My Journal

Chapter 1-8

Briefly read.

Note of interest:

Philistines were from the Island of Crete (disputed by some, but Britannica gave Crete more credit), Aegean people. (Remnants of the coast of Caphtor - Jeremiah 47:4) They were not native to Canaan.

Through young Samuel, God warned Eli of his fatherhood, but his response: "...let him do what is good in his eyes" (3:18). This is seen in today's churches where the seniors deal with issues in a liberal manner and pastors allow this to happen.

After first defeat, the Israelite brought out the Ark, and the Philistines were afraid at first, but they had no other choice, so they manned up and fought to victory, taking the Ark.

Phinehas' wife had a son, Ichabod, named by the mother while dying, to lament the lost of the Ark. (4:21)

The Ark was troubling the Philistines, so they sent it on cows to Beth Shemesh, of the Israelites. To see if the omen was of God's or of chance. On it, were guilt offerings of 5 gold tumors (as they were plagued by God in such) and 5 gold rats, according to 5 of their cities: Ashdod, Gaza, Ashkelon, Gath and Ekron.

I supposed 6:19 is what influenced the Indiana Jones movie. There are debates whether God struck 50,070 or only 70, even though the Levites were there to handle the Ark. They number 50k is perhaps too great for Beth Shemesh, as some believe. 50,070 could have included the Philistines, or the Israelites who died in battles. I could accept either only 70 or more to include the Philistines, as long as it has to do with the Ark, not the battles. Whether there were Philistines touching the Ark as Uzzah, I see it matters not if God would strike them or not for they were not the law bearers.

Kiriath Jearim took the Ark eventually due to fear of it in Beth Shemesh. A levite Eleazar was consecrated to guard it.

During Samuel's burnt offering of a suckling lamb at Mizpah, the Philistines attacked. Israelites did not react but kept praying Samuel to continue the sacrifice. God came to their aid (7:10) with loud thunder, causing them panic. Then, the Israelites slaughtered them.

It appears that the Israelites even took back Ekron and Gath (7:14). Samuel led a good defense, contrasting with King David, against the Philistines. Israel also became friends with the Amorites after they help rescuing their territories from the Philistines.

Samuel traveled like Pak Tong, from Bethel to Gilgal to Mizpah to Ramah (his home). The late Eli was in Shiloh.

Because his sons were wicked, Samuel was not trusted with his natural successors. But ultimately, it was up to God (8:7): it is not you they have rejected, but they have rejected me as their king. This reminds me of Michael Liu's case, when many sought against him and Pak Tong. They did not care for God's will, only their logic of who Pak Tong's successor should be. Whether Michael Liu would be successor or not, it matters not, because it was not what Rev. Stephen Tong intented. His intention was to take care of Michael Liu (Matthew 18:10, Matthew 25:40) while other pastor/elder "kick" him out. In other words, Pak Tong was doing the job of some of those who criticize him for taking too much care of Michael Liu. I am doing some of their job of teaching their younglings as well. May God have mercy on us all. All they care about is to judge who is not suitable to be leader, because they think they know better, even than God, they want a human king, they praise men that they like, they scorn at those they like not. They liked Pak Tong then, they like him not now. They are the king, not God.

The warning against wanting a king discredits anti-civ.'s claim that Christianity (religion) brought elements of civilization that they frowned upon: control power, centralized government power, taxes, etc.

I should not say churches, the bride of Christ my Lord. However, it was good for the purpose of local church discernment.

Now, be wary of a group of Christians who love to praise men who have no interest in their prayer meetings.

They praise men, they promote them to teach in the church; while these men have not the desire to be associated with them, nor pray with them, nor attend their prayer meeting, if there is one. There is a role for such in today's secular world. The label is very common in Las Vegas. The Bible has labeled the same to such as well.

I pray for them, not with them.

Indifferent things. Things that are supposedly not mentioned in the Bible, but permissible.

"...New Testament examples of adiaphora are often cited from Paul's First Epistle to the Corinthians. Some of this epistle was written in response to a question from the Corinthian Christians regarding whether it was permissible for a Christian to eat food offered to idols. In response, Paul replied:

...food does not bring us near to God; we are no worse if we do not eat, and no better if we do. Be careful, however, that the exercise of your freedom does not become a stumbling block to the weak. (1 Corinthians 8:8–9 New International Version)

However, upon study of several other Pauline passages ones sees that Paul is not necessarily saying that there are such things as adiaphora. Elsewhere he says:

And whatever you do, whether in word or deed, do it all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him. (Colossians 3:17 NIV)

The adiaphora are morally acceptable or unacceptable by God based upon the motive and end of the doer. In this sense there are no indifferent things."