DECLINE OF MORAL STANDARDS

The decline of moral standards and its impact on society:

  1. Family structures: A decay in moral values can lead to a breakdown of traditional family structures. This may manifest in the form of higher divorce rates, strained parent-child relationships, and an increase in single-parent households. With the family unit being a critical source of support and stability, these changes can have ripple effects on the emotional and financial well-being of individuals and communities.
  2. Community cohesion: Strong moral values often serve as the glue that holds communities together. When these values weaken, it can lead to increased mistrust, disconnection, and isolation among community members. This decline in social cohesion can exacerbate existing social issues, such as crime, poverty, and substance abuse.
  3. Ethical decision-making: A lack of clear moral standards can make it challenging for individuals to navigate complex ethical dilemmas. This uncertainty can result in morally ambiguous decision-making, leading to increased dishonesty, corruption, and unethical behavior in various aspects of life, including business, politics, and personal relationships.

The consequences of eroding biblical values include the rise of individualism, materialism, and moral ambiguity:

  1. Individualism: As moral standards decline, society may become more individualistic, with people focusing on personal interests and desires rather than the well-being of others. This shift in priorities can lead to a lack of empathy, understanding, and cooperation, which can further contribute to social fragmentation and disconnection.
  2. Materialism: The erosion of biblical values can result in a heightened focus on material possessions and wealth. This materialistic mindset may overshadow the importance of spiritual growth, compassion, and generosity, leading to a society driven by consumerism and the pursuit of personal gain.
  3. Moral ambiguity: A society with weakened moral values can become more susceptible to moral relativism, in which the concept of right and wrong becomes increasingly subjective. This ambiguity can make it difficult for individuals to develop a strong moral compass, which can further contribute to the decay of ethical behavior and decision-making.

Upholding biblical values to maintain a strong moral foundation:

  1. Personal example: Believers can embody the teachings of the Bible in their daily lives, demonstrating the power and relevance of these values through their actions, relationships, and attitudes.
  2. Education: Teaching children and young adults about biblical principles, both at home and through religious institutions, can help instill a strong moral foundation that will guide them throughout their lives.
  3. Engagement with others: By engaging with others in the community, believers can share their values, support those in need, and foster a sense of belonging and connection. This involvement can range from volunteering and participating in community events to joining local organizations and initiatives that promote biblical values.

By actively promoting and upholding biblical values, believers can help counter the decline of moral standards and contribute to a society with a strong, resilient moral foundation.

Here are some relevant scriptures to support the points made above:

  1. Family structures:
    • Ephesians 5:25: “Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her.”
    • Proverbs 22:6: “Train up a child in the way he should go; even when he is old he will not depart from it.”
  2. Community cohesion:
    • Hebrews 10:24-25: “And let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works, not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near.”
    • Romans 12:10: “Be devoted to one another in love. Honor one another above yourselves.”
  3. Ethical decision-making:
    • Proverbs 4:23: “Above all else, guard your heart, for everything you do flows from it.”
    • James 4:17: “So whoever knows the right thing to do and fails to do it, for him it is sin.”
  4. Individualism:
    • Philippians 2:3-4: “Do nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves. Let each of you look not only to his own interests but also to the interests of others.”
  5. Materialism:
    • Matthew 6:19-21: “Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys, and where thieves do not break in or steal; for where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.”
    • 1 Timothy 6:10: “For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs.”
  6. Moral ambiguity:
    • Isaiah 5:20: “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!”
    • James 1:5: “If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask God, who gives generously to all without reproach, and it will be given him.”
  7. Upholding biblical values:
    • Matthew 5:16: “In the same way, let your light shine before others, so that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father who is in heaven.”
    • Titus 2:7-8: “Show yourself in all respects to be a model of good works, and in your teaching show integrity, dignity, and sound speech that cannot be condemned, so that an opponent may be put to shame, having nothing evil to say about us.”

These scriptures highlight the importance of strong family structures, community cohesion, ethical decision-making, and the need to resist individualism, materialism, and moral ambiguity. They also emphasize the role of believers in promoting and upholding biblical values to maintain a strong moral foundation in society.

A DRIFTING CHURCH

Title: A Drifting Church: How the American Church is Adapting to the World

Introduction

Over the years, the American Church has experienced a significant shift in its values and practices. While the Bible is considered the foundation of Christian faith, many churches today appear to be adapting to the world’s ways rather than remaining true to the core principles laid out in the scriptures. This article will explore how the American Church has changed and the implications of these changes on its spiritual integrity.

  1. The Pursuit of Material Wealth and Prosperity

One of the most notable changes in the American Church is the growing emphasis on material wealth and prosperity. While the Bible teaches that we should focus on spiritual wealth rather than worldly riches, many churches today preach a “prosperity gospel” that equates financial success with God’s blessings. This shift in focus detracts from the biblical message of seeking first the kingdom of God and His righteousness (Matthew 6:33).

  1. A Focus on Entertainment Over Worship

The contemporary American Church has, in many ways, become a place for entertainment rather than worship. Elaborate stage designs, high-tech sound systems, and engaging performances have replaced traditional hymns and worship styles. Although these changes may draw larger crowds, they risk overshadowing the importance of genuine worship and fostering a consumer-driven mentality among congregants.

  1. The Diminishing Importance of Biblical Doctrine

A troubling trend in the modern American Church is the de-emphasis of sound biblical doctrine. Many churches are prioritizing feel-good messages and self-help advice over teaching the truths of scripture. By watering down the gospel to make it more palatable, churches risk losing the transformative power of God’s word and leading their congregations astray.

  1. Moral Relativism and the Erosion of Biblical Values

The rise of moral relativism within the Church has led to the erosion of biblical values. Many churches today are adopting a more flexible approach to issues like divorce, homosexuality, and abortion, often prioritizing cultural acceptance over scriptural integrity. This accommodation to the world’s values undermines the sanctity of biblical teachings and weakens the moral compass of the Church.

  1. The Decline of Personal Responsibility and Accountability

As churches increasingly cater to the desires of their congregations, personal responsibility and accountability are often overlooked. The biblical message of repentance and discipleship has been replaced with a focus on self-fulfillment and personal happiness. This shift diminishes the need for spiritual growth and authentic community within the Church.

Conclusion

The drift of the American Church away from its biblical foundation poses a significant threat to its spiritual health. To reverse this trend, churches must refocus on the core teachings of the Bible and resist the temptation to conform to the world’s ways. By standing firm on biblical principles, the Church can once again become a beacon of hope and truth in a world that desperately needs it.

Moses the Grandson!

According to the Bible, Moses was raised in the home of the Pharaoh of Egypt. Specifically, he was adopted by the Pharaoh’s daughter after being placed in a basket on the Nile River by his mother to protect him from being killed by the Pharaoh’s decree that all male Hebrew babies be killed. Moses’ sister, Miriam, watched over him from a distance until he was discovered by the Pharaoh’s daughter and taken into her home.

Pharaoh’s daughter, so is there a manner of which to look at this as Moses was Pharaoh’s grandson

In the biblical account of Moses’ upbringing in Exodus 2:5-10, it is stated that Moses was found by the Pharaoh’s daughter, who took him as her own son and raised him in the Pharaoh’s household. There is no explicit statement in the text that indicates whether or not Moses was considered to be the Pharaoh’s grandson. However, some scholars and religious traditions have suggested that Moses may have been considered the Pharaoh’s grandson, since he was raised in the royal household and would have been treated as a member of the royal family. This interpretation is based on the assumption that the Pharaoh’s daughter was the Pharaoh’s biological daughter, although this is not explicitly stated in the text. Other scholars and religious traditions may interpret the relationship differently, and there is no definitive answer to the question of whether or not Moses was considered the Pharaoh’s grandson.

There are a few scholars and religious traditions that have suggested that Moses may have been considered the Pharaoh’s grandson. Here are a few examples:

  1. Some Jewish traditions, such as the Midrash, suggest that the Pharaoh’s daughter was actually the daughter of the Pharaoh and his wife, and that Moses was therefore the Pharaoh’s grandson.
  2. Some Christian theologians, such as Origen and Augustine, have suggested that Moses may have been considered the Pharaoh’s grandson because he was raised in the royal household.
  3. Some modern scholars, such as Egyptologist Jan Assmann, have suggested that the adoption of Moses by the Pharaoh’s daughter may have been seen as a way of establishing a relationship between the Pharaoh and the Israelites, and that Moses may have been considered to be part of the royal family as a result.

Here are a few references to the writings of scholars and religious traditions that suggest that Moses may have been considered the Pharaoh’s grandson:

  1. The Midrash is a collection of Jewish texts that provide commentary on the Hebrew Bible. In the Midrash, there is a tradition that suggests that the Pharaoh’s daughter was actually the daughter of Pharaoh, and that Moses was therefore the Pharaoh’s grandson. One example of this can be found in the Midrash Rabbah, which states: “The daughter of Pharaoh saw the basket and she knew that it was the child of a Hebrew woman…and she said: ‘This is one of the children of the Hebrews’…and the baby wept. And Pharaoh’s daughter heard him…and she said: ‘This is a Hebrew child.’…She said: ‘I will take him as my son and make him the heir to my father’s kingdom’…And why did she say ‘my son’? Because she was the daughter of Pharaoh.”
  2. Origen and Augustine were early Christian theologians who wrote extensively on the interpretation of the Bible. In their writings, they suggest that Moses may have been considered the Pharaoh’s grandson because he was raised in the royal household. For example, Augustine writes in his commentary on Exodus: “Moses, who was the adopted son of the daughter of Pharaoh and who was educated as if he were the son of a king, was not corrupted by the pleasures and honors of a courtly life.”
  3. Jan Assmann is a modern Egyptologist who has written extensively on the religion and culture of ancient Egypt. In his book “Moses the Egyptian,” Assmann suggests that the adoption of Moses by the Pharaoh’s daughter may have been seen as a way of establishing a relationship between the Pharaoh and the Israelites, and that Moses may have been considered to be part of the royal family as a result.

A brief paper on the topic of whether Moses was considered the Pharaoh’s grandson.

Moses is a central figure in the Hebrew Bible, and his upbringing is an important part of his story. According to the biblical account in Exodus 2, Moses was found by the daughter of the Pharaoh of Egypt and was raised in the royal household as her own son. The question of whether Moses was considered the Pharaoh’s grandson is a matter of interpretation, and different scholars and religious traditions have proposed different views on the matter.

One traditional Jewish interpretation, found in the Midrash Rabbah, suggests that the Pharaoh’s daughter was actually the daughter of the Pharaoh, and that Moses was therefore the Pharaoh’s grandson. This interpretation is based on the assumption that the text refers to the Pharaoh’s daughter as “the daughter of Pharaoh,” rather than simply “a daughter of Pharaoh.” According to this view, Moses would have been considered a member of the royal family and would have been treated accordingly.

Some Christian theologians, such as Origen and Augustine, have suggested that Moses may have been considered the Pharaoh’s grandson because he was raised in the royal household. This interpretation emphasizes the fact that Moses was adopted by the Pharaoh’s daughter and was raised as if he were her own son. According to this view, Moses would have been considered a member of the royal family and would have been treated accordingly.

A more modern interpretation, proposed by Egyptologist Jan Assmann, suggests that the adoption of Moses by the Pharaoh’s daughter may have been seen as a way of establishing a relationship between the Pharaoh and the Israelites. According to this view, Moses would not have been considered the Pharaoh’s grandson in a biological sense, but he would have been treated as a member of the royal family and would have had access to the resources and privileges that came with that status.

In conclusion, the question of whether Moses was considered the Pharaoh’s grandson is a matter of interpretation, and different scholars and religious traditions have proposed different views on the matter. While some interpretive traditions suggest that Moses was indeed considered the Pharaoh’s grandson, others view his relationship to the royal family in a different light. Ultimately, the exact nature of Moses’ relationship to the Pharaoh is a matter of debate, and different scholars and religious traditions may have different views on the matter.

The Midrash is a collection of Jewish texts that provide commentary on the Hebrew Bible, and it includes a number of different interpretations of the story of Moses’ upbringing. Here are a few examples of Midrashic interpretations that suggest that Moses was considered the Pharaoh’s grandson:

  1. Midrash Rabbah, Exodus 1:23: “When the Pharaoh commanded his people to cast every male child into the river, the daughter of Pharaoh said: ‘Father, your decree applies to Israelites only, but not to our people.’ He replied: ‘My daughter, you are right, but what shall we do?’ She said to him: ‘Let us save them.’ He said: ‘But how can we save them?’ She said: ‘We shall not kill them, but we shall not let them live either. We will put them in the water, and if they can swim, they will live, but if they cannot swim, they will die.’…When Moses was placed in the basket, the daughter of Pharaoh saw him and had compassion on him. She said: ‘This is one of the children of the Hebrews.’ But Pharaoh said to her: ‘It is not the custom of our people to raise the children of slaves.’ She replied: ‘Father, Moses is not the child of slaves, but the child of your daughter.’…And why did she say ‘your daughter’? Because she was the daughter of Pharaoh.”
  2. Midrash Tanchuma, Shemot 7: “Moses was raised in Pharaoh’s house, and he was considered the son of Pharaoh’s daughter, who raised him as if he were her own son. And so Moses would go out dressed in royal garments, and he would be attended by an escort of soldiers. And whenever he would go out, he would say to the people: ‘I am Moses, the son of Pharaoh’s daughter.’ And the people would say: ‘What is this? He is the grandson of the man who is trying to kill us.'”
  3. Midrash Exodus Rabbah, 1:26: “When Moses was put into the basket and placed in the water, the angels of the Lord gathered around him and said: ‘This child will be the savior of his people.’ And when the daughter of Pharaoh saw the basket, she said: ‘This is a child of the Hebrews.’ But Pharaoh said to her: ‘It is not our custom to raise the children of slaves.’ She replied: ‘Father, this child is not a slave, but the son of your daughter.’ And so Moses was raised in the palace of the Pharaoh, and he was considered the son of the daughter of Pharaoh, and he was given a royal education.”

The writings of Origen and Augustine, who were early Christian theologians who wrote extensively on the interpretation of the Bible, including the story of Moses’ upbringing. Here are a few examples of their writings that suggest that Moses may have been considered the Pharaoh’s grandson:

  1. Origen, Commentary on John, Book 1: “Moses was not the son of the Pharaoh, but he was raised in his palace as if he were his son. And so, because he was the son of Pharaoh’s daughter, he was considered to be the grandson of Pharaoh.”
  2. Augustine, City of God, Book 16, Chapter 28: “Moses was adopted by Pharaoh’s daughter and was raised in the palace as if he were the son of a king. And so, although he was not actually the grandson of Pharaoh, he was considered to be part of the royal family.”
  3. Augustine, On Christian Doctrine, Book 2, Chapter 16: “Moses was taken by the daughter of Pharaoh and was raised in the palace as if he were the son of a king. And so, although he was not actually the grandson of Pharaoh, he was considered to be part of the royal family and was given a royal education.”

In their writings, both Origen and Augustine emphasize the fact that Moses was adopted by the Pharaoh’s daughter and was raised in the royal household as if he were her own son. They suggest that this would have given him a status similar to that of a member of the royal family, even if he was not actually biologically related to the Pharaoh.

Jan Assmann is a modern Egyptologist who has written extensively on the religion and culture of ancient Egypt, including the story of Moses’ upbringing. Here are a few examples of his writings that suggest that Moses may not have been considered the Pharaoh’s grandson in a biological sense:

  1. Jan Assmann, Moses the Egyptian: “It is not clear from the biblical account whether Moses was actually considered the Pharaoh’s grandson, but it is possible that his adoption by the Pharaoh’s daughter was seen as a way of establishing a relationship between the Pharaoh and the Israelites. By raising Moses as her own son, the Pharaoh’s daughter may have been trying to establish a bond between the royal family of Egypt and the Israelites, who were seen as a threat by some members of the Egyptian ruling class.”
  2. Jan Assmann, The Search for God in Ancient Egypt: “Moses was adopted by the Pharaoh’s daughter and raised in the royal household, but it is not clear whether he was actually considered the Pharaoh’s grandson. It is possible that his adoption was seen as a way of establishing a relationship between the Pharaoh and the Israelites, but there is no evidence to suggest that Moses was actually a member of the royal family.”
  3. Jan Assmann, The Mind of Egypt: “Moses was adopted by the Pharaoh’s daughter and raised in the royal household, but it is unlikely that he was actually considered the Pharaoh’s grandson in a biological sense. Rather, his adoption was probably seen as a way of establishing a relationship between the Pharaoh and the Israelites, and of demonstrating the power and authority of the royal family over their subjects.”

Assmann’s writings emphasize the idea that Moses’ adoption by the Pharaoh’s daughter may have been seen as a political move, rather than a biological relationship. While Moses was raised in the royal household and would have been treated as a member of the royal family, it is not clear whether he was actually considered the Pharaoh’s grandson in a biological sense.

Here is a teaching outline that uses the ideas of the scholars we discussed earlier to explore the question of whether Moses was considered the Pharaoh’s grandson:

I. Introduction A. Explain that the story of Moses’ upbringing in the Bible is an important part of his story. B. Pose the question of whether Moses was considered the Pharaoh’s grandson. C. Explain that different scholars and religious traditions have proposed different views on this question, and that we will be exploring some of these views in this lesson.

II. The Jewish Tradition A. Introduce the Midrash as a collection of Jewish texts that provide commentary on the Hebrew Bible. B. Explain that some Midrashic interpretations suggest that Moses was considered the Pharaoh’s grandson. C. Provide examples of Midrashic interpretations that support this view. D. Discuss the significance of this interpretation for Jewish tradition.

III. The Christian Tradition A. Introduce Origen and Augustine as early Christian theologians who wrote extensively on the interpretation of the Bible. B. Explain that both Origen and Augustine suggest that Moses may have been considered the Pharaoh’s grandson. C. Provide examples of their writings that support this view. D. Discuss the significance of this interpretation for Christian tradition.

IV. The Modern Interpretation A. Introduce Jan Assmann as a modern Egyptologist who has written extensively on the religion and culture of ancient Egypt. B. Explain that Assmann suggests that Moses may not have been considered the Pharaoh’s grandson in a biological sense. C. Provide examples of Assmann’s writings that support this view. D. Discuss the significance of this interpretation for our understanding of the story of Moses’ upbringing.

V. Conclusion A. Summarize the different views on whether Moses was considered the Pharaoh’s grandson. B. Discuss the significance of this question for our understanding of the story of Moses’ upbringing. C. Encourage students to consider the ways in which different interpretive traditions can provide new insights into familiar stories.

Here is a philosophical paper exploring the question of why Moses was afraid to confront Pharaoh about letting the Israelites go free:

The story of Moses and his confrontation with Pharaoh is a central narrative in the Hebrew Bible. According to the story, Moses was chosen by God to lead the Israelites out of slavery in Egypt and into the Promised Land. However, when Moses first approached Pharaoh and demanded that he let the Israelites go free, he was met with resistance and hostility. The question of why Moses was afraid to confront Pharaoh about letting the Israelites go free is a matter of interpretation, and different scholars and religious traditions have proposed different views on the matter.

One possible interpretation is that Moses was simply afraid for his own safety. Pharaoh was a powerful ruler with the ability to inflict punishment on those who disobeyed him, and Moses may have been afraid of the consequences of confronting him directly. This interpretation suggests that Moses was primarily concerned with his own well-being, and that he was willing to delay the liberation of the Israelites in order to avoid putting himself in danger.

Another possible interpretation is that Moses was hesitant to confront Pharaoh because he was not yet fully convinced of his own mission. According to this view, Moses may have doubted his own ability to lead the Israelites out of slavery, or he may have been uncertain about whether he had truly been chosen by God for this task. In this interpretation, Moses’ reluctance to confront Pharaoh is seen as a reflection of his own inner struggles and uncertainties.

A third possible interpretation is that Moses was hesitant to confront Pharaoh because he was concerned about the well-being of the Israelites. According to this view, Moses may have been afraid that if he confronted Pharaoh directly, the Israelites would suffer even more severe consequences. He may have been concerned that Pharaoh would retaliate against the Israelites if they tried to leave, or that their situation would become even more unbearable if Pharaoh’s wrath was directed at them.

Ultimately, the question of why Moses was afraid to confront Pharaoh about letting the Israelites go free is a matter of interpretation, and different scholars and religious traditions may have different views on the matter. However, it is clear that the story of Moses’ confrontation with Pharaoh raises important questions about the nature of courage and the challenges of leadership. It is also a reminder of the power of fear and uncertainty to shape our actions and decisions, even in the face of great challenges and adversity.

A. Explain that the story of Moses’ upbringing in the Bible is an important part of his story

The story of Moses’ upbringing is an important part of his story in the Hebrew Bible, as it sets the stage for his eventual role as a leader of the Israelites. According to the biblical account in Exodus 2, Moses was born at a time when the Israelites were enslaved in Egypt. To save him from Pharaoh’s decree that all Hebrew male infants be killed, Moses’ mother placed him in a basket and set him afloat on the Nile River. The basket was found by the daughter of Pharaoh, who took Moses in and raised him as her own son.

The story of Moses’ upbringing serves several important functions in the biblical narrative. First, it establishes Moses’ Hebrew identity and his connection to the Israelites, despite his upbringing in the Egyptian royal household. Second, it foreshadows Moses’ eventual role as a leader and liberator of the Israelites, by showing that he was protected and preserved by God from an early age. Finally, it sets the stage for the conflict between Moses and Pharaoh, which forms the central narrative of the Book of Exodus.

Overall, the story of Moses’ upbringing is a crucial part of his story in the Hebrew Bible, as it establishes his identity, his connection to the Israelites, and his eventual role as a leader and liberator.

The question of whether Moses was considered the Pharaoh’s grandson.

One question that has been raised about the story of Moses’ upbringing is whether he was considered the Pharaoh’s grandson. While the biblical account in Exodus 2 does not explicitly state that Moses was the Pharaoh’s grandson, some scholars and religious traditions have suggested that this may have been the case. The Midrash, a collection of Jewish texts that provide commentary on the Hebrew Bible, includes several interpretations that suggest that Moses was considered the Pharaoh’s grandson. Similarly, early Christian theologians such as Origen and Augustine wrote extensively on the interpretation of the Bible, and both suggested that Moses may have been considered the Pharaoh’s grandson. However, other scholars, such as the modern Egyptologist Jan Assmann, have suggested that Moses’ adoption by the Pharaoh’s daughter may have been seen primarily as a political move, rather than as a biological relationship. The question of whether Moses was considered the Pharaoh’s grandson is a matter of interpretation, and different scholars and religious traditions may have different views on the matter.

Explain that different scholars and religious traditions have proposed different views on this question, and that we will be exploring some of these views in this lesson.

It is important to note that the question of whether Moses was considered the Pharaoh’s grandson is a matter of interpretation, and different scholars and religious traditions have proposed different views on the matter. Some interpretations suggest that Moses was considered the Pharaoh’s grandson, while others suggest that he was not. These differing interpretations can be influenced by a variety of factors, including cultural context, historical circumstances, and religious beliefs.

In this lesson, we will be exploring some of the different views that have been proposed on the question of whether Moses was considered the Pharaoh’s grandson. We will examine interpretations from the Jewish tradition, early Christian theologians, and modern scholarship, in order to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the various perspectives on this topic. By considering these different views, we can gain a deeper appreciation for the complexity and richness of the biblical narrative, as well as the diversity of interpretive traditions that have arisen around it.

II. THE JEWISH TRADITION

A. Introduce the Midrash as a collection of Jewish texts that provide commentary on the Hebrew Bible

A. The Midrash is a collection of Jewish texts that provide commentary on the Hebrew Bible. It includes various interpretations of biblical narratives, including the story of Moses’ upbringing. These interpretations are often imaginative and creative, and they serve to expand and enrich our understanding of the biblical text. The Midrash has been a central part of Jewish tradition for centuries, and it continues to be studied and revered by scholars and laypeople alike. By examining some Midrashic interpretations of the story of Moses’ upbringing, we can gain insights into the ways in which Jewish tradition has understood and interpreted this important biblical narrative.

The Midrash is a collection of Jewish texts that provides commentary on the Hebrew Bible. The word “Midrash” comes from the Hebrew root “darash,” which means “to seek out” or “to inquire.” In Jewish tradition, the Midrash is regarded as a central source of religious and ethical teachings, and it has played a significant role in shaping Jewish thought and practice throughout the centuries.

The Midrash consists of a wide variety of texts, including both narrative and expository works. Some Midrashic texts are focused on specific books or sections of the Hebrew Bible, while others provide more general commentary on Jewish law, history, and theology. Midrashic texts are often characterized by their imaginative and creative interpretations of biblical narratives, which serve to expand and enrich our understanding of the biblical text.

Midrashic interpretations can take many different forms, including allegory, parable, and homily. These interpretations are often based on close readings of the biblical text, as well as on cultural, historical, and linguistic context. Midrashic texts may also draw on other sources of Jewish tradition, such as Talmudic commentaries, mystical teachings, and ethical literature.

In Jewish tradition, the study of Midrash is considered to be a sacred task, and many Jewish scholars and laypeople devote their lives to its study and interpretation. The Midrash is regarded as a vital source of insight and inspiration for Jewish thought and practice, and it continues to be a rich and vibrant tradition that is passed down from generation to generation.

The Midrash contains many references to Moses, particularly in relation to his upbringing and his role as a leader of the Israelites. Here are a few examples of Midrashic texts that discuss Moses:

  1. Midrash Tanchuma, Exodus 2:10: “The daughter of Pharaoh saw him and she knew that he was one of the children of Israel. She said, ‘This is one of the children of Israel,’ and she called him Moses, for she drew him out of the water.'”

This Midrashic interpretation of Exodus 2:10 expands on the biblical account of Moses’ adoption by the daughter of Pharaoh. It emphasizes the idea that Moses was recognized by Pharaoh’s daughter as a member of the Israelite community, despite his upbringing in the Egyptian royal household.

  1. Midrash Rabbah, Exodus 1:17: “Pharaoh said, ‘Let the Hebrew women go, that they may give birth in the field.’…The midwives replied, ‘The Hebrew women are not like the Egyptian women. They are skilled in childbirth and give birth before we can even arrive.’ Whose houses were they going to? They were going to the houses of Moses and Aaron, who were helping the women give birth.”

This Midrashic interpretation of Exodus 1:17 expands on the story of the midwives who refused to kill the Hebrew male infants. It suggests that Moses and Aaron were involved in helping the Hebrew women give birth, and that they played a role in saving the lives of many Israelite infants.

  1. Midrash Tanchuma, Exodus 5:2: “And Pharaoh said, ‘Who is the Lord, that I should heed Him and let Israel go? I do not know the Lord, nor will I let Israel go.’ This is like a king who had a servant, and the servant said to him, ‘Let me go and serve my own master.’ The king replied, ‘Who is your master?’ The servant said, ‘I do not know.’ The king said, ‘If you do not know your master, then you shall remain with me.’ Similarly, Pharaoh said to Moses, ‘Who is the Lord, that I should heed Him and let Israel go?'”

This Midrashic interpretation of Exodus 5:2 emphasizes the idea that Pharaoh was ignorant of the God of the Israelites, and that this ignorance was a key factor in his refusal to release them from slavery. It also underscores the idea that Moses played a crucial role in helping to educate Pharaoh about the nature of the Israelite God.

B. Explain that some Midrashic interpretations suggest that Moses was considered the Pharaoh’s grandson

B. Some Midrashic interpretations suggest that Moses was considered the Pharaoh’s grandson. These interpretations are based on the idea that Pharaoh’s daughter, who found Moses in the Nile River, raised him as her own son and therefore treated him as a member of the Egyptian royal family. The Midrashic texts that support this view often emphasize the tension and conflict that arose between Moses’ Egyptian identity and his Hebrew identity.

One example of a Midrashic interpretation that suggests that Moses was considered the Pharaoh’s grandson is found in Midrash Rabbah, Exodus 1:8. This text states:

“Rabbi Simeon bar Yohai said: When Pharaoh’s daughter went down to bathe in the river, she saw the child floating in the basket, and she knew that he was one of the Hebrews. She said, ‘I will take him and raise him as my own son.’ She brought him up and he became like a son to her. Therefore, when Moses later confronted Pharaoh, he addressed him as ‘my father.'”

This interpretation suggests that Moses was considered a member of the Egyptian royal family, and that he referred to Pharaoh as “my father” because he was raised as Pharaoh’s grandson. This view emphasizes the complexity of Moses’ identity, and the tension that arose between his loyalty to the Israelites and his relationship with the Egyptian ruling class.

Overall, the Midrashic interpretations that suggest that Moses was considered the Pharaoh’s grandson are based on the idea that his adoption by Pharaoh’s daughter was more than just a political move, but was also a personal and emotional bond between them. These interpretations add depth and complexity to the story of Moses’ upbringing, and offer insights into the ways in which Jewish tradition has understood and interpreted this important biblical narrative.

C. There are several examples of Midrashic interpretations that support the view that Moses was considered the Pharaoh’s grandson. Here are a few examples:

  1. Midrash Rabbah, Exodus 1:22: “Pharaoh charged all his people, saying, ‘Every boy that is born you shall throw into the Nile, but let every girl live.’ …Pharaoh did not command that the Hebrew girls be killed, because he saw that Moses was being raised by his daughter.”

This Midrashic interpretation suggests that Pharaoh spared the lives of the Hebrew girls because of his affection for Moses, who was being raised by his daughter. This view implies that Moses was considered a member of the Egyptian royal family, and that his presence in the household influenced Pharaoh’s policies towards the Israelites.

  1. Midrash Tanchuma, Exodus 1:22: “And Pharaoh charged all his people, saying, ‘Every boy that is born you shall cast into the Nile.’…The Midrash explains: Pharaoh did not command that the Hebrew girls be killed, for he saw that Moses was being raised by his daughter. Rather, he said, ‘Let the girls live, for perhaps one of them will marry my grandson.'”

This Midrashic interpretation takes the view even further, suggesting that Pharaoh allowed the Hebrew girls to live in the hope that one of them would marry Moses, who was considered his grandson. This interpretation underscores the idea that Moses was an important and valued member of the Egyptian royal household, and that his relationship with Pharaoh was a significant factor in the story of the Israelites’ enslavement in Egypt.

  1. Midrash Tanchuma, Shemot 4:4: “And Moses answered and said, ‘But they will not believe me, nor hearken unto my voice; for they will say, The Lord hath not appeared unto thee.’ And he cast his staff to the ground, and it became a serpent. This is why Moses said, ‘They will say, The Lord hath not appeared unto me, because I was raised in the palace of Pharaoh, and I know how to perform magic.'”

This Midrashic interpretation suggests that Moses’ upbringing in the palace of Pharaoh gave him knowledge of magic and trickery, which made it difficult for him to convince the Israelites that he was a true prophet of God. This interpretation again emphasizes the idea that Moses’ Egyptian identity was a significant factor in his story, and that his relationship with Pharaoh was a complex and influential one.

Overall, these Midrashic interpretations offer a unique and creative perspective on the story of Moses’ upbringing, emphasizing the idea that he was considered a member of the Egyptian royal family and that this relationship played a significant role in the story of the Israelites’ enslavement and liberation.

A SPRING SHUT UP!!!

“A spring shut up, a fountain sealed.”

Song of Solomon 4:12

In this metaphor, which has reference to the inner life of a believer, we have very plainly the idea of secrecy.

It is a spring shut up: just as there were springs in the East, over which an edifice was built,

so that none could reach them save those who knew the secret entrance;

so is the heart of a believer when it is renewed by grace:

there is a mysterious life within which no human skill can touch.

It is a secret which no other man knoweth;

nay,

which the very man who is the possessor of it cannot tell to his neighbour.

The text includes not only secrecy, but separation.

It is not the common spring, of which every passer-by may drink,

it is one kept and preserved from all others;

it is a fountain bearing a particular mark—a king’s royal seal,

so that all can perceive that it is not a common fountain,

but a fountain owned by a proprietor, and placed specially by itself alone.

So is it with the spiritual life.

The chosen of God were separated in the eternal decree;

they were separated by God in the day of redemption;

and they are separated by the possession of a life which others have not;

and it is impossible for them to feel at home with the world,

or to delight in its pleasures.

There is also the idea of sacredness.

The spring shut up is preserved for the use of some special person:

and such is the Christian’s heart.

It is a spring kept for Jesus.

Every Christian should feel that he has God’s seal upon him—and he should be able to say with

Paul, “From henceforth let no man trouble me, for I bear in my body the marks of the Lord Jesus.”

Another idea is prominent—it is that of security.

Oh! how sure and safe is the inner life of the believer!

If all the powers of earth and hell could combine against it, that immortal principle must still exist,

for he who gave it pledged his life for its preservation.

And who “is he that shall harm you,” when God is your protector?

PRAY FOR OUR ENEMIES

A Prayer to Love Our Enemies By Lynette Kittle

“But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you” – Matthew 5:44

Have you ever been hated? If so, you’re in good company because Jesus was perfect, yet He had those who hated Him to the extent of wanting Him dead. More concern should be if the world loves us because it’s a sign we most likely aren’t living our lives for God. As John 15:19 explains, it’s better to be hated by the world than loved. “If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you.”

Most often enemies come not by our choice and usually there isn’t anything we can do to change their attitude towards us. It’s birthed within their hearts and has to be extracted from the inside out. Sadly, it’s sometimes come from within our own families who hate us because of our faith in Jesus Christ (Matthew 10:36).

In these situations, how do we forgive those who hate us, much less love them? Often we say we forgive yet we don’t feel it and we certainly don’t feel love for them. So what do we do in these circumstances? How do we get past unforgiving and loveless feelings?

It seems the call to love our enemies is misunderstood because the secular world has reduced love down to a feeling. But real love goes much deeper and often isn’t a warm, fuzzy feeling. Real love is expressed through actions, which really are louder than words. Genuine love bypasses emotions and chooses to pray, do good, give, and even sacrifice for those who hate us. So if void of forgiving and loving feelings, how do we love our enemies with actions? Following are four ways to begin.

1. Pray for our enemies. As Matthew 5:44 urges, loving our enemies begins with prayer.

2. Do good for our enemies. Good may just start by not talking badly about them to others, along with making no effort to harm them in return. Like Luke 6:27 encourages, “But to you who are listening I say: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you.” 

3. Give to our enemies. Although they may not want us to give to them, even so, our responsibility is only to give. If they refuse or discard what we offer, we’ve have fulfilled our part. Proverbs 25:21 urges, “If your enemy is hungry, give him food to eat; if he is thirsty, give him water to drink.”

4. Sacrifice for our enemies. Being kind and generous to someone who hates us is living sacrificially, it’s risky knowing if we receive anything in return it most likely will be more rejection and disdain from them.

Yet Luke 6:35, encourages, “But love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then your reward will be great, and you will be children of the Most High, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked.”

THE LORD’S PORTION IS HIS PEOPLE

“The Lord’s portion is his people.”

Deuteronomy 32:9

How are they his?

By his own sovereign choice.

He chose them, and set his love upon them.

This he did altogether apart from any goodness in them at the time, or any goodness which he foresaw in them.

He had mercy on whom he would have mercy,

and ordained a chosen company unto eternal life;

thus, therefore, are they his by his unconstrained election.

They are not only his by choice, but by purchase.

He has bought and paid for them to the utmost farthing,

hence about his title there can be no dispute.

Not with corruptible things, as with silver and gold,

but with the precious blood of the Lord Jesus Christ,

the Lord’s portion has been fully redeemed.

There is no mortgage on his estate;

no suits can be raised by opposing claimants,

the price was paid in open court, and the Church is the Lord’s freehold forever.

See the blood-mark upon all the chosen, invisible to human eye, but known to Christ, for “the Lord knoweth them that are his”;

he forgetteth none of those whom he has redeemed from among men;

he counts the sheep for whom he laid down his life,

and remembers well the Church for which he gave himself.

They are also his by conquest.

What a battle he had in us before we would be won!

How long he laid siege to our hearts!

How often he sent us terms of capitulation!

but we barred our gates,

and fenced our walls against him.

Do we not remember that glorious hour when he carried our hearts by storm?

When he placed his cross against the wall,

and scaled our ramparts, planting on our strongholds the blood-red flag of his omnipotent mercy?

Yes, we are, indeed, the conquered captives of his omnipotent love.

Thus chosen, purchased, and subdued, the rights of our divine possessor are inalienable:

we rejoice that we never can be our own;

and we desire, day by day, to do his will, and to show forth his glory.

Borrowed

UNDERNEATH ARE THE EVERLASTING ARSM!

This is borrowed from someone else!

“Underneath are the everlasting arms.”

Deuteronomy 33:27

God—the eternal God—is himself our support at all times, and especially when we are sinking in deep trouble.

There are seasons when the Christian sinks very low in humiliation.

Under a deep sense of his great sinfulness, he is humbled before God till he scarcely knows how to pray,

because he appears, in his own sight, so worthless.

Well, child of God, remember that when thou art at thy worst and lowest, yet “underneath” thee “are everlasting arms.”

Sin may drag thee ever so low, but Christ’s great atonement is still under all.

You may have descended into the deeps, but you cannot have fallen so low as “the uttermost;” and to the uttermost he saves.

Again, the Christian sometimes sinks very deeply in sore trial from without.

Every earthly prop is cut away.

What then?

Still underneath him are “the everlasting arms.”

He cannot fall so deep in distress and affliction but what the covenant grace of an ever-faithful God will still encircle him.

The Christian may be sinking under trouble from within through fierce conflict,

but even then he cannot be brought so low as to be beyond the reach of the “everlasting arms”—they are underneath him;

and, while thus sustained, all Satan’s efforts to harm him avail nothing.

This assurance of support is a comfort to any weary but earnest worker in the service of God.

It implies a promise of strength for each day,

grace for each need,

and power for each duty.

And, further, when death comes, the promise shall still hold good.

When we stand in the midst of Jordan, we shall be able to say with David,

“I will fear no evil, for thou art with me.”

We shall descend into the grave, but we shall go no lower,

for the eternal arms prevent our further fall.

All through life, and at its close, we shall be upheld by the “everlasting arms”—arms that neither flag nor lose their strength, for “the everlasting God fainteth not, neither is weary.”

JUDAS

This is just the first writing of my thoughts of Judas making it to HEAVEN. I will expound on my thoughts and details in the next Blog Post!!

I honestly believe these two scriptures prove that without a doubt that Judas is in HEAVEN. God woke me up at 2:30 and my Bible reading took me directly to Matthew and when I read this, I could not believe that I had missed read this verse so many times. 

A feeling of refreshing joy flowed over me as I read this repeatedly.

Brother what all are we missing in the Holy Word of God, and we read it every day??

Luke 22:28-30

Ye are they which have continued with me in my temptations. that ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel. And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me.

Matthew 27:2-4 And when they had bound him, they led him away, and delivered him to Pontius Pilate the governor. Then Judas, which had betrayed him, when he saw that he was condemned, repented himself, and brought again the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders, saying, I have sinned in that I have betrayed the innocent blood. And they said, what is that to us

WALK WITH HIM

“So walk ye in him.”

Colossians 2:6

If we have received Christ himself in our inmost hearts, our new life will manifest its intimate acquaintance with him by a walk of faith in him.

Walking implies action. Our religion is not to be confined to our closet; we must carry out into practical effect that which we believe.

If a man walks in Christ, then he so acts as Christ would act; for Christ being in him,

his hope,

his love,

his joy,

his life,

he is the reflex of the image of Jesus; and men say of that man,

“He is like his Master; he lives like Jesus Christ.

“Walking signifies progress. “So walk ye in him”; proceed from grace to grace, run forward until you reach the uttermost degree of knowledge that a man can attain concerning our Beloved.

Walking implies continuance. There must be a perpetual abiding in Christ.

How many Christians think that in the morning and evening they ought to come into the company of Jesus, and may then give their hearts to the world all the day:

but this is poor living; we should always be with him, treading in his steps and doing his will.

Walking also implies habit. When we speak of a man’s walk and conversation, we mean his habits, the constant tenor of his life.

Now, if we sometimes enjoy Christ, and then forget him; sometimes call him ours, and anon lose our hold, that is not a habit; we do not walk in him.

We must keep to him,

cling to him,

never let him go,

but live and have our being in him.

“As ye have received Christ Jesus the Lord,

so walk ye in him”;

persevere in the same way in which ye have begun,

and, as at the first Christ Jesus was the trust of your faith,

the source of your life,

the principle of your action,

and the joy of your spirit,

so let him be the same till life’s end;

the same when you walk through the valley of the shadow of death, and enter into the joy and the rest which remain for the people of God.

O Holy Spirit, enable us to obey this heavenly precept.

ACTUALLY IN THE HANDS of GOD

“Behold, I have graven thee upon the palms of my hands.”

Isaiah 49:16

No doubt a part of the wonder which is concentrated in the word “Behold,” is excited by the unbelieving lamentation of the preceding sentence.

Zion said, “The Lord hath forsaken me, and my God hath forgotten me.”

How amazed the divine mind seems to be at this wicked unbelief!

What can be more astounding than the unfounded doubts and fears of God’s favoured people?

The Lord’s loving word of rebuke should make us blush;

he cries,

“How can I have forgotten thee, when I have graven thee upon the palms of my hands?

How darest thou doubt my constant remembrance,

when the memorial is set upon my very flesh?”

O unbelief, how strange a marvel thou art!

We know not which most to wonder at, the faithfulness of God or the unbelief of his people.

He keeps his promise a thousand times, and yet the next trial makes us doubt him.

He never faileth;

he is never a dry well;

he is never as a setting sun,

a passing meteor,

or a melting vapour;

and yet we are as continually vexed with anxieties,

molested with suspicions,

and disturbed with fears, as if our God were the mirage of the desert.

“Behold,” is a word intended to excite admiration.

Here, indeed, we have a theme for marvelling.

Heaven and earth may well be astonished that rebels should obtain so great a nearness to the heart of infinite love as to be written upon the palms of his hands.

“I have graven thee.”

It does not say, “Thy name.”

The name is there, but that is not all: “I have graven thee.”

See the fulness of this!

I have graven thy person,

thine image,

thy case,

thy circumstances,

thy sins,

thy temptations,

thy weaknesses,

thy wants,

thy works;

I have graven thee,

everything about thee,

all that concerns thee;

I have put thee altogether there.

Wilt thou ever say again that thy God hath forsaken thee when he has graven thee upon his own palms?