Daniel

So, I began a study of the book of Daniel using the book by David Jeremiah call The Agents of Babylon.  The book begins each chapter with a fictional telling of what happens in the chapter of Daniel that is under study, and then moves into what the scriptures say and his comments about the book.  I am finding the book very fascinating and am discovering some extremely interesting facts not only about the Book of Daniel but also about the culture of the people during that time.

I was so amazed by how the story of Daniel starts because I never looked at Daniel as someone who had suffered because of his capture, march to Babylon, and what he underwent once he reached Babylon.  The fact that he was castrated never entered my mind even though I knew what the word ‘eunuch’ meant.  How many who read Daniel take in the fact that Daniel would have been very young at the time of his captivity and that he would have suffered the fact of being made less than he was at such a young age.  Not only was he faced with losing his family at the time, but he lost the ability to ever have a family.  According to tradition, those who served the king were made Eunuchs so that they could focus all their time on service to their king, but this also allowed Daniel to focus all his time on God – I had never thought about that before.  The beginning of the book did make me stop and think, very seriously, about Daniel, about his fate, about his future, and about the trust he had to have in God to help him survive and then prosper.

I have to say that Daniel faced a lot of trials in you early life; brutally ripped from his face, forced to leave his home and homeland, castrated at a young age (best guess is fourteen or fifteen years old), lost any future family he might have had, put into a rigorous training program, and then judged whether he was worthy to serve the king.  This does not include what he underwent while growing up and serving the king, for during that time there were men who hated him because he was above them in favor with the king, but those men never took the time to understand why Daniel was higher in favor then them.  Daniel did not only serve God faithfully, but he also served his kings faithfully, and the men who envied and hated Daniel were serving themselves and their own pride and position; had they served their king as faithfully as Daniel served both his kings, then they too might have been put in higher positions, but they did not.

It is something for us to remember, and something we should ask ourselves.  Are we serving God faithfully?  Are we serving those we work for faithfully?  How can we be rewarded if we are not faithful, trustworthy, and good servants?

Have you ever wondered?

 What made Enoch the way he was?  Here is a man who walked with God every day, but nothing is ever mentioned about what happened while he walked with God.

  The next question is whether this is a figurative or literal walk.  According to Strong's, the Hebrew word is 'halak', which means "to walk (in a great variety of applications, lit. and fig.)", and Dake's notes state that 'halak' means 'to walk up and down, be conversant'.  I like the meaning of 'be conversant' because to me that means they talked.  How great it must feel to know that God is talking with you.  Most commentaries say that Enoch lived a Godly life and followed God, but why did the writer use the 'walk' rather than 'lived'.  The writer could have said Enoch followed God's teaching and lived a godly life, but he didn't.  In fact, twice the scripture says, "Enoch walked with God" (Gen. 5:22 & 24).  If all scripture is God's words, then why would God have the writer use 'walk' to describe a particular way of living, why not say 'lived' rather than 'walked'?  It gives one much to contemplate if one desires to contemplate such things, and I for one, do.  In fact, I enjoy asking questions and then trying to dig for answers, some of which I may never find, but I still enjoy the search.

  Now, imagine if 'walk' is the literal meaning of the relationship between Enoch and God.  One then must ask, what did the two of them talk about, for I cannot image one walking with God and not talking to Him, and in this conversation, God would be talking with Enoch as well.  In a way, I envy Enoch because of having such a close relationship with God; a close enough relationship that "God took him" (Gen. 5:24).  God only takes one other person after Enoch and that was Elijah (2Kings 2).  I try to imagine what kinds of things God told Enoch during their 300-year walk.  Just try to image what 300 years would constitute in a very close relationship with God.

  In Dake's Annotated Reference Bible, the side margin notes that "Enoch and Noah were the only antediluvians who 'walked with God'."  Considering the length of time that men lived and the short time span between Adam and Eve being in the garden and the occurrence of the flood, you would think more men would have walked with God.  That is not to say that there were no other godly men, for Seth's line had some men who did live godly lives, but none of them is said to have 'walked with God'.  I can only wonder why more of them did not walk with God.  What kept them from walking with God?  Dake's also says in the margin that "This walk might have been as literal as with Adam" (Gen. 2:19; 3:8).  I like the fact that someone believes as I do, or at least seems to believe as I do.

  So, back to Enoch and his walking with God.  Can you even imagine literally walking with God every single day, and was God physically walking with him, or is this a metaphorical depiction of God's actions?  The first time I ever read about Enoch, and I must have been about 11 or 12, I had a very visual image of Enoch actually walking through gardens and fields with God beside him and the two of them carrying on a verbal dialog.  Even at that age, I interpreted this to be a literal rather than figurative walk.  I still believe it was literally the two of them walking and talking together.  Interestingly enough, nothing is ever said about what God talked to him about.  One is bound to ask, what could God have been telling Enoch?  We know from Jude 14 that Enoch was a prophet because Jude says that Enoch prophecied the second coming of Christ.  This is one of the things that God had to have talked to Enoch about, and if there was one thing then there had to be more that God talked to him about.

  In Jewish tradition, there is a book of Enoch, but it is not a part of the Torah nor was it included in the Bible.  I always wondered why. There are versions of the Book of Enoch online, but I cannot help but wonder if it is the original from the Hebrew, or if someone might have added to or deleted from it over time.  There are also copies that can be purchased on Amazon.com and there you can also find information about the authors of the different translations of The Book of Enoch.  I will not provide any links because I will not say that what is in the book is to be believed as the word of God.  I think if one reads it, they should do so carefully and with discretion.  Nothing, in my opinion, should be believed at face value when it comes to dealings of faith or God; instead, it must be compared to what we do know as God's word in the bible, and then prayed about carefully.  So much for my warnings, back to Enoch.

 The next thing that is interesting about Enoch is that his walk did not take place until after the birth of his son, Methuselah (I found it interesting that Methuselah means "when he is dead it shall come" and Dake's adds that 'it' is the deluge).  Enoch was 65 years old when his son was born, and then it say that Enoch walked with God for 300 years.  In Genesis, it then states that "all the days of Enoch were 365 years", so the first 65 years, it appears as if Enoch was not walking with God.  Does that mean he did not live a godly life, or that after the birth of Methuselah something changed and the relationship he had with God become more or, maybe, much deeper. If Methuselah's name is prophetic, then Enoch had to have had a relationship with God before his birth, but why not say Enoch walked with God all his life unless there was some type of change in Enoch's relationship with God.  This leads me to ask, what type of change occurred?  My only answer seems to relate to a stronger or deeper relationship, or maybe a more spiritual relationship than prior to Methuselah's birth.  Many interesting questions still to ponder.

 If Enoch was so close to God, 'Why is there so little about him in the Bible?' is my next question.  He is only mentioned thrice; once in Genesis, then in Hebrews, and again in Jude.  (Gen. 5:22-24; Heb. 11:5; Jude 1:14-15)  As stated before, Jude reveals that God must have told Enoch something of the end times because Enoch prophesied about the return of the Lord.  What else, however, did God tell Enoch during those walks?  As a prophet, were there other things that Enoch shared with people?  The Bible tells us nothing else, but think about it, 300 years is a long time; a much longer time than anyone of us will ever live; long enough for Enoch and God to share much with each other.

  There are a great many questions to ask about Enoch beside his walks with God. For instance, what did Enoch do or know in order for God to take him? What did Enoch's family do when Enoch disappeared or did they know that God had taken him? What do we need to do to emulate Enoch if we so choose to emulate him?  

     Then again, are there Christians who want to emulate Enoch? Who is ready to walk off with God or be taken by God? Would God allow anyone to achieve that point in their relationship today? The scriptures do state that all men are allotted to die once, which means both Enoch and Elijah are still allotted to die.  This is why many claim that the two prophets in Revelations are Enoch and Elijah because neither of them has physically died.

Knowing and Trusting

". . . For I know the one in whom I trust . . ."  2 Timothy 1:12

How true are these words?  It is not the fact that I trust Him that I would question, but the comment 'I know the one."  How well do I really know Him, and how well do I need to know Him before trusting Him?  I guess the real issue is not 'trust' but 'know'.  How well do I want to know Him?  How well can I get to know Him?

One of the people I most admire in the bible is Enoch.  Enoch walked with God and became so close to God that he one day walked off with God.  What kind of a relationship did they really have?  Why are we not told more about Enoch?

So, what do I really know about God?

• He is an all loving father.  And how do I know this?  What father, if he did not have an infinite amount of love, would sacrifice his true son for the sins of his adopted children?  Only one who had so much love that in him that it transcends the understanding of man.
• He is the creator; this is something I have no doubts about even if I cannot physically prove it.
• He is forgiving.  This goes back to my first statement about Him being all loving.
• He is all knowing, for why would God even create man if he did not know ahead of time that there would be those who were worth His effort and who would love Him beyond all humanly reason.
• He is trustworthy.  He made a promise to Adam and Eve after they fell that He would send one who would crush the serpent, and He did by sending part of Himself in the form of a son, and then willingly offered that life to save mankind from his sins.
• He loves me; see what He did as a loving father, for if that is not proof of His love for me, than nothing is.  This statement is more than "He is an all loving father" because it pinpoints me specifically.  I feel it is very important to  remember that He Loves Me, not just everybody else because when I look at it that way, I forget that He does these things for me personally not a just some random person.
• He knows me; it says in the bible that He knew us before the foundation of the earth (Ephesians 1:4), and He tells Jeremiah that He knew him before He formed him (Jeremiah 1:5).  If that is true for Jeremiah, then I believe it is true of me also.  Besides, how can you love someone so unconditionally without know them?

This might not be everything that I know for sure, but I believe it is a good start.  I do like how the amplified bible reads: ". . . for I know (perceive, have knowledge of, and am acquainted with) Him Whom I have believed (adhered to and trusted in and relied on) . . . " 2 Timothy 1:12.

Is it not true that it is hard to trust those in whom you do not believe or have no acquaintance with or knowledge of?  I really like the term "acquainted with."  The Merriam Dictionary defines 'acquaint' as "to cause to know personally," and is that not what our relationship should be.  We should know our Lord personally; we should have a personal relationship with Him, and when we do, it is much easier for us to trust and believe in Him.