same storm is ruling their lives doesn't care.  Too many times we act like we have been specially set up to judge others in how they offer their compassion and help.  If it doesn't come when I want and the way I want, they are unloving.  And that of course, can lead to the excuse so many use for leaving the church.  "You didn't come visit me when I was in the hospital.  The elders didn't call, the preacher didn't hold my hand and pray over me, none of the members sent me a card."  Yet, when pressed in the matter you will usually find out one of two things:  the problem wasn't ignored; it was unknown because it was not shared.  Somehow everyone should just "know"—if I have to say anything, they aren't caring enough.  Or, "no one" is a gross exaggeration.
            And it also insinuates that because no one helped me the way I expected and thought they ought to, that I am now excused for any bad behavior.  For because he himself has suffered when tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted. (Heb 2:18).  That passage seems to imply that one of the purposes of suffering is so we can learn to help others who are also suffering.  That's what it did for the Lord I claim to be following.  I am supposed to be learning something here, not judging others.  And if I really do learn it, then it becomes my responsibility to do better than the ones I think left me high and dry--not castigating them or using them as an excuse for my own bad conduct, but showing them the way.
            Once my mind cleared that morning, I knew that others were affected by my storm.  They came in droves with hugs, welcoming me back to the assembly.  They had sent me off to difficult surgeries with hugs and money in my pockets for the expenses.  They had fasted and prayed during my scariest operation.  They had taken turns carrying me back and forth to the doctor after Keith ran out of leave time to do it.  That is usually the case when you let your brothers and sisters know your needs, when you share your fears and troubles.  If no one knows you are in a storm, that's your fault entirely.  Don't let a few moments of self-absorption steal the joy of brotherhood.
 
Bear one another's burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ. (Gal 6:2)
 
Dene Ward

…the Sermon on the Mount is not a soporific sentimentality designed to induce a kind of feeble-minded do-goodism.  Nor do these chapters tolerate the opinion that Jesus' views on righteousness have been so tempered with love that righteousness slips to a lower level than when its standards were dictated by Law.  Instead we discover that the righteousness demanded by Jesus surpasses anything imagined by the Pharisees, the strict orthodox religious group of Jesus' day.  Christ's way is more challenging and more demanding—as well as more rewarding—than any legal system can ever be.  Moreover, his way was prophetically indicated before it actually arrived; as Paul says, But now a righteousness from God, apart from the Law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify (Rom 3:21). 

The Sermon on the Mount, An Evangelical Exposition of Matthew 5-7, by D. A. Carson

This is another aspect of devotional Bible reading that we discussed on the podcast I mentioned yesterday.  How in the world can Bible reading be dangerous?  Let's see…
            I think the first danger might be that we stop with that kind of reading and never progress further.  Remember what we said yesterday about keeping a journal?  That journal should lead you to a more complete study, the kind that involves analysis, noting repeated words and phrases, looking up word meanings, making charts and lists and perhaps pulling out a few reference books.  Stopping with simple devotional reading is like stopping the meal after the appetizer.  It will also keep you firmly in the "milk" zone rather moving on to the meat.  (Pardon my mixed metaphors, at least they are all food!)
            Another danger is that your reading will become a mere mechanical habit.  Instead of reading slowly and stopping occasionally to consider a point or make a note to pursue later, it can easily turn into, "Read my Bible today—check!"  God's Word is precious.  Don't ever treat it like your toothbrush.
            A final danger is that our "Me" culture can easily get in the way.  When all I want is something that "resonates" with me, that makes me feel good, that brings a tear to my eye or makes the hair stand up on my head, my Bible reading has become about Me instead of the God I worship; about what I like, not what He says and I need to hear.  All of us need a challenge occasionally, or even a good swift (verbal) kick once in a while.  I need to read those too, and I must not make my likes and dislikes cause me to avoid certain parts of God's Word.
            As we discussed yesterday, devotional reading can be a good and helpful part of our lives as Christians.  Just be aware that, as always, Satan knows how to take even the good and twist it into something bad.  Even he quoted the Word of God.
            If you would like to hear the podcast, you can find it easily.  On Facebook search for "Working with the Word."  Go to that page and look for the post that has my name on it.  Click on that link and it will take you straight to my interview.  I can't say it's perfect by any means.  Most of these last two articles are things I wish I had said!  But maybe you will learn some other things and will find this podcast something you might like to listen to in the future.  In fact, you can search their Facebook page while you are there for other subjects you might be interested in and listen to them.  I am sure that Emerson Brown and Jeff O'Rear would appreciate your support.
 
They read from the book, from the Law of God, clearly, and they gave the sense, so that the people understood the reading…They read from the book, from the Law of God, clearly, and they gave the sense, so that the people understood the reading (Neh 8:8,12).          Dene Ward

Recently I was asked to record a podcast on Devotional Bible Reading.  It took me a few minutes to realize what they meant, despite the fact that I write daily devotionals.  My definition of this type of reading versus Inductive Bible reading, would be the reading we do more or less casually, usually on a daily basis, and with no real aim in mind beyond that.  Inductive reading, then would be more of a study method involving reference works and cross referencing other passages in the Bible, with some writing almost always included.  They didn't tell me I was wrong when I gave them those definitions so I'm sticking with them.
            At first thought, devotional Bible reading seems almost pointless, but now that I have actually thought about it, I can see several advantages.  First, it gets the Word into your head.  You would be surprised how many things I was taught incorrectly as a child.  I am sure the teacher just knew the narrative so well that she didn't bother to read it again and told what she had always heard or remembered.  That is exactly how errors get passed from generation to generation.  I remember the first time I discovered an error like this.  I had pulled down my Bible and actually read what it said.  I sat back in shock for several minutes.  Over the years I have discovered several more of these instances.  It isn't that we have false teachers in the church who deliberately set out to teach our children incorrect details.  It's that we are sometimes a little lazy and we know we know it so why bother taking the time to read it again?  Because you may not know what you think you know, that's why.
            Another advantage is the ingrained habit of reading the Word of God on a schedule.  Once you train yourself to do it, you generally keep on doing it even when times are rough and life is difficult.  While I do not believe in any sort of mysticism, I do believe in God's providential care.  Who knows but as you sit there reading that particular morning (or evening), you might come across something that is just what you need right then?  Sort of like assembling.  I do not remember a time in my life when I did not assemble with the saints on Sunday morning.  Even when my spirits were low and my spirituality suffered, I went out of habit.  But where was the best place for me at such a time in my life?  Right there where I might hear something I needed, or receive an encouragement that pulled me out of the pit.  The same can be true of a practiced habit of daily reading.  A passage may "speak" to you, even a familiar passage, like it never has before. 
            A third advantage may be that Devotional Reading might be easier to relate to your life at that moment.  When you are studying more deeply, you are looking up word meanings, studying customs and geography, and finding other pertinent passages.  The nuts and bolts of taking a passage apart can completely rip the fabric of application, while a more casual reading might instantly make sense for a problem you are currently facing.  I remember tearing a passage to pieces one day, then looking with satisfaction on my paper full of notes only to suddenly think, "So how does this help me tomorrow?"  It didn't actually.  I may have learned a few things, but it didn't help me live a bit better the next morning.
            A final advantage could be that it moves you on to that deeper study we have been contrasting it to.  Keep a journal beside you as you read.  It will help you keep track of where you've been, but you can also write down things to study more intently later on.  What does this word mean?  Is this character mentioned anywhere else in the Bible?  (Do you know who that king Absalom ran off to was?)  How far is this place from that place?  (Do you know how far Hannah was from Samuel after she took him to the tabernacle?)  How much money is this (that the Samaritan left to care for a perfect stranger or that the Christians were giving when they sold property in Acts 4)?  And then, just write down things that are bothering you that particular day or that you struggle with.  All of those things can lead you to a longer, and maybe more beneficial study at another time.
            If you aren't reading your Bible daily, I hope you will start.  Two men in the Bible were told to "eat" God's Word—Ezekiel and John (Ezekiel 2:8; Revelation 10:9).  It is our spiritual sustenance.  You really can't do without it.
 
​The sum of your word is truth, and every one of your righteous rules endures forever. Princes persecute me without cause, but my heart stands in awe of your words (Ps 119:160-161).
 
Dene Ward

As I write today, which is probably a month or more before this posting, we are approaching three years since Mama left us for a better home.  It took over a year before I stopped thinking, "I need to call her and tell her about this."  It took even longer before the car stopped veering to that particular exit on the interstate.  And even now, friends still tell me they miss her as well, and share funny stories and a tear or two.
            We moved her up here when she was 87.  We were already dealing with our own age, health problems, and increasing disabilities so a five hour round trip to see about her even just once a month was becoming difficult.  Then after three years here, when living alone (her preference) even so much closer to us, was no longer safe for her, we had to go the assisted living route.  Her doctor said we lived too far from him and the hospital—about thirty miles out in the country.  Due to my Daddy's careful stewardship, we were able to find a good place in town, and between us and her church family, she was the most visited resident there.  We were told that she received more visits in a week than the rest of the community did in a year.  How sad is that for them? 
            We stopped by no less than twice a week, took her to every doctor appointment, and brought her out here for every holiday, Mother's Day, birthdays, and a few others days for good measure.  Let's be honest here:  it was wearing; it was time-consuming; it was inconvenient; it was expensive—especially the gas!  But so was I, not for a mere four and a half years as it turned out, but for 20!  Which doesn't count all the continuing worry parents feel after you are out on your own.
            When, after two weeks, it became apparent that particular hospital stay was going to be the last, I had only one last thing I could do for her.  I moved myself into her hospital room for four days, and then into her hospice room for the final four.  Sleep was impossible.  Eating depended upon whether anyone had brought something by.  I talked to her.  I answered the hard, almost impossible questions.  I held her head up for a sip of water and fed her yogurt—the only thing she could stomach—a quarter teaspoon at a time, a couple of bites at a time.  In the end, I just held her hand and waited for the last breath.  It was my final gift to her and I will always be grateful I could give it.
            But she gave me a final gift as well.  In those last four and a half years, I got to know her as a person, not just Mama.  I found out what a marvelous sense of humor she had.  She kept people in stitches—sometimes in the middle of church services!  She was full of compassion, especially for the people everyone else look down on.  She was friendly—I could leave her in a waiting room while I paid the bill and made her next appointment only to come out and find her chatting away with a perfect stranger, then wishing her well in her upcoming surgery as we left!  That's how close she had gotten in five minutes.  She shared with me stories I had never heard before—about her childhood, dating Daddy, and her early married years, a treasure trove I will always have. 
            And now I have great memories—of a person, not just a parent.  Perhaps too many of us expect perfection from a parent and cling to their mistakes, while we might more easily forgive a fellow human being for simply being "human."  In those last few years my mother apologized again and again for not being her idea of the "perfect mother."  I had to shush her with constant reassurances.  All those years ago she had to learn to be a Christian, a wife, and a mother all at the same time without the blessing of "growing up in the church."  Mistakes she made were more than understandable. 
           As she lay on her deathbed, she still worried about me.  "Get some sleep," she would say, not realizing that she had her days and nights turned around and I was up with her every 15 minutes all night long.  And she asked if I thought Daddy was still waiting for her.
            "Of course he is," I told her, "and right now he's getting pretty excited."
            All those gifts I would not trade for the world.  Don't throw away your chance to receive the same.  You will never regret it.
 
When Jesus saw his mother and the disciple whom he loved standing nearby, he said to his mother, “Woman, behold, your son!” Then he said to the disciple, “Behold, your mother!” And from that hour the disciple took her to his own home (John 19:26-27).
 
Dene Ward

I see one Bible study mistake made over and over and even by seasoned professionals—mixing up their metaphors.
            By this I do not mean what is usually meant in grammar class, using two different and unrelated metaphors in the same phrase of an analogy.  Like this one:  "That's awfully thin gruel for the right wing to hang their hats on."  (MSNBC, September 3, 2009).  Rather, what we refer to here is assuming that every Biblical metaphor means the same thing in every context.  Prime example:
            For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you again the basic principles of the oracles of God. You need milk, not solid food, for everyone who lives on milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, since he is a child. But solid food is for the mature, for those who have their powers of discernment trained by constant practice to distinguish good from evil. (Heb 5:12-14)
            So put away all malice and all deceit and hypocrisy and envy and all slander. Like newborn infants, long for the pure spiritual milk, that by it you may grow up into salvation-- (1Pet 2:1-2)
            I don't know how many times I have heard these two passages equated just because babies and milk are mentioned in both.  Here is the problem:  they speak of two entirely different issues and if you don't separate them, you miss half the teaching. 
        In the Hebrews passage, the writer rebukes those who have not progressed in their knowledge of the word.  They are still babies who need milk.  They ought to have matured into adults who can handle a T-bone steak, but they cannot.  They have not "trained their powers of discernment."  In this case, the milk is the first principles, the ABCs of being a Christian, the easy stuff, and being a baby is something you definitely do not want to be.
           Peter, on the other hand, says we should desire the spiritual milk in the same way an infant desires its mother's milk.  The "baby" in this passage is a good example, not a bad one.  We have all seen a hungry infant open its mouth and grunt for that milk over and over until it is fed.  All of us are supposed to be like that little baby, hungering for the spiritual milk, no matter how long we have been Christians.  In this case, the metaphor is about hunger, not just for the Word but for all spirituality, and the baby is something you want to be. 
           These two passages may use some of the same words, but they are not about the same thing.  All it takes is a little slow reading of the entire context, and then maybe a little thought—pretty obvious thought as a matter of fact.  Perhaps one could even call it "milk."
           Here's another one:
          According to the grace of God given to me, like a skilled master builder I laid a foundation, and someone else is building upon it. Let each one take care how he builds upon it. For no one can lay a foundation other than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Now if anyone builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw— each one's work will become manifest, for the Day will disclose it, because it will be revealed by fire, and the fire will test what sort of work each one has done. (1Cor 3:10-13)
          Now in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and silver but also of wood and clay, some for honorable use, some for dishonorable. Therefore, if anyone cleanses himself from what is dishonorable, he will be a vessel for honorable use, set apart as holy, useful to the master of the house, ready for every good work. (2Tim 2:20-21)
          This one is a little trickier.  Both passages mention gold, silver and wood, along with a few other materials.  However, in the Corinthian passage, Paul uses the various building materials to say that all of us are different.  We each use whatever our abilities are to build on the spiritual foundation.  Some of us have greater abilities than others, but God will be the judge of how we use those abilities.  Being a "wood" disciple is not necessarily bad as long as we are doing what we can with that wood.  The analogy here is our various abilities, a subject he will eventually come back to in chapter 12, using the body as his analogy.
          However, in the Timothy passage, we are talking about pots, and what the pot is made of determines whether it is honorable or dishonorable.  He goes on to say that we will be honorable vessels, i.e., gold or silver, if we cleanse ourselves, making ourselves suitable for God's use.  We will be dishonorable, wood or clay, if we don't.  Do you see the difference in how this metaphor is used?  In the first, wood is not necessarily wrong, but in the second it is definitely wrong.
          These are not the only two by a long shot.  In one place Christ is the foundation; in another the apostles are.  Stop tying yourselves in knots and just realize that you are using figurative, not literal, language—metaphors, in this case.  The way some people go on, you would think Jesus and the apostles were real stones!  Separate your metaphors rather than mixing them and you will come much closer to the truths they are trying to teach you, without missing any of them.
 
Dene Ward

A certain young lady I know can name all the kings of Israel and Judah in order.  Her classmates in Bible class, whom I suppose were embarrassed that they could not do the same thing, told her, "All you know is a bunch of useless information."  Let me tell you something:  nothing in the Bible is useless information.  If you cannot use it now, someday when you learn a little more and dig a little deeper, I guarantee it will come in handy.
            Do you want an example?  A scholar named L. R. Helyer has pointed out that the Eastern cultures have an eastern orientation.  In other words, they face east to determine direction, while we Occidentals tend to face north to do the same thing.  Do you remember when Abraham and Lot separated because their flocks were too large to dwell side by side (Gen 13)?  Abraham stood in the Promised Land and said, "Do you want the left or the right?"  Abraham would have been facing east when he did that, and he would have meant, "Do you want the north or the south?"  And by that he meant the northern or the southern half of the Promised Land.  Abraham, to whom the promise was given, was generous enough to share that land with his nephew.  So what was Lot's choice?
            "But Lot journeyed east" [completely out of the land].  These four words ring increasingly ominous as the story continues.  But notice, even here, the distinction that is made between Abram who settled in the land of Canaan and Lot who settled among the cities of the valley.  "It is clear from [Gen 13:12] that the territory chosen by Lot lies outside the borders of Canaan" (Growth of the Seed, Nathan Ward). 
            If the story of Genesis is the choosing of the line of the Messiah—which I believe it is—here is one reason Lot was rejected from that line.  He wanted a land that looked well-watered and fruitful, even if it contained the most wicked heathen of the time, rather than trusting the promises of God and staying in the Land.
            BUT—would you have ever known that if you had not known about the eastern orientation of the Oriental peoples?  Would you have ever realized the significance of the choice he was offered versus the choice he made if you hadn't noticed that it was "the left or the right?"
            Now think a little more.  Is that orientation the reason the tabernacle and, ultimately, the Temple, faced east?  I don't know, but maybe it's something worth considering.  In fact, maybe any mention of direction might be worth studying yet again to find its significance, if any.
            If God had it recorded for us, it isn't useless.  In some fashion it will add to our knowledge and appreciation of him.  If I can't figure it out yet, it's up to me to work at it, not look down on someone who has gone to the trouble of learning as much as possible, even if it does not appear pertinent at the moment.
            Details matter.  Don't discard them like so much rubbish.
 
For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. (Matt 5:18)
 
Dene Ward

Just as we should know some basics about Hebrew in order to avoid making foolish errors in our reasoning, we should know at least a little about Greek, the language of the New Testament.  So let's learn a little something about it.
            First, at the time of the New Testament, Greek was written in uppercase letters only.  That's important because too many times I have heard people in Bible classes say something like, "Well, it has to be talking about the Holy Spirit because it's capitalized."  ALL the letters are capitalized.  In fact, in our culture we would be thinking that God is yelling at us, which of course He isn't, though I am sure He would like to fairly often.  When the translators see the word "SPIRIT" they must make the decision whether it means the Deity or an attitude, like school spirit or a spirit of unity.  These men are often so reverent that when they are not certain which it means, they will capitalize it to make sure they do not insult the Holy Spirit.  That was the mindset of the very early translations and translators, a wonderful mindset to be sure, but one that can and has often caused misinterpretations.  Be careful with those capital letters and don't make any arguments based upon them.
            Second, no spaces existed between words and there was no punctuation.  In the classic example, imagine you saw this sentence:  ISAWABUNDANCEONTHETABLE.  Now, is that "I saw a bun dance on the table," or "I saw abundance on the table?"  The translators go primarily by context as well as common sense.  I have never seen a bun dance on the table, neither the waltz nor the polka, but I have seen many feasts where indeed there was abundance on the table.  That's why the translators are acknowledged scholars.  They are used to handling that ancient language and all its peculiarities.
            The point about punctuation is also important.  Everyone knows that Paul had a penchant for long sentences, as in Eph 1:3-14.  That is one sentence.  The newer versions cater to our culture's desire for what I call "business writing"—short sentences that are simple to read and understand.  That's fine in business writing.  It is NOT fine when we are discussing important and profound subjects.  You should always keep an older version handy when you are studying from a new one (NIV, ESV, etc.) so you know exactly what was written and see the connections.  If your version includes a phrase or words four sentences later that were actually in the original one sentence, you may miss those connections.  Yet these are the markers for the beginning and end of a thought. Yes, it is more difficult to read and comprehend a long sentence, but this is your soul we are talking about.  You are supposed to be so deeply interested in these things that you will pore over them for hours, not give them a quick scan and move on.  The New Testament is not a collection of sound bites!
            Now about those italics.  Words written in Italics are supposed to be words "not actually in the Greek."  Many times those words are implied or even necessary to the Greek word they support, another thing those scholars know that we don't.  (If you took Latin in high school like I did, this probably makes perfect sense to you.)  When we say, "That italicized word is not there," a majority of the time (one scholar told me 99%), we are wrong.  It has to be there because of the word choice by the author. Please be careful when you start spouting off about a language you neither understand nor speak
            Having said all this about Hebrew and Greek, remember that very few points can be made from those languages that cannot be made from any language, including English. Our loving God would never have left us with something we could not understand and follow when He planned to judge us by it.
           
Dene Ward