For a full description of the (Y4) reading plan, see the “About” page.
Gen. 13
Lot had a choice to make. He chose the well-watered Jordan valley. I have no idea what his thought process or motivations were for choosing this land other than that a well-watered valley seems like a good choice for all his livestock. I can’t ignore the picture here, though. That Jordan valley must have come across as abundantly rich and beautiful. It must have seemed like the optimal source for the provision and security that Lot needed for himself and all his possessions. By the standard of human reasoning, it was a good choice. But there was a problem with it. Together with all that rich beauty was an abundance of evil, and Lot moved right up to the edge of it.
I don’t know if Lot consulted or even thought about God in making his decision. And I don’t really think it matters. I think Lot is just one more in a long line of men who reveal to us the way of men. Left to our own devices, we head straight for evil. Our desires simply take us there. Our eyes see what looks good and our hearts fail to discern the evil. Abram, on the other hand, is that single point, through which God carries His promise throughout history. Thus we continue to see two paths. There is that narrow line that leads to God, and there is everything else.
Matt. 12
There is no neutrality with regard to our position in Christ. Either we are His or we aren’t. Thus, we are either covered by His righteousness and freed from God’s judgment, or we are dead in our sin and doomed to face the all-consuming wrath of God. We know this because at least twice Jesus removed neutrality from the equation. The first time is here, when the Pharisees accused Him of serving Beelzebul. Jesus pointed out that you can’t serve what you stand against. Then He said, “He who is not with Me is against Me; and he who does not gather with Me scatters.” (Matt. 12:30). Neutrality is not with and is, therefore, against.
The second time Jesus removed neutrality from the equation was sometime after His transfiguration. When the disciples tried to stop someone from casting out demons in Jesus’ name, Jesus told them not to hinder the man. He said, “For he who is not against us is for us.” (Mark 9:40). Taken on its own, this statement could arguably suggest that neutrality is as good as support. I find it interesting, however, that Jesus made both of these statements in a situation involving the casting out of demons. Casting out demons certainly seems like a gathering activity to me, reclaiming a lost soul from the clutches of evil. Thus, Jesus’ first comment was against those who opposed His actions. The second was in support of someone joining in His work. So we can oppose or we can support, and to not support is the same as opposing. Neutral doesn’t exist.
Neh. 2
When King Artaxerxes noticed Nehemiah’s sad demeanor and said, “This is nothing but sadness of heart”, Nehemiah became very afraid. Why would he fear at the king’s expression of concern? It makes me think about Esther. As favored as she was with the king, she did not take that favor for granted. She knew the king’s law still applied to her. If she presented herself to him without his calling her, she faced the risk of death. Nehemiah’s situation was a little different, but I suspect the king’s power was the same if he disapproved of Nehemiah’s request. Thus, I am willing to bet that Nehemiah made his request at the risk of death. My takeaway in that? Simple. I pray to the God of heaven that I, too, would be strong and courageous, even at the risk of death.