That word “swaddling”. . .
The KJV Bible contains the word “swaddling” in its text. That word caught my attention the other day so I decided to research the matter to see if God wasted a word on us humans. I first noticed it was in the Book of Luke and was a “sign” to the Jews (and us guys too!). I looked closer and found out that “swaddling” and “manger” were THE SIGN (the two had to go together, sort of like my left side and my right side. . . one is not complete without the other). Well, my curiosity increased and here is what I found. . . .
“And she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn.” Luke 2: 7
“And this shall be a sign unto you; Ye shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger.” Luke 2: 12
The ancient Jewish prophet Micah foretold the birthplace for the coming Messiah seven hundred years before the birth of Jesus Christ. Micah said that the Son of God would be born in the little insignificant village near Jerusalem called Bethlehem. History records that Jesus Christ, the Messiah, was indeed born in Bethlehem, not in Nazareth where He was raised, not in Capernaum where He conducted His ministry, not even in Jerusalem where He was crucified, buried, and resurrected, but Jesus Christ was born in Bethlehem.
The actual birthplace of Jesus Christ in the little town of Bethlehem has a prophetic significance both in the past and the future. The past significance of Migdal Edar: Migdal Edar, the tower of the flock mentioned in Micah 4:8, is the watchtower where the priestly shepherds would watch over their flocks in the shepherd's fields there at Bethlehem.
It was in the lower portion of this watchtower that the birthing of the lambs would take place. The shepherds would wrap the newborn lambs in swaddling clothes to protect the body of the lambs which would be offered as sacrifice at the Temple just four miles away in Jerusalem. Wrapped in swaddling clothes to keep the new lambs without spot or blemish, they would be laid in a manger until they had calmed down.
Yes, the lamb was wrapped in swaddling clothes to protect it from any harm and they laid the lamb in a manger lined with soft hay. (Remember the lamb for sacrifice must be without blemish. A bruised or broken bone would disqualify it.) Once the lamb had settled down from the birthing process, the shepherd would remove the swathing materials and deliver the lamb to its mother. The lamb would receive special care from the shepherd/priests because this lamb would be sacrificed for the sins of the people.
The prophetic significance of Migdal Edar: the priestly shepherds in their fields near Bethlehem on that Christmas Eve knew where to go to find the newborn Messiah, Jesus Christ. He would be found where the angel had told them, wrapped in swaddling clothes lying in a manger in the lower floor of the tower of the flock, Migdal Edar, and He would be there as the Lamb to be sacrificed to take away the sin of the world.
The shepherd/priests had trained all of their lives for this very moment. To the common passerby, seeing a baby in a manger meant very little; however, to the shepherd/priest it was a sign of the coming Messiah. They were keenly aware that the Messiah would one day free the people from their sins. A baby, announced by the heavenly choir, lying in a manger, wrapped in swaddling clothes was more than they could handle – they “came with haste.” They immediately recognized the sign – this baby was the One born to die for the sins of the world.
Micah 4:8 also speaks of the fact that this One born in the tower of the flock, Migdal Edar, Jesus Christ would setup His dominion, His Kingdom in Jerusalem, only several miles from where He had been born. The actual site, Migdal Edar, for the cradle of Jesus Christ, would also reveal the prophecy for where Jesus Christ the Messiah would wear His crown as the King of kings and the Lord of lords for a coming future kingdom right here on earth.
I’m glad I have the KJV!! I don’t want to miss out on any of those blessings contained in God’s Word.
Are you made "whole" or made "well"?
In Luke 17: 19, Jesus said to the Samaritan leper who had returned to thank Christ for healing his leprosy, "…thy faith hath made thee whole." Other translations, including the NKJV, replace "whole" with "well". The word "well" has to do with making a sick person "well" or making a diseased person, such as this leper "well" or healed of his leprosy which Christ had done. But that is as far as "well" goes and a reader only gets a portion of what God is saying.
The word "whole" as recorded in the 1611 KJV is so much more than that. Yes, "whole" includes the above definition of "well" but it includes oh so much more. "Whole" in this verse comes from the Greek word "so-zoe" and is the word for "save" and the root word for "salvation" ( to save, deliver, protect, KEEP safe--eternal security!!). That leper was made "well" but he was also made "whole". He got saved that day!! Just getting "well" is not enough. The leper's faith allowed Christ to do the "whole" (Oh, yeah!) job on the leper: heal his body and save his soul.
For more blessings to your heart, "whole" here also means:
1. to deliver one who is in danger of destruction, to save or rescue;
2. to preserve one in such danger;
3. to deliver one from the penalties of the Messianic judgment (hell);
4. to save one from the evils which obstruct the reception of the Messianic deliverance (salvation). In other words, the devil wants to keep you from salvation but God won't let him!! That's exciting. That's being made "whole".
The leper, now healed, eventually died, but he now lives in Heaven and is still "whole" for all eternity. Christ came to save (make people "whole") for eternity, not just make people "well" so they could postpone their deaths a bit longer.
It gets even better! "Whole" is the same word as the word "save" in the following two verses, given as examples. Try replacing the word "save" with getting them "well". There is a difference and the 1611 KJV preserved that wealth of difference for our blessings today.
"And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins." Matthew 1: 21
"For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost." Matthew 18: 11
GRJ 7-19-2011
“Only Begotten”
One of my favorite verses that embraces those two words is John 3:16 “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” Yep, that’s the 1611 KJV. Other versions of the Bible replace those two words with “one and only” or just “only”. That is, the word “begotten” is simply discarded. Wait a minute, not so fast pleaseJ
Is Jesus the “one and only” son or the “only” son of God? No, He is not! “But as many as received him, to them gave He power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:” John 1: 12 “And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified together.” Romans 8: 17 Yes, if you have trusted Christ as your Saviour, then you have been “born again”, John 3:3, 7, and you are a son (or daughter) of God. The KJV has it right. Those Bible versions which replace “begotten” with “one and only” or “only” overlook or simply discard the full wealth of the word “begotten”. Thankfully, the KJV kept that wealth for us to enjoy.
You see, there is only one “begotten” Son of God. Amen!! But there is not a “one and only” son of God because I’m a son of God also, thanks to Calvary!! Amen againJ Here are some “gold nuggets of blessings for you” from the word “begotten”. God put it there to bless you. Here goes. . .
With reference to Christ, the phrase "the only begotten from the Father," John 1: 14, indicates that as the Son of God He was the sole representative of the Being and character of the One who sent Him. The “glory” in v. 14 was that of a unique relationship and the word "begotten" does not imply a beginning of His Sonship. It suggests relationship indeed, but must be distinguished from generation as applied to man. You and I have a beginning, not Christ! And, Christ is of the direct bloodline of God, the Father, not us. We are “adopted” into the family through faith in Christ. Ephesians 2: 8, 9 and John 14: 6. There is more!!!
We can only rightly understand the term "the only begotten" when used of the Son, in the sense of unoriginated relationship. The begetting is not an event of time, however remote, but a fact irrespective of time. The Christ did not become or have a beginning, but necessarily and eternally is the Son. He, a Person, possesses every attribute of pure Godhood. This necessitates eternity, absolute being. The expression also suggests the thought of the deepest affection, as in the case of the OT word yachid, variously rendered, "only son," Jeremiah 6:26; Genesis 22:2; Amos 8:10; Zechariah 12:10; "only beloved," Proverbs 4:3, and "darling," Psalms 22: 20; 35:17.
In John 1: 18 the clause "The Only Begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father," expresses both His eternal union with the Father in the Godhead and the ineffable intimacy and love between them, the Son sharing all the Father's counsels and enjoying all His affections. Thus, in John 3: 16 the statement, "God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten son," must not be taken to mean that Christ became the Only Begotten Son by Incarnation. In John 3: 18 the phrase "the Name of the Only Begotten Son of God" focuses upon the full revelation of God's character and will, His love and grace, as conveyed in the name of One who, being in a unique relationship to Him, was provided by Him as the object of faith.
Yes, Christ is the “only begotten” Son of God, without beginning or end, but you and I are also “sons” of God. I am thankful for the difference and I am thankful for the wealth that the 1611 KJV preserves for us today.
7-21-2011 GRJ