Millstones Millstones are mentioned in the bible at least eleven times. Their qualities are used as examples of issues that writers were talking about. There are some things we cannot explain in words such as trying to define the differences between red and green to a person born blind. In bible times everyone knew what millstones were. So they were used for several lessons. Mills had two stones. The bottom fixed one was very hard and flat. The top one could be a small hand held stone or a large round wheel that was often dragged about by a donkey or slave. In early bible times every household would have had some sort of a mill for grinding. Possession meant the difference between survival and starvation, life or death. Wheat and other cereal crops contain much of the nutrients we need for life, but they must be processed. That processing involves crushing or grinding and then cooking to make bread or similar. Grinding was done by rubbing the grains between the two flat stones until they became flour. To get the two stones with flat faces without iron or other tools available was difficult. Possession was so important that the Mosaic law said that a millstone may not be taken in lieu of a debt. That could be equivalent to murder. Hard. That bottom stone was very hard and did not wear away quickly or the flour was full of sand. In modern times we might say “as hard as iron”. But then Jeremiah talks about the enemy monster which has a heart as hard as a bottom millstone. That gave the immediate picture of someone who could not be persuaded by high level talks or similar “diplomacy”. Paul says in Galatians that if anyone preaches anything different to what he has said, let him be accursed. Anathema is the original word he used. That is strong. Jesus said to some church people “depart from me for I never knew you”. These are hard quotes and need thought. Precious The Bible records an incident where an enemy invaded a city and the inhabitants took refuge in a tower. The attackers piled branches around the tower which, if ignited, would be the end of those inhabitants. We read that a woman, in desperation, grabbed her precious top millstone and dropped it on the head of the leader of the attackers which cracked his skull. The attackers were so upset they gave up and went away. That one woman was prepared to forfeit her life by hunger by sacrificing her precious millstone rather than all her fellow townsfolk being killed by the enemy. It was the only thing she had to hand. In the event the only one who died was the man with the cracked skull. However, in the Bible account, the cracked skull did not immediately kill that leader. But he was so ashamed that he might have been killed by a woman that he commanded his servant to stick a sword through him which proved to be terminal. Is pride precious? Fatal. A millstone had to be heavy enough to grind the cereal grains but light enough for someone to push it round and then lift it off to sweep up the flour. Everyone knew what a millstone was like and Jesus used that knowledge when He says “If you give one of these simple childlike believers a hard time, bullying or taking advantage of their simple trust, you’ll soon wish you hadn’t. You’d be better off dropped in the middle of the lake with a millstone draped around your neck”. Fatal. Just like the woman on the roof of the tower treated the obvious attackers. Jesus follows this warning saying if your hand, foot or eye distract you, cut them off in Mark chapter 9. He is not saying that the things you might do or go to or even see are bad in themselves. It is when they cause distractions. Jesus did not say a millstone was bad. It could be used badly. Conclusions. Words have limitations. Ezekiel says “I saw the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the Lord”. He was just lost for words. Millstones here are used to illustrate lessons which may not be otherwise defined. Jesus uses lots of parables in the gospels to illustrate points. Some of them must have been hilarious to the people then. Does the Christian faith have hard limits? Is the Nicean creed the basis of our belief? The dropped millstone is recorded in two of the bible books. Jesus’ condemnation of inaccurate teaching is in each of the first three gospels. So these things must be important to avoid the millstone treatment. What is understood to be precious to people now, a computer, TV, mobile, front garden? Rowan Williams has said that the CofE could almost be idolatrous with its fixations on procedures and rituals and missing its target. A good thing round the neck is a good thing proving fatal. Bob
Dramatic honesty<br>The usual practice in churches is to read only a select few verses as the lesson which may miss the message of a whole book. Bear Grylls has brought more of the human life of Jesus to our attention with his “Greatest Story” book. Amos was not an intellectual from the university but a sheep farmer who did not fear to put things plainly. He used Nathan’s technique of communication by getting people to judge others before realising they were actually judging themselves. Despite his humble position, I can imagine him standing speaking to groups of people and receiving cheers and clapping as he told the truth about the bad things of others. Laughter too. He honestly lays accusations on the nations, towns and settlements that are neighbours. Almost earthy humour. First in the North, then South, North West, South West, East South East and the South. They were cruel and made weapons even for others to do atrocities. They did slave trading, even selling whole communities. They disregarded treaties and were not just. They were obsessed with idols. He used a set form of words for these accusations. In an identical format he then pointed to his audience and says in effect “You are no better. You may not have done all these things yourself, but you have not done anything to stop them”. A moment of drama when indignation becomes painful. <br>An absolute standard<br>The essential message of the book is summarised in the statement “Can two walk together unless they be agreed?” in chapter 3. He then gives an honest lesson in logic using words and language that only Old Testament prophets seem permitted to use. As an example he said that these other people “sold the righteous for silver and the needy for the price of a pair of sandals. They trampled on the heads of the poor as upon the dust of the ground and denied justice to the oppressed”. He goes on to say that although his audience may not actually do these obviously cruel and inhumane practices, they did not do anything to prevent or oppose them. Intentions as well as actions are equally judged. He says that God will set a plumb line to define justice. In modern construction we may use a spirit level or theodolite for accuracy, but in those days a piece of string with a weight on it was used to find the vertical. That was called a plumb line. It was an absolute standard. You could not argue with it or make excuses. So is God’s judgement.<br>Inclusive?<br>This message of separation may seem at odds with things like Jesus’ going to dinner with a Roman centurion, also Zacchaeus the tax collector, touching a lepper, the woman at the well, eating with sinners, healing on the Sabbath, accepting Palestinians and the thief on the cross. David was a really nasty piece of work with his fighting and womanising. Jesus’s teaching is clear that some will be saved and others not. But it is Jesus who will judge, not us. Whole books have been written on this message when it is really quite simple. Amos is telling his audience to accept the people but reject their attitudes and actions.<br>Warnings<br>This was all at an interesting period in history. The northern kingdom of Israel was doing good trade and seemed secure. The southern lot based in Jerusalem also were well off and at peace with neighbours. Only twenty years later the Assyrians decided they wanted a safe trade route to Egypt and beyond and so attacked and devastated Israel in the North. These Israelis were scattered and never really recovered their lands for many hundreds of years and then only partially under domination. The Assyrians confident of victory marched on towards Jerusalem where a God fearing king had led a reformation. What followed was one of the most dramatic victories which we may look at later and the southern people survived for another hundred and twenty years. Amos predicted this devastation from riches to annihilation accurately. They took no notice of the warnings and suffered the consequences while the southern kingdom listened and acted.<br>Judgement inevitable<br>Amos reminds this northern kingdom that God had promised blessings but they had rejected God with a perversion of religion to injustice and decadence. God gave them five repeated stimuli to repent which were painful (famine, drought, plague etc.) but even then declares the Lord they had not returned to him. So a final disaster was coming. That disaster continued about five hundred years later when they asked the Romans to come in “to protect them from attacks” and suffered accordingly. The last few verses of the book reminded them of God’s original promise whose results were not seen for several thousands of years.<br>Questions<br>Amos uses amusement and basic language to get his message across. He must have offended a lot of people. Was that right? Are our rituals, attitudes and actions justifiable in the light of the general confession we recite each Sunday in church? Jesus used recreation in some of his parables. Was he seriously honest with things? Amos does finish his book with a message of restoration and hope.<br>Bob<br><br>
Thomas, seeing is believing ? The sincere melancholic. Thomas is recorded in the first three gospels as being chosen by Jesus to be one of the disciples. It is however John’s one that gives us also four incidents about Thomas illustrating his character and so what we might learn from his behaviour. Maybe that was because John, the academic, had sympathy for Thomas, the despondent pessimist. The first record is just before the crucifixion when Jesus and the group had left Jerusalem and went and hid in the countryside when they realised that the then church leaders were so jealous that they determined to do away with Jesus. The group was safe for the moment, but then Jesus tells them that he is going back. Thomas resignedly says “Let us also go that we may die with him”. Is this bravery or suicidal? This is just after Lazarus had died and dramatically come alive out of a sealed tomb. So Thomas must have been feeling confused. The fact that Lazarus is brought to life again and they all say they had seen him does not seem to cheer Thomas as it did the others. Muddled Not long after this the group did set out to go back to Jerusalem for the Passover feast where rumours that Jesus was on his way caused quite a crowd of people to gather to welcome him. The crowd were excited about Lazarus and really thought Jesus must be the promised one. They sang praises. But the church leaders were resentful saying “This is getting us nowhere, look how the whole world has gone after him”. That too must have made Thomas even more confused. Were the church leaders wrong? Then comes the last supper and Jesus talks about going away to prepare a place for them. Dear Thomas blurts out “Lord, we do not know where you are going so how can we know the way?” This prompts Jesus to give a straight answer when he says “I am the way the truth and the life”. The word he uses for “way” (odos) has two meanings which may not be obvious in English. They are “the entrance” and “the journey”. This must have muddled poor Thomas even more after the celebrations of the crowds, the threats of the church leaders and the secret venue for their meal. Entrance yes, but a journey can go on for a long time perhaps, he thinks. Proof needed Now to add to Thomas’ confusion Jesus has just said he is the journey and gets killed most unpleasantly. We do not know if Thomas witnessed the death, but he had no doubts at all that it was final. His melancholia returns and, although he had seen Lazarus come back to life after four days, he feels he cannot share the rest of the group’s excitement when they say they have “seen the Lord”. He wants visual proofs of scars. “Unless I have touched him and seen his hands, I cannot believe”. John, who records this in his gospel, is also keen on proofs as he says in his epistle ”things we have heard and seen with our eyes and touched we declare unto you”. John has gone from belief to knowing. He had no doubts. A week later Jesus appears again, exactly knows Thomas’ doubts and in an act of sympathy and love tells Thomas to put his finger on the nail holes in his hands and shows him his side where the spear went. I can imagine the grin on Jesus’ face as he said that. Jesus knew. Thomas does not put out his finger but obeys Jesus’ command “stop doubting and believe”. His reaction was immediate “My Lord and my God”. Not “you are God”, it was “my God”. Jesus then comes out with that wonderful promise “Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed”. Proof got At Jesus’ first meeting with the group they thought they had seen a ghost. Jesus actually says “touch me and see, a ghost does not have flesh and bones”. He asks for something to eat and has some broiled fish. Ghosts don’t eat food. A week or so later, just to confirm that he was not an apparition, Jesus is recorded as showing himself to Thomas and the rest of the group who had got depressed again. They had decided to go fishing and saw someone on the shore cooking who asked whether they had caught anything and got that silly advice to try the other side of the boat where there probably was not the equipment for lifting a net. “We always put the net out on this side”. You can imagine the exclamations when they had counted one hundred and fifty three fish. They all breakfasted on fish and bread. Then the ascension and “a cloud took him out of their sight”. Contemporary records tell us that the group of disciples, faced with the impending persecution of Christians and destruction of most of Jerusalem, divided up the known world between them. Thomas was allocated the East to India. The records tell us that he was captured and sold as a slave to a merchant going to India. That got him there for free where he started telling people about Jesus and then founded the Syrian Christian community for which there is still some evidence. Questions. Why is all this recorded for us in the Bible? What can we learn from it? Sometimes it cannot be wrong to admit to doubts or lacks of understanding. Jesus himself prayed “Why have you forsaken me?”. Any man born blind who is told about the difference between red and blue cannot understand. He has to accept and trust. Jesus knew about Thomas’ doubts without being told. Thomas needed tactile evidence. Even then he was not ashamed to ask “show me the way”. Is that a fair prayer for us? What evidence should we need to convince other people? Thomas needed several thumps before he said “My God”. References: Greek lexicon, English NIV. Commentaries. Google Josephus .Bob
ReputationsA reputation formed. The Bible is not a linear history book. It is a series of records that God has selected and wants us to learn from. These incidents recorded below cover a period of about fifty or so years around the time of the exiles in 600 BC. Nebuchadnezzar was the king of the very powerful city of Babylon which had raided Jerusalem several times and captured the sacred jewels from the temple and took captives men with potential. Among these captives were Daniel and his three friends. They were sent at royal expense, to the top Babylonian University which had an international reputation to develop their knowledge and skills. That gave Daniel a problem as the University meat rations were from animals sacrificed to Bel and other local idols, so he resolved to go vegetarian. The authorities were sceptical but gave him a three month trial and surprisingly found that he seemed to look better than other students. Daniel now had a reputation. Meanwhile Daniel’s three friends also gained a reputation when they did not bow down to a statue. As a punishment they were thrown into the local blast furnace. These furnaces were fed on tar and bitumen and were the source of much metal production, particularly iron and steel. When the three walked out without even the smell of burning tar on them, the king promoted them to senior government positions. Those three were called Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego who I remembered as Shake-a-bed, Make-a-bed and A-bed-we-go some eighty years ago.A reputation justified. The walls round Babylon city were so thick and wide that four chariots could drive side by side along the top. Huge gates. Absolute security. No worries, even when a small army under Darius the Persian came up and camped round the city. To demonstrate their confidence, Belshazzar who had succeeded Nebuchadnezzar as king got out the golden goblets that had been taken from the Jerusalem temple to show off at a big feast he was giving. (some politicians don’t change much do they?) In the middle of the feast a hand appeared and wrote four words on the wall which no one could understand. “Mene Mene Tekel Upharsin”. The king was so scared that, on the advice of his wife, he got his star student Daniel in to translate. The translation is simple “God has numbered your days and they don’t add up. You have been weighed and you don’t weigh much. Your kingdom has been divided”. (Message) Disaster is forecast. Belshazzar the king was amazed and Daniel and co were further honoured and rewarded, but the warning was ignored.A reputation resented. Meanwhile, Darius had not been idle and had dug a bypass for the river that flowed through the city. In the middle of the feast, he opened the sluices and the water stopped going through the city. All the water ran round the new bypass. The old riverbed became dry. Darius walked in with his army. The kingdom was certainly divided. The record is terse: “At that same night the Babylonian king Belshazzar was murdered and Darius the Mede succeeded him as king aged sixty two.” The new king divided the country up into admin areas and appointed governors for each. Daniel got one and did so well that the new king decided to appoint him supreme governor over all the others who were naturally jealous. They thought that the only way to get at Daniel was to pretend he was disloyal. They persuaded the king to issue a decree that all prayers for the next month must be made only to the king or be lion feed. These pet lions were kept on a diet of two sheep and a human prisoner every day according to Josephus.A reputation tested. Daniel is undeterred and, as was his habit, made his daily prayers to God by the window. The other governors saw him and thought they had won and reported to the king who realised he had been tricked and objected but had to keep to the decree. In front of witnesses Daniel is sealed into the lion cage. The next morning Daniel is pulled out unharmed and the other scheming governors take his place to the delight of the lions who liked fresh meat. The king Darius issues a new decree that Daniel’s “God is the living God, world without end. His kingdom never fails. He is a saviour”. Daniel is treated well from then on and into the reign of Cyrus, who became king of all the Medes and Persians. Daniel does have another dream which forecasts accurately the great empires of the Persians, then the Greeks and finally the Romans. Perhaps for future articles.Questions. Why are these incidences recorded for us now? What should we learn in 2026? Was Daniel’s capture a disaster or was it a part of God’s plan? Was Belshazzar wrong to use the sacred cups for a party? The promise of inevitable judgement is repeated from Genesis to Revelation. God is that judge, not us. The meaning of the inscription written on the wall at the feast is translated in our AV Bibles “You are weighed in the balances and found wanting”. That observation was scary. It must have worried the king yet all he did was to give Danel a promotion and go on with the feast. Jealousy and pride are very strong motivators of behaviour. Do we recognise them in international relations? Being a Christian is considered by some, a soft option. Works like feeding the poor, providing housing, making reparations, net zero, levelling up and other good works without faith may be as good as leaving Christ out of Christian behaviour. Is it like that now? Rules precedent over love? Jesus wept over Jerusalem saying that disaster would come on it “because you did not recognise the time of God’s coming to you”. He said nothing about good works. (Luke 21) But faith without works is dead we are told in the Epistles. Daniel must have had some faith when he prayed by the window and said, “My God is able”. He lived up to his reputation. Quotes from AV and Message BibleBob
