Question 60: Why was David a man after YHVH’s own Heart?

Answer:

This question has often been asked, both by scoffers and the serious. David, it is true, had fallen into deep sin many times; but his struggles, his remorse, his repentance, his efforts at reparation -- these also must be considered. He lived in a rude and warlike age. His whole life, as one biographer says, was "the faithful struggle of an earnest human soul toward what was good and best -- a struggle often baffled, yet never ended." This was the character of the man who was illustrious as soldier, shepherd, poet, king, prophet; who kindled patriotism, united Israel and made it a great nation and who drove out the worship of strange gods in the land. In view of all the blessings that came to the Hebrew race through David's reign; in view also of "the oath sworn unto David" and of the many evidences of his repentance and his trust in YHVH, as expressed in the Psalms, his career must be regarded as a whole rather than judged of by specific acts, if we would try to find out how David in any degree merited the commendation which the sacred historians accord him.

Question 59: Who were king David’s wives?

Answer:

He had a number of wives, but those that are known chiefly to history are Abigail of Carmel (1 Chronicles 3:1); Michal, the daughter of Saul (2 Samuel 3:13) and Bathsheba (1 Chronicles 3:5).

Question 58: Were Daniel’s companions his brothers?

Answer:

In Daniel 1:6 the companions and Daniel are spoken of as the children of Judah. This means of the tribe of Judah. There is no evidence that they were brothers in the sense of blood relationship. Shadrach was the Chaldee name of Hananiah, the chief of the "three children" or young men of the tribe of Judah, who were Daniel's companions. He was taken captive with Daniel and a number of others at the first invasion of Judah by Nebuchadnezzar about B. C. 606. All four were young men of kingly bearing of the royal tribe of Judah and of superior understanding or education. Meshach was the Chaldee name given by the Babylonian court to Mishael and Abednego was the name similarly bestowed on Azariah.

Question 57: Was David justified in ordering Solomon to have Joab and Shimei executed?

Answer:

Dean Stanley, strange to say, avers that in the order given to Solomon. (1 Kings 2:5-9) King David "bequeathed a dark legacy of long cherished vengeance." Dr Terry's view seems more probable, that "this dying charge was not the offspring of personal revenge, but a measure of administrative wisdom." "David," says Wordsworth, "does not mention among Joab's sins that which caused him personally the most poignant grief, the murder of Absalom." He dwells on the fact that Joab had treacherously slain Abner and had also assassinated Amasa, shedding the blood of war in peace. Shimei had blasphemously insulted the royal majesty of Israel. David it is true, had sworn to spare Shimei, but this oath was not binding on Solomon. David seems to feel that he had been too lax in punishing crime. His own guilt, though repented of, may have made him feel that the son of Zeruiah in particular, was too strong for him. Hence this charge to Solomon as keeper of YHVH's Law and guardian of the kingdom's safety. In one sense, the execution of these men may be looked upon as an act of retributive justice (they being the enemies of the king), yet in the view of some commentators, the personal vindictiveness that David cherished in the matter and the absence of a disinterested purpose to secure justice and the welfare and security of Israel, his kingdom, call for condemnation of David in his instructions to his son.

Frequently asked questions and answers:

Question 56: What time was consumed in the work of the Creation?

Answer:

Many have asked: "How long did it take YHVH to create the world and what was the order in which the various beings and things were brought forth?" There are many theories propounded concerning Creation. Some interpreters contend that the Bible account should be taken as meaning literal days, while others, remembering that a day is as a thousand years in YHVH's sight, interpret them as meaning periods of indefinite duration. This problem has been a theme of endless discussion and science is powerless to decide it. The first three days of Creation comprise the inorganic era and the last three days the organic era. The first two chapters of Genesis are repetitive of the story of Creation, the first seven verses of chapter 2 reciting more briefly what was already stated in the first chapter in a somewhat different literary form. As to the order in which Creation proceeded, we have nothing else to guide us than Genesis and the order there given is: first day, light (general); second day, earth and water divided; third day, land and water outlined and vegetation created; fourth day, light (direct); fifth day, lower animals created; sixth day, mammals and man created; seventh day, rest as to the length of time between the Creation of Adam and of Eve, that is one of the disputed points on which no one can speak conclusively. Theorizing is futile and traditions.

Question 55: Is it possible to approximate the date of the creation?

Answer:

An ever-fruitful topic is the date of Creation. The chronology which one finds in the marginal columns of many of the older Bibles, notably in the Authorized Version of King James, is not a part of the Bible itself by any means. It is the work of Archbishop Ussher, an illustrious prelate of the Irish Church, who lived 1580-1656. His chronological labours were directed towards affording an idea of the time that elapsed between certain events in recorded history. For this purpose, he took the year 1 A. D. -- the beginning of the believer’s era – as his starting point and reckoned backwards as far as reliable recorded history afforded good working ground. He reckoned as far back as 4,000 years before Moshiach and then finding no more available material in the form of history, either written or inscribed, he had necessarily to stop. He did not by any means imply however, nor are his figures interpreted by Biblical scholars to mean, that he had reached the point of Creation. On the contrary, he had simply gone as far as recorded history enabled him to go. The Mosaic books in the Old Testament did not claim, in any sense, that the world was created in 4000 B. C. The first line, first verse and first chapter of Genesis distinctly tells us that "in the beginning" YHVH created the heaven and the earth. Moses was educated at the court of Egypt and imbibed all that was worth learning of the Egyptian civilization, which was old even at that date. But before Egypt there had been still older kingdoms and civilizations. Anyone looking up the history in any good encyclopaedia of Babylonia, Phoenicia, Chaldea and other ancient nations will form some idea of the great antiquity of that portion of the world's history which has not yet been definitely written. In the last century, the world has yielded up many of its secrets to excavators and consecrated scholarship has made unquestioned discoveries, which are accepted by all the churches, showing that recorded time must now be pushed back to a period at least 2,000 years earlier than Ussher's computation. How far beyond this we have to travel to get at the date of Creation is as much a conjecture as ever. Science tells us that countless ages may have passed in the early stages of the world's geological development; and even before man appeared on the scene. It is true that scientists differ in this as they do in many other things, but the essential fact remains that the world is far older by many thousands of years than our forefathers supposed. We have better light on the subject than they had and yet in no vital sense does that light conflict with the words of Scripture "in the beginning." In the New Testament also the same identical language is used at the opening of John's Gospel, chapter 1, verse 1, "In the beginning was the Word." Thus, we see in both dispensations, the old and the new, recognition of the fact that the date of the world's creation is far beyond man's computation.

Question 54: What was the sin of the Canaanites?

Answer:

The Canaanites were descendants of Ham (Genesis 10:6) and comprised seven distinct nations (Deuteronomy 7:1). Though great and mighty (Numbers 13:28) they were idolatrous, superstitious, profane and wicked (Deuteronomy 29:17, Deuteronomy 18:9-11, Leviticus 18:21). They had many strong cities (Numbers 13:28). Israel was warned against making league or intermarrying with them or following their idols or customs (Deuteronomy 7:2; Joshua 23 :12; Exodus 23:24; Leviticus 18:26, 27). They were partially subdued by Israel (Joshua 10, Joshua 11 and Judges 1). Some of their descendants were still found in the time of Yeshua (Matthew 15:22; Mark 7:26).

Question 53: How many of the children of Israel entered Canaan?

Answer:

The number of adults over twenty years of age who left Egypt is stated in Exodus 12:37, at about six hundred thousand. Allowing the normal proportion of children to such a host we may infer that the total number was probably between one and two million. Three or four months later, when they were at Sinai, a more careful count was made and the number of adults is then given (Exodus 38:26) at 603,550. Two years later another census was taken and the number is stated (Numbers 2:32) at exactly the same figure, but as the Levites were not included and there were 22,000 of them, we may assume that by that time the adults numbered about 625,000. Thirty-eight years later, immediately after a pestilence had swept away large numbers and just before entering Canaan, another census was taken. The figures are given (Numbers 26:21) at 601,730, which shows a slight decrease. Of these only two -- Joshua and Caleb -- were left of the adults who crossed the Red Sea. With these exceptions, the entire adult generation died in the wilderness.

Question 52: What are the essential facts about Cain?

Answer:

The Genesis narrative tells us that Elohiym had no respect for Cain's offering, as he had that of Abel, his brother's. The reason for this must have been a wrong spirit in Cain (Genesis 4:3-7). Verse 7 states: "If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? And if thou doest not well sin lieth at the door." There have been many interpretations suggested for the last part of this verse; but whatever translation may be given the specific words, the whole narrative implies that the trouble with Cain was with his motive. He did not come humbly, worshipfully, as Abel did and probably his offering was less costly, less of a real sacrifice. Again, it has been thought that in the acceptance of the animal sacrifice and the rejection of the fruit sacrifice there was a suggestion of the fact that sin requires death for atonement. Abel's was the first of the long line of offerings for sin in which blood was shed, culminating in the sacrifice of Moshiach's body on the cross. The mark upon Cain has been a fertile subject of conjecture among Biblical scholars. Some hold that it was probably a sign given to Cain as assurance that no man should kill him, but the nature of the sign and whether it was something perceptible to others, are left in uncertainty. One commentator suggests that it may have been an aspect of such ferocity that he became an object of horror and avoidance. Lastly, the question is asked about the land of Nod, to which Cain was banished after the murder of Abel and where he found his wife. The land of Nod means simply "land of exile." We may gather from Genesis 4:14-15 that at the time referred to, the human family had multiplied considerably. Cain's wife was doubtless some blood relative, probably a sister. An ancient Arab tradition states that her name was Azura. From the account in Genesis, we may conjecture that although only four persons are mentioned in the sacred narrative up to this point, the human race had increased rapidly (Josephus says that the Jews held a tradition that Adam had thirty-three sons and twenty-three daughters). Cain's fear of punishment may therefore have been directed toward his own relatives.

Frequently asked questions and answers:

Question 51: In what language was the message on the wall written to Belshazzar written?

Answer:

The words, as they are found in Daniel, are pure Chaldee and if they appeared in the Chaldean characters on the wall, might have been read by any person present who understood the alphabet of the Babylonian language. Authorities differ as to the language in which the famous Mene, Mene, Tekel, Upharsin appeared. Dr Hales suggests that it may have been in primitive Hebrew; Josephus implies that it was in Greek. Another explanation is that while the observers may have been familiar with the language, its meaning or signification may have been hidden from them, until explained by the prophet.