Willful Neglect
| Contents |
|
1. Introduction 2. Duty and Transgression 3. The Testimony of Scripture 4. Application to Doctrine 5. Application to Practice 6. Conclusion |
Introduction
Zahakiel: Luke, please offer the opening prayer.
Qinael: Our most holy and
loving Father,
We thank you for the blessing of this New Moon day, for this time for your children to gather together. We ask that your Spirit attend to this meeting and all present. In Yahshua’s name, amen.
Zahakiel: Amen.
Barb: Amen.
Crystle: Amen.
Pastor “Chick”: Amen.
Guerline: Amen.
Ye: Amen.
Rita: Amen.
Zahakiel: This month’s study is going to be an examination of the concept of “Willful Neglect.” I would like to begin with a brief reminder of our last topic, which was about the true motives of every Christian. We studied the “Joyful heart” that leads to a sincere desire for true godliness. Now that we have studied that issue, which is really foundational to many other areas, we can turn this month to an examination of at the duties to which we have been invited on the path of sanctification.
We will read first the description of those who will be Heaven’s citizens, and if I am not mistaken we have read this in a previous study. It has direct relevance to this topic, however, so I present it again here:
“Yahweh,
who shall abide in thy Tabernacle? Who shall dwell in thy holy hill? He that
walketh uprightly, and worketh righteousness, and speaketh the truth in his
heart. He that backbiteth not with his tongue, nor doeth evil to his neighbour,
nor taketh up a reproach against his neighbour.
“In whose eyes a vile person is contemned; but he honoureth them that fear Yahweh. He that sweareth to his own hurt, and changeth not. He that putteth not out his money to usury, nor taketh reward against the innocent. He that doeth these things shall never be moved.” (Psa 15:1-5)
What we find in that passage are two kinds of duties: active and passive.
Zahakiel: The active duties mentioned in Psalm 15 are walking uprightly, working righteousness, speaking the truth in one’s heart, honoring those who fear Yahweh, and keeping one’s word once it is given.
The first passive duty mentioned is a refusal to “backbite,” the word used there identifying such things as gossip, slander, prying into the affairs of others and generally speaking unnecessarily negative things about one’s neighbor. The other duties of this nature are refusing to cause harm to others, refusing to justify evildoers, and avoiding things like bribery or usury (lending money in order to profit from the interest).
We are going to look at these duties in some detail, and examine the principles behind them.
Duty and Transgression
Zahakiel: If we take some time to consider the nature of the duties we have listed, we will see something interesting: to ignore the passive duties is to engage in active transgression. For example, a passive duty is, “Refusing to do evil to your neighbor.” If you fail at this duty, you are going to actively “do evil to your neighbor.” Failing to avoid receiving a bribe makes you guilty of actively doing something unjust for personal gain. Does everyone see how this works?
Rita: Yes.
Qinael: <nods.>
Ye: Yes.
Crystle: Yes.
Barb: Yes.
Zahakiel: Now of failing to keep passive duties, and actively transgressing the commandments of God, we have spoken often and at length. Most of the commandments are phrased in such a way as to restrict active transgression. The commandment “Thou shalt not kill” (Exo 20:13) tells us not to actively transgress the Law. This is a relatively easy commandment to keep, since the natural tendency of even the worst of the worldlings is not to engage in random murders. We are keeping a passive duty by remaining innocent of this crime. The same may be said for adultery, stealing, idolatry, and so on. The Scriptures talk about avoiding these in great detail.
On the other hand, to ignore the active duties is passive transgression; that is the “willful neglect” of which we will speak in this study. We see, by way of example, that to not “walk uprightly,” which is one of the active duties of the Christian, is to be spiritually slothful and to avoid the proper and sanctifying course of action. To not honor those that fear Yahweh – and in this I would include not only those who openly slander Christians, but also nominal believers who refuse to unite in one Body, independent ministries, and those who speak poorly of commandment-keepers – is to passively oppose them by failing at this positive duty. It was this concept to which Yahshua was referring when He said, “He that is not with me is against me, and he that gathereth not with me scattereth.” (Luke 11:23)
The commandment “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy” (Exo 20:8) is an example of an active duty, a positive commandment. It is telling us to do something, not to avoid doing something. To fail at this is to reject a blessing, to avoid a sanctifying experience, to passively transgress.
Zahakiel: So this, then, is the basic principle: To fail at a passive duty results in an active transgression. To fail at an active duty is a passive transgression. Most of the time, when we speak of “transgression,” it is the active set that comes to mind. We are going to see here, however, that passive transgression is transgression nonetheless, and every bit as serious a violation of the sanctified life as any of the more visible spiritual crimes.
Are there any questions so far?
Rita: None.
Ye: No.
Crystle: None here.
Guerline: No.
The Testimony of Scripture
Zahakiel: One of the first passages that came to my mind while I was contemplating this subject is this one: “To him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.” (James 4:17) This statement comes at the end of a rebuke that James is giving to those who lay plans independently of Yahweh, and rejoice in their own abilities without rendering thanksgiving to their Creator. The writer states that to make plans that do not take into account the will of Yahweh, and to develop pride in these plans, is “evil.” (verse 16) They are not evil because they are necessarily bad plans – they may not be intended to harm others, or to break any laws. Yet they are “evil,” because they do not give place to Yah. If you think of it in terms of the tithe, you will see what I mean by that.
Yahweh has given us the ability to generate income. We have health, energy, and a good work ethic – particularly if we are converted Christians. These are all gifts, for none of us can make ourselves healthy or energetic (although it is our duty to maintain ourselves in these states). None of us chose the skills we would have upon being born, and although some of us have developed various talents with practice and training, we had within us the potential that was provided by Yahweh. The tithe that we return to the Almighty (Mal 3:10) is an acknowledgement of these blessings; and even then, it is not giving to Yahweh something that He needs, but participating in His Gospel work that is also for our sakes.
Our time and our plans ought to follow the same pattern. We may consider a path we wish to follow for the future, but if we do not take into account the plan that Yah has for our lives, and if we rely upon our own merits to bring about the success we desire, we are not returning a “tithe of acknowledgement” to the Creator. The worldly mind will have trouble with this concept, because it is true to a degree that “God helps those who help themselves.” But Yah does not help us to be self-sufficient, and this is a distinction we need to be able to understand. Our Father in Heaven gives us great talents, but they are not for our own good; they are given so that we may serve others. The Scriptures are full of men and women who did well in the growth and use of their various gifts, but because it led them to pride of heart, they fell away from the truth. The very first sinner was victim to this trap.
Zahakiel: We read of him, “How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! How art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! For thou hast said in thine heart, ‘I will ascend into Heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God. I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north. I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.’ Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.” (Isa 14:12-15)
We read of Israel, the favored nation, “thou didst trust in thine own beauty, and playedst the harlot because of thy renown, and pouredst out thy fornications on every one that passed by; his it was.” (Ezek 16:15)
Do you see the pattern here?
Rita: Yes.
Ye: Yes.
Qinael: <nods.>
Barb: Yes.
Zahakiel: Now, what does all this have to do with the idea of willful neglect? It is relevant in that it points out one of the more subtle traps Satan lays. While claiming to live good and decent lives, humanity falls easy prey to pride of ability. The tendency of the natural man is to work hard to achieve success, (which is good) but often through competitive means, (which is not good) and generally with the result of becoming proud of his achievements (which is terrible). We read, “Trust in Yahweh with all thine heart, and lean not unto thine own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge Him, and He shall direct thy paths.” (Pro 3:5, 6) This is how to avoid the “evil” of which James speaks, remaining humble and avoiding this passive sin.
But James’s statement has an application much wider than that specific context. We can easily find support for a more general reading. For example, “But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves. For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass; for he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was. But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.” (James 1:22-25)
That is another passage from James, speaking of the importance of obeying the knowledge that comes to us, of following in the light that Yahweh sheds on our path. But now, some tend to see James as being more “works oriented” than the rest of the New Testament. It is certainly true that James speaks more about the acts of righteousness than many of the other Biblical authors, and for this reason some have seen him as being at odds with – some have even said in competition with – others such as Paul whose focus was primarily on grace. Yet Paul taught exactly the same thing, writing, “For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.” (Rom 2:13)
The problem that those who would set Paul and James in different camps have is that they have a basic misunderstanding of what “grace” is, and this is a concept we have covered in previous New Moon meetings. Grace is not a substitute for righteousness – it is an ability to seek it and accomplish it. Grace is undeserved, yes, but this does not mean that those who receive it continue to actively pursue a course that makes them undeserving. On the contrary, Grace is imputed righteousness; but it is righteousness in fact and reality, not merely in legal standing. James was addressing one kind of error into which the Christian may fall, and Paul another; they were certainly not at odds with each other. Both wished to keep the believers under their care on the “strait and narrow” path.
Zahakiel: The neglect of duty, which both James and Paul address, is one of the creeping snares that the tempters employ to draw men away from Christ. The tools they use to accomplish this are many, including procrastination, self-justification, apathy and general Laodicean lethargy. These transgressions, particularly the last two, are easily seen when speaking to the Christian world, almost always the Adventist world, about the most recent application of the Mark of The Beast prophecy.
Considering this ready example, it is easy to get them to agree on the basic principles: a union of Church and state that seeks to restrict religious liberty. But when we apply this in such a way as would actually force our hearers to do something, to make a change, to stand for truth, it is then that we see willful neglect. To fail to act when we see someone being abused makes us accomplices to that misdeed. This is as true in the spiritual world as it is in the material. To know of a duty yet fail to perform it is to reject that light once offered – and this is a very dangerous course to take.
When speaking of “known” duties, it is important to make a distinction between genuine and willful ignorance. It is possible to genuinely not know something, and to err. We read, for example, “If a soul commit a trespass, and sin through ignorance, in the holy things of Yahweh; then he shall bring for his trespass unto Yahweh a ram without blemish out of the flocks.” (Lev 5:15a)
But now, and this is extremely important, even genuine ignorance does not immunize us to the consequences of our deeds. The individual described there in Leviticus 5 was genuinely ignorant of the nature of his misstep, but the Scripture does not say, “If a soul commit a trespass, and sin through ignorance, it is okay.” Or even, “If a soul commit a trespass, and sin through ignorance, let him apologize and receive forgiveness.” We notice that he must sill bring a ram – there must still be a shedding of blood – and this concept is at odds with the carnal mind.
Zahakiel: Under our covenant, no rams are offered. Christ has died for our transgressions; but just because the Sacrifice is past does not lessen the weight of the error and its consequences. This is why, if we are rebuked for some wrongdoing, or if we are required to pay a penalty for an error, even if we were ignorant of its nature, we should not see this rebuke or this penalty as being “unfair,” but accept it as a blessing from Yahweh. Even concerning ignorant sins it is truly spoken: “As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten; be zealous therefore, and repent.” (Rev 3:19) And even of children, who would have the most excuse for mistakes due to ignorance, it is written, “Chasten thy son while there is hope, and let not thy soul spare for his crying.” (Pro 19:18)
The Scripture is not advocating any abusive actions, but explaining that we must learn (by both our own experiences and those experiences we provide to others) that genuine rebuke and reproof are acts of love, and not vengeance. They are corrective measures designed to free us from the curse of ignorant neglect and to teach us to entirely avoid willful neglect. This is necessary, because if even genuine ignorance is not without its consequence, what does it mean if we deliberately chose to avoid doing something important?
Are there any questions about that?
Rita: No.
Guerline: No.
Crystle: No.
Ye: No.
Zahakiel: Deliberate neglect can apply not only to duties in terms of actions, but to our thoughts and personal knowledge as well. We read: “Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, and saying, ‘Where is the promise of His coming? For since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.’ For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished.” (2Pet 3:3-6)
This is a famous creationist passage, because it accurately predicts the state of the world today in terms of its reception of the Biblical record of our origins; but it also points out an important and more general truth. Those who are genuinely ignorant, when rebuke comes, will receive it and grow. They will, if they remain humble, ultimately be spared the judgment of wrath. Those who are willingly ignorant, on the other hand, when rebuke comes they will be offended, and harden themselves in their lack of knowledge.
It is of these specifically that Yahweh says, “My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge.” (Hos 4:6a) What loving Father would actually destroy His children because they did not know something? But as the rest of that verse informs us (“because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee”) we see that it is deliberate ignorance – the willful neglect of education – that leads to this parting of ways. Be open to rebuke. In fact, rejoice in rebuke when it comes, and seek the loving kindness of Yahweh even when things are “unfair.” If you can do this, you will never fail to learn and grow in grace and knowledge. If you can do this you will see the true beauty of the passage, “And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to His purpose.” (Rom 8:28)
Zahakiel: The bottom line for
understanding the principle behind willful neglect in found in the words of the
Messiah. He said, “And why call ye me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ and do not the things
which I say?
“Whosoever
cometh to me, and heareth my sayings, and doeth them, I will shew you to whom
he is like: he is like a man which built an house, and digged deep, and laid
the foundation on a rock: and when the flood arose, the stream beat vehemently
upon that house, and could not shake it: for it was founded upon a rock.
“But he that heareth, and doeth not, is like a man that without a foundation built an house upon the earth; against which the stream did beat vehemently, and immediately it fell; and the ruin of that house was great.” (Luke 6:46-49)
Say when you are finished with that.
Qinael: Finished.
Rita: Finished.
Crystle: Finished.
Pastor “Chick”: Finished.
Ye: Finished.
Guerline: Finished.
Zahakiel: The rebuke there is not for the Pharisees, who were opposing Him, or the Gentiles, who were not yet exposed to Him. The rebuke there was for those who were calling Him “Lord,” and who received His teachings, and who learned of their duties… but they neglected to do them, they avoided the opportunities to double their talents, (Mat 25:14-30) and the ruin of their house will surely be great.
Application to Doctrine
Zahakiel: Understanding the principle behind willful neglect allows us yet another key to having confidence in our reading of the Scriptures. This is how we truly let it interpret itself; not by merely looking for the definition of a word from one verse in another place, but by reading for principle and understanding the character of the Author. When we can do that, then the interpretation flows naturally and perfectly from the words we read, regardless of how long we have been studying it. But until this is done, it does not matter how many weeks or years we have been reading the Bible – ignorance of the One who wrote this testimony will always lead to failure.
Here is an example. We read from Genesis, “Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field
which Yahweh Elohim had made. And he said unto the woman, ‘Yea, hath God said,
“Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?”‘ And the woman said unto the serpent, ‘We may eat of the fruit of
the trees of the garden; but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of
the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it,
lest ye die.’
“And the
serpent said unto the woman, ‘Ye shall not surely die; for God doth know that
in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as
gods, knowing good and evil.’
“And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat. And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.” (Gen 3:1-7)
Let me know when you’ve read that.
Qinael: Finished.
Pastor “Chick”: Finished.
Rita: Done.
Barb: Done
Ye: Finished.
Crystle: Finished.
Zahakiel: Now, as Seventh-day Adventists, we give some regard to the writings of Ellen White, and she said of this incident, “The angels had cautioned Eve to beware of separating herself from her husband while occupied in their daily labor in the garden; with him she would be in less danger from temptation than if she were alone. But absorbed in her pleasing task, she unconsciously wandered from his side.” [Patriarchs and Prophets, pp. 53, 54] This set the stage for what was to follow.
We accept these details, and believe that Adam was not present with Eve during the time that the serpent initially spoke with her and tempted her to eat. Some Christians might hear us say that, however, and respond, “That’s not in the Bible. Where do you get the idea that Adam was not there?”
We need to be careful about that, both taking that position or dealing with it in others, and for several reasons. First, there is no moral “high ground” for rejecting continued revelation. Some Christians, in fact some Christian groups, take almost a kind of pleasure in denying any form of modern-day prophecy because, “We don’t need any more help to learn what the Bible says.” Of course Moses, who provided us with the history of these things, was not there either; he was shown many of the things he recorded by means of prophecy, which we are not to despise either before or after the Cross. (1Th 5:20)
Second, and perhaps more importantly, we need to make it clear that we accept the things Mrs. White wrote, not because Mrs. White wrote them, but because we can independently conclude –from the principles of Scripture – that she was quite correct. That idea is central to most of the doctrinal things that I have written during the course of my time in this message, and this issue of Adam and Eve is a good example of how that works. No other reading of the passage in Genesis, independently of what Ellen White wrote, (although she does probably make it more obvious to those who might otherwise miss it at first) would make any sense in terms of the sin of willful neglect.
Zahakiel: We could point out here that Moses, like every Bible writer, had a distinctive style that can influence the way we read the text. For example, Moses simply says, “she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.” If that was all we knew of the event, it might seem like an obvious conclusion to draw that he was there the entire time and Eve, having taken a bite, simply turned around and offered what was left to Adam. The phrase “her husband with her” might give the impression that he was “with her” at the time when she took the fruit, but this would be an unjustified conclusion.
Just as John’s style is to repeat himself very often (as we’ve noted in other studies) so Moses’ style involves flowing through a narrative with a focus on the events themselves, but not necessarily on the timing of these events. This is precisely what gives some modern skeptics problems with the first two chapters of Genesis, and some have concluded, because of Moses’ way of writing, that there are actually two separate accounts of the creation that conflict with each other. We won’t go into the details of that specific issue in this study, but another brief example should illustrate what I mean.
We read, “And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch.” (Gen 4:17a) Now, we know that Cain’s wife was also a child of Adam and Eve, and for several reasons. But when do we even read that they had other children? We do not discover that until this verse: “And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years; and he begat sons and daughters.” (Gen 5:4) Misunderstanding Moses’ style might make it seem that he is saying, “After Adam had begotten Seth he begat other sons and daughters” because of the fact that they are not mentioned until after Seth. But the verse does not say that Adam had no other children between Abel and Seth; it just says that he lived eight hundred years after the birth of this third named son, and he also had children other than these. Similarly, familiarity with Moses’ style of writing provides no justification for the idea that Adam was with Eve at the time of her temptation, only that he was with her when he ate the fruit.
Are there any questions at this point?
Rita: None.
Qinael: No.
Ye: No.
Barb: No.
Crystle: No.
Guerline: No.
Zahakiel: Confirmation is found in the principles we have been studying. Adam was a part of the “very good” creation; there was no flaw in his character, no sin polluting his soul until the transgression involving the Tree of The Knowledge of Good and Evil. This is not to say that judgmental error was impossible, but there was no “sin” in him, and that is an important distinction when discussing righteousness and transgression.
If Adam had allowed his wife to wander away, that could be considered an error. As Eve did wander away, this was certainly an error. But had Adam been there and, knowing the explicit instructions of Yahweh regarding the tree, allowed his wife to listen to the serpent’s words and then take the fruit, he would have placed himself in a position of submission to her now-unsanctified judgment and worse, would have deliberately neglected to do his proper duty as husband.
The Bible contains a description of the role of the husband, which is based upon the relationship of Christ and the Church, which in turn is based upon the relationship between the Father and the Son. (1Cor 11:3) Because of its divine basis, we know that the relationship between spouses has nothing to do with the changes made at the entrance of sin. We read, “Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the Church, and gave Himself for It; that He might sanctify and cleanse It with the washing of water by the word, that He might present It to Himself a glorious Church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that It should be holy and without blemish. So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself.” (Eph 5:25-28)
Now compare that passage describing a proper husband (of which Adam was a perfect prototype) with the image of our first father standing quietly at Eve’s side while Satan’s snake-like form convinced her to fall away from light into darkness. It doesn’t quite fit, does it?
Rita: No.
Zahakiel: Had it been so there would have been a sin imputed to the human race even before Eve bit into the forbidden fruit; and willful neglect, as we have seen, is sin, for James explicitly calls it “evil.” Yet we are told that it was the eating of the fruit that caused guilt to come upon our first parents. “And [Yahweh] said, ‘Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat?’” (Gen 3:11) Yahweh did not ask if Adam had failed in his duty as a husband, or if he had allowed Eve to be tempted despite his full presence and knowledge. He did not ask Adam if he had allowed another to ignore the danger of which he had already been warned (Gen 2:17) regarding the fruit of the forbidden tree. Instead He asked, “Did you eat of the fruit?” This was the transgression that concerned the Creator; this was the problem at hand.
What we find, then, is that Mrs. White’s additional insights into the events of Genesis are not only consistent with the narrative, but point out the only course of events that could have reasonably brought about the events that followed. By understanding the danger of willful neglect, and by seeing the clearly identified transgressions that come about from participating in it, we must conclude that the serpent, being “subtle,” chose an unguarded moment and set out to deceive the one who would be more receptive to his charms. (1Tim 2:14)
Note, again, that Eve was described as being “deceived.” She was genuinely misled by the serpent, resulting in a genuine error. But, as we have seen above, ignorance that leads to errors does not remove the need for rebuke and chastening. Ignorance does not remove the consequences of our actions, which is precisely why deciding not to learn something in order to be less accountable (willing ignorance) is a guaranteed pathway to ruin.
Are there any questions?
Rita: None.
Crystle: No.
Ye: No.
Guerline: No.
Application to Practice
Zahakiel: By way of a summary, we know that the word for “Sin” in the New Testament means, “To miss the mark.” It is a failure to achieve something. Specifically, it is a failure to achieve something that is offered to us as a necessity, and by the infinite sacrifice and tireless ministry of Yahshua. The worldly mind may think, “How can God punish failure? Where is the justice in that?” The truth is that failure is a great crime if success has already been purchased for us at a great price and we then refuse it. A man who has a terminal disease, but fails to apply a cure to which he has full access, will die in due course. Is this “unfair?” No – this is the natural result of his inability to act. What the Christian must do is learn to see transgression as a deadly disease… more dangerous, and more contagious, than any ailment of the physical body.
If this is done, he will not hesitate to leap at the cure: the justification of Yahshua and the path of righteousness He bids us walk. He says to us, “Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.” (Mat 11:29, 30)
The walk may be challenging, yes, because we have a powerful enemy and a war with sin and self. Yet it is not difficult in terms of being unattainable. It is a “peaceful war” if we can conceive of such a thing. We have been given every advantage, therefore we are rightly asked, “How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation?” (Heb 2:3, emphasis added)
The author speaks rightly… those who do not obtain salvation will come short (i.e., “miss the mark”) because they have neglected it. They may not neglect to hear the words of the Gospel, or to respond to the claims of Christ and submit to baptism. They may not neglect to tell others that they are Christians, and believe in the world to come. Yet if they neglect the teachings and example of Christ, and prefer their own way to the path He has marked out for them, they will assuredly miss some blessing He had placed along the road for their benefit, and that blessing may prove to be the very thing that would have confirmed their souls in life everlasting.
Zahakiel: Are there any questions or comments here?
Rita: None.
Pastor “Chick”: No.
Guerline: No.
Ye: No.
Conclusion
Zahakiel: Then finally, there is a practical application of understanding the danger of avoiding the right actions, or the knowledge that would tell us what these actions are. Our Messiah was our perfect example, yet He was always seeking to lay hold of the Father’s wisdom and power. He “increased in wisdom and stature” (Luke 2:52) by obedience to both Yahweh and His earthly parents, (verse 51) and by earnest prayer. (Luke 6:12)
King David, though a “lesser light,” was nevertheless a man after Yahweh’s own heart. (Acts 13:22) He provides us with the method of success for avoiding willful neglect. We read him saying, “Shew me thy ways, O Yahweh; teach me thy paths.” (Psa 25:4) “For thou art my Rock and my Fortress; therefore for thy name’s sake lead me, and guide me.” (Psa 31:3) “Teach me thy way, O Yah; I will walk in thy truth. Unite my heart to fear thy name.” (Psa 86:11) “Teach me, O Yahweh, the way of thy statutes; and I shall keep it unto the end.” (Psa 119:33)
Many are the instances we could cite in which David asked for wisdom and knowledge. When his son Solomon was at the height of his power, it was then that he was most dependent upon the gifts that the Almighty had promised him. (1Kings 4:29) We are not, it is revealed, ever to avoid obtaining wisdom and knowledge. “Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom, and with all thy getting get understanding.” (Pro 4:8)
Accountability, though we often use it in a somewhat negative sense when discussing corporate guilt, is not – itself – a bad thing. The accountability of a righteous man is a measure of his maturity, of his responsibility, of the degree to which Yahweh has entrusted him with the tools of success for this life and beyond. We should not be concerned with what Yahweh will have us do, nor should we imagine that they would be difficult or impossible. Being discontent with the role that the Gospel would have us play is one of the first steps toward the neglect of duty, and this is one of the reasons why the Sabbath-rest principle is the “seal” of the committed Christian.
Zahakiel: Paul said to Timothy, though it certainly applies to us all, “Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery.” (1Tim 4:14) Agape-love would leave no avenue untried for the salvation of souls, no weapon of our warfare unused in the day of battle. Let us not, therefore, neglect our talents and our skills, but let us be diligent to place them on the altar of our faith so that others may see the fire of our devotion and gather themselves together unto the Israel of Yah.
Are there any questions before we close?
Rita: Would you please restate the statement about the role regarding the sabbath rest principle in another manner?
Zahakiel: Yes, that “discontent” leads to a neglect of duty. If we are content with our calling, essentially being in Sabbath-rest, then we will be defended against falling into this neglect.
Rita: Good. Got it.
Zahakiel: Ok :) Pastor, will you offer a closing prayer?
Pastor “Chick”: Father in
Heaven,
Please make the teaching of
this day effectual in the hearts of all present and all who read later. May the Sabbath of YAH be our seal of joy
and gladness, forever more.
In YAHshua’s holy name, AMEN!
Qinael: Amen.
Zahakiel: Amen.
Guerline: Amen.
Rita: Amen.
Barb: Amen.
Crystle: Amen.
