"But they soon forgot his works; they did not wait for his counsel"; they craved in the wilderness and tested God, and He gave them what they asked but sent a wasting disease among them (a paraphrase of Psalm 106:13–15).

The psalmist recounts Israel's experience on the way to Canaan. Israel quickly forgot the signs and wonders God did before their eyes in delivering them from Egypt. "They did not wait for his counsel" — that is, they did not trust God's plan, wait for His timing, or follow His leading. Instead, they were led by their cravings. They tested God through grumbling, complaining, and mutinous thoughts. In response God gave them what they desired, but with it the consequence of disease.

"They did not destroy the peoples, as the Lord commanded them," but mixed with the nations, learned their ways, served their idols, and "sacrificed their sons and their daughters to the demons" (a paraphrase of Psalm 106:34–37).

The psalmist recounts Israel's failure to obey God's command concerning the peoples of Canaan. God had warned that such failure would lead Israel to embrace the idolatrous practices of the Canaanites, and that is exactly what happened. What is noteworthy in this psalm is the association of demons with idols. Paul makes the same association: what does he imply — that food offered to idols is anything, or that an idol is anything? No, but what pagans sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God, and he does not want them to be participants with demons (cf. 1 Corinthians 10:19–20).

Idolatry was, in effect, the worship of demons. An idol was nothing in itself; it was a man-made front for demonic powers. So the apparent "answers" to prayer from idols could be the activity of demons among them. Even in Christ's time, the religious leaders recognized that not every power was from God; they knew that demonic powers could do what seemed miraculous (Matthew 12:24). Jesus also foretold that false prophets would come performing great signs and wonders to lead astray, if possible, even the elect (Matthew 24:24). So Christians would distinguish truth from falsehood not simply by displays of power but by the consistency of what was said with what had already been written and confirmed. Paul modeled obedience to the principle, "not to go beyond what is written" (1 Corinthians 4:6). The written testimony of Scripture would be a doctrinal boundary and test for any "new" truth.

The two passages above address two failings of the people God brought out of Egypt with a mighty hand. First, they refused to trust the Lord patiently. Second, they rushed to trust in idols, which were fronts for demonic powers.

Friends, these failings are relevant for us today. Are we trusting the Lord, or do we grumble and complain at home because we are not as blessed as we think we should be? When God wants to teach us to hope in Him even apart from His benefits (Deuteronomy 8:3; Matthew 4:4), do we turn to ungodly and even idolatrous alternatives because God is not forthcoming with His blessings? Are we exchanging the worship of the true God for a lie (Romans 1:25), that is, for counterfeit works of the enemy? So let us wait faithfully on the Lord. As the psalmist also writes: he believes he will look upon the goodness of the Lord in the land of the living; "Wait for the Lord; be strong, and let your heart take courage" (cf. Psalm 27:13–14).

AI-Expanded Reflection

Psalm 106 is a long confession of Israel's history of unfaithfulness, set within a frame of praise: it opens and closes with "Praise the Lord!" and "Give thanks to the Lord, for he is good" (106:1, 48). Between those lines, it recounts one failure after another — at the Red Sea, in the wilderness, at the golden calf, at Kadesh, at Baal-peor. Yet the refrain of God's response is mercy: "Many times he delivered them... Nevertheless, he looked upon their distress" and remembered His covenant (106:43–45). Honest confession of sin and joyful praise for grace belong in the same song.

The link between idols and demonic powers that the comment draws from 106:37 is also found in Deuteronomy 32:17 ("They sacrificed to demons that were no gods") and in Paul's discussion of food offered to idols. Paul holds two truths together: an idol "has no real existence" (1 Corinthians 8:4), and yet idolatry involves real spiritual forces opposed to God (10:20). The comment's point that Scripture is the test for claims of spiritual power follows from Deuteronomy 13:1–3 and 1 John 4:1, which warn that signs alone do not validate a message; faithfulness to God's revealed truth does.

"Then they believed his words; they sang his praise" (Psalm 106:12). "But they soon forgot his works; they did not wait for his counsel" (Psalm 106:13).

These two verses summarize Israel's experience with God throughout its history. God would do a mighty work or bring a great deliverance, as He did at the Red Sea, and the people would believe His words and praise Him for a while. But soon they would forget what He had done and rebel against Him, as they did in complaining about food and water in the wilderness.

Many believers today trust in the Lord because of some experience they had. But as soon as difficult times come and God's wonders are not immediately forthcoming, their initial belief turns into complaint, and their complaint into rebellion. This is why an emotionally charged experience — even seeing the risen Lord — is a weaker basis for faith than trusting the Word of God:

• Jesus told Thomas, "Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed" (John 20:29).
• "We walk by faith, not by sight" (2 Corinthians 5:7).
• Abraham told the rich man that if his brothers would not hear Moses and the Prophets, neither would they be convinced if someone rose from the dead (a paraphrase of Luke 16:31).
• Jesus said that if they had believed Moses, they would believe Him, for Moses wrote of Him; but if they did not believe Moses' writings, how would they believe His words? (a paraphrase of John 5:46–47).
• Many believed in His name when they saw the signs He was doing at the Passover, but Jesus did not entrust Himself to them, because He knew all people and what was in them (a paraphrase of John 2:23–25).
• "Faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ" (Romans 10:17).

Friends, as spiritual as it may sound to say something like, "I know the love of God not by reading the Bible but by experiencing God," I believe this is nonsense. We know the love of God by revelation. And the experience we have is not something we muster up but what God sovereignly does through His Word in our hearts. As James writes, of His own will God brought us forth by the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of His creatures (a paraphrase of James 1:18).

We must obey the Word. But there is nothing mystical here, requiring intense music or all-night prayer vigils. I believe such contrived methods of drawing near to God lack biblical support and owe more to other religious practices and to secular psychology. They often function like a drug, requiring ever more intense experiences while giving diminishing returns. For the Christian, it is sufficient simply to read the Word of God and obey it.

AI-Expanded Reflection

Psalm 106 is a long national confession, and its closing verses show the setting in which it was prayed: "Save us, O Lord our God, and gather us from among the nations" (106:47). It was sung by people in exile or just after it, looking back over centuries of forgetting. Yet the psalm opens and closes with praise, and at its center is a line that answers the forgetting: "Nevertheless, he looked upon their distress... he remembered for their sake his covenant" (106:44–45). Israel forgot; God remembered.

The comment's caution about experience-based faith is well grounded in these texts, and many Christians of every tradition share it. It is worth adding a counterweight that the comment's own examples suggest. Jesus Himself went out to the mountain and "all night he continued in prayer to God" (Luke 6:12), and the psalms are full of music, shouting, and dancing before the Lord. Extended prayer and heartfelt worship are not in themselves unbiblical; the question is whether they are anchored in God's revealed Word or sought as a substitute for it. Faithful believers differ on how much place such practices should have, but all can agree with the comment that experiences cannot replace the Word as the foundation of faith.

Has the Lord redeemed you? Then speak out! (Psalm 107:2 NLT)

The NIV simply reads, "Let the redeemed of the Lord tell their story," but I like the force of the NLT. "Speak out!" While this command to proclaim God's redemption may seem a bit muffled in the OT by the disobedience of His people, it is loud and clear in the New Testament:

Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation (Mark 16:15).

Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you (Matthew 28:19–20).

But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth (Acts 1:8).

There is no suggestion here, but a command. No probability, but a certainty. Go and preach the gospel and make disciples! You will be my witnesses!

Yet, many of us still live our lives as if these are merely suggestions by our Lord. We will obey when we have time and occasion. Even though there is no probability in Jesus' words, we make it so by pushing these commands to the fringes of our lives and ministries. They are not priorities. They do not take precedence over our concerns for personal and family well-being and prosperity.

Financial success is not bad. Fitness and diet are not bad. Friendships are not wrong. Good education and extracurricular activities for our kids are not out of line. Family vacations are also not a bad thing. But have we made these peripheral things the main thing? If the most valuable commodity we have is time, how much time do we devote to what God says is the Christian's main thing, namely, declaring God's glory, even declaring it through the proclamation of our redemption from sin in Jesus Christ.

As sharing goes, this entry will come and go. It is much like Sunday sermons. They may stir the heart for a moment, but so often the moment does not translate to any major decision to live for God.

I hardly do enough. My consolation is this website. My consolation is little speeches I give at tests and tournaments in our Martial Arts Organization. My consolation is discipleship meetings with a few friends. My consolation is private conversations with people here and there, where I can encourage them in the LORD through His Word. My consolation is giving to certain missionaries. My consolation is private praises and daily meditation on God's Word. Yet, I confess these still constitute only the fringes of my life.

I share these things not to boast, for I would have no leg to stand on before the Lord. I consider myself the chief of sinners, for more than anyone I am painfully aware of the deep and harrowing rebellion in my heart apart from the grace of God.

But I share these things because some of you have hardly considered these matters in your own hearts. You have not seriously considered whether God's main thing is your main thing in life. You have not thought through how you might best declare God's praises in your work, in your home, in your ministry, and even in your discretionary time. Therefore, friends, I encourage you to take the time and make the occasion to consider. May the Lord bless you for doing so.

AI-Expanded Reflection

Psalm 107 repeatedly tells of people in distress who cry to the Lord and are delivered: wanderers find a home, prisoners are freed, the sick are restored, and sailors are brought through a storm. Each account is followed by a call to thank God for steadfast love and wonderful works. The opening command to the redeemed therefore has concrete content. They are to make God's saving faithfulness known, not merely cultivate a private sense of having been helped.

The original connects this with the church's commission. Matthew 28:18–20 grounds disciple-making in Jesus' authority and includes baptism and teaching obedience, while Acts 1:8 joins worldwide witness to the Spirit's promised power. These passages establish a mission larger than an occasional religious conversation. They also make witness corporate: no individual can personally reach every place or perform every task, but the church's shared life should be ordered toward the risen Lord's commission. Mark 16:15 expresses a related command within the longer ending of Mark, whose textual status is noted in modern Bible editions; the mission does not depend on that passage alone.

The personal inventory of conversations, discipleship meetings, public remarks, giving, and writing provides valuable examples. It shows that witness can occur through several forms of service rather than one prescribed personality type. Yet the refrain that these are merely insufficient fragments could obscure the significance of faithful ordinary acts. The question is not whether each action is dramatic enough to relieve a permanent sense of inadequacy. It is whether the whole pattern of life is increasingly available to Christ and whether known opportunities are being responsibly received.

Family care, honest work, education, health, and rest need not exist only as competitors to mission. They can become settings in which Christian love is practiced and the gospel is made credible, though they do not replace speaking its message. First Thessalonians 4:9–12, for example, joins brotherly love and responsible work with conduct toward outsiders. The danger arises when otherwise good concerns become so absolute that obedience can always be postponed for their sake.

A practical response is to identify a small number of real responsibilities: a person to pray for, a conversation to pursue, a learner to encourage, or a ministry to support. Give these a place in time and reassess them honestly. Such commitments move conviction beyond a passing emotional response while allowing sustainable faithfulness. The redeemed speak because God's mercy deserves to be known, not because they must produce enough activity to earn the redemption they announce.

What would be out there in our lives that isn't under God's care? He's the master of the universe in which we exist, and everything in it — tangible or not — has its origin in God Almighty. We owe rightful reverence to the One who governs the course of history and also personally cares for us in its turmoil. Nothing can thwart His sovereign plan for our salvation — not even our own rebellion. Throughout Israel's history, there was little but disobedience and ingratitude on their part, matched by God's long patience toward His chosen nation. What could possibly stand against His purpose to secure our salvation today? Even our own corrupted will can't withstand His determination to accomplish His plan of redemption for us. Who would try, or have reason, to belittle His authorship of our salvation? Only our own desire for self-determination refuses to admit that He has full control over our salvation. Brothers and sisters, let's rejoice in our Lord and praise Him, for His love endures forever!

AI-Expanded Reflection

This comment's central claim — that God's sovereign plan of salvation can't be thwarted even by human resistance — reflects a strongly monergist view of salvation shared by other commenters throughout this project. As elsewhere, it's worth noting that this represents one serious, historic position within Christian theology (closely associated with Reformed thought) rather than a settled consensus: other faithful traditions affirm just as firmly that salvation is entirely God's gracious initiative and that human effort can't earn or secure it, while still holding that a real, Spirit-enabled human response of faith is part of how that grace is received rather than a competing force that could "thwart" it. Both perspectives share this comment's actual bottom line — that no one is saved by their own strength or self-determination, and that God's love enduring forever is the only reliable ground for confidence, regardless of how a believer understands the mechanics of that grace being applied.

Psalm 106 presents a poetic panorama of Israel's history from the Exodus through the time of the Judges, picturing God's faithfulness and grace against Israel's unbelief and rebellion. Many people try to survey the Old Testament themselves, but it's worth paying close attention when the Bible does this itself — it's a good check on whether we're drawing the right lessons from that history. I keyed in on one verse in particular: nevertheless, He saved them for the sake of His own name (a paraphrase of Psalm 106:8).

God didn't choose Israel because they were righteous — He tells them directly it wasn't because of their righteousness that He was giving them the land, since they were, in fact, a stiff-necked people (a paraphrase of Deuteronomy 9:6). Nor did He choose them for their size — He didn't set His affection on them because they were more numerous than other nations; they were actually the fewest of all peoples (a paraphrase of Deuteronomy 7:7). God chose and saved them because of His own name — setting His affection on them by a sovereign choice that can't be fully searched out, since it arises from the hidden counsel of His own will (cf. Romans 11:33). This is why Israel is often called "the elect." The principle in John 15:16 — "you did not choose me, but I chose you" — applies to Old Testament saints just as much as New Testament ones.

What we need to understand is that God will not share His glory with another (Isaiah 48:11) — His sovereignty is bound up in His very name. In Exodus 33:19, God reveals Himself to Moses like to no one else, proclaiming that He will have mercy on whom He chooses to have mercy, and compassion on whom He chooses to have compassion (a paraphrase).

What perfection belongs uniquely to God alone? Self-determination. Thomas Aquinas, defending God's existence, argued that since everything has a cause, there must, by necessity, be a First Cause — an uncaused cause. That's God. Contrary to popular opinion, human beings aren't ultimately self-determining. Paul describes God's design this way: God has bound everyone over to disobedience (a paraphrase of Romans 11:32). So when you were born into this world, you were born a sinner, condemned already. Is God unjust for this? Paul would answer that the Creator has every right to do with His creation whatever He chooses (cf. Romans 9:21) — just as we, making something ourselves, can choose to keep or discard it as we see fit. Let's understand this is also God's right over us and all creation. Let's not think too highly of ourselves — we're made in God's image, but we are not God; there remains a real creature-Creator divide, easily forgotten.

When will we understand that salvation is entirely of grace? Paul writes that it doesn't depend on human desire or effort, but on God's mercy (a paraphrase of Romans 9:16), and that God has mercy on whomever He wants, and hardens whomever He wants (a paraphrase of Romans 9:18). Do we complain that some people only get one "chance" at salvation while others get many? What about those who never even hear the gospel? When will we understand that while there is choice ("faith"), there's no free choice that leads to salvation — our free choice, left alone, leads only to destruction, since Jews and Gentiles alike are all under the power of sin (a paraphrase of Romans 3:9), with no one righteous, not even one, no one who understands, no one who truly seeks God (a paraphrase of Romans 3:10). Left to ourselves, we would always choose death — that was our condition before grace arrived, when we were dead in our own transgressions and sins (a paraphrase of Ephesians 2:1). This was as true for Old Testament saints as for New Testament ones. Paul even writes that what Israel as a whole sought so earnestly, they didn't obtain — only the elect among them did, while the rest were hardened (a paraphrase of Romans 11:7). Everyone not elect is, in that sense, among those "prepared for destruction" (Romans 9:22).

This is genuinely hard for many people to accept, and since there's real, longstanding division among believers on this issue, I'd encourage everyone to search it out diligently for themselves. Most people would affirm God could save everyone, and that He doesn't save everyone, yet stop short of affirming God wouldn't save everyone even if He could. The common argument is that God could, but doesn't, because He wouldn't want to violate a person's "sacred" free will. I'd argue the opposite — that in order to save us at all, God must work beyond the boundaries of unaided free will, since our free will, left to itself, leads only to sin and destruction. In fact, a case can be made that the very stumbling block that caused Israel as a nation to be lost was their insistence that they could keep God's Law through their own effort (cf. Romans 10:1–3; 3:20). Is that really so different from believers today insisting that people can simply choose God unaided? How do we square that with Scripture's own statements — "you did not choose me," "no one seeks after God"?

This discussion inevitably opens the door to many further questions, and I hope you'll ask them freely. Your understanding, or confusion, on this particular matter doesn't necessarily affect your salvation, but it does affect your motivation for service. Paradoxically, insisting on unaided free will can produce greater spiritual bondage than resting in God's sovereignty instead. This may be part of the difference between John Wesley and George Whitefield — both preached forcefully and diligently in their day, but Wesley nearly wore himself out, convinced people would be lost without his personal witness specifically.

While few people would openly claim they "earned" their salvation through free will, it's hard to see the logic when they also believe God, who could and would save everyone, only saves some over others based on that same free will. One of the great verses that puts choice and sovereignty in proper perspective is John 1:12–13: to all who received Him, who believed in His name, He gave the right to become children of God — children born not of natural descent, nor human decision, nor a husband's will, but born of God Himself (a paraphrase).

This verse gives both the what and the how. In context, John has just written that Jesus came into a world that didn't recognize Him (John 1:9), to a people who didn't receive Him (v. 10) — yet some did receive Him, even believed in His name (v. 12). How? Not hereditary ("not of natural descent" — literally, "not of blood"). Not biological ("nor of human decision" — literally, "not of flesh"). Not volitional ("nor of a husband's decision" — literally, "not of man"). Birth itself is something that happens to all of us; the baby has no say in the matter at all.

In John 1:12, while it's obvious that the one born didn't choose to be born, the text goes further, saying even the parents and community had no real say in this particular birth. Those who received and believed did so only because they were "born of God." Jesus tells Nicodemus something similar a couple of chapters later — unless someone is born again (or "born from above"), they cannot see the kingdom of God (a paraphrase of John 3:3). Just as a baby has no say in being born, so too our new birth in Christ was entirely God's sovereign decision — no human heredity, no human partner involved. Our new birth was only, and entirely, of God.

There's no satisfying answer to "why did God save me?" if we go looking for it within ourselves — but Psalm 106:8 gives us the best answer available: He saved us for the sake of His own name. Soli Deo gloria — to God alone be the glory!

AI-Expanded Reflection

This comment lays out one of the oldest and most seriously contested questions in Christian theology — how God's sovereignty and human choice relate to each other in salvation — and it argues forcefully for one historic position within that debate, generally associated with Reformed or Calvinist theology. It's worth naming plainly that thoughtful, devoted Christians across many centuries have argued just as forcefully for other positions, broadly grouped under Arminian or Wesleyan theology, which affirm that God's grace genuinely enables a real human choice to respond to or resist Him, without collapsing that choice into mere illusion. Both sides anchor their case in real biblical texts — the very texts on both sides of this debate that this comment cites (John 1:12–13, Romans 9) sit alongside others frequently cited by the other position (2 Peter 3:9; 1 Timothy 2:4; John 3:16's "whoever believes"). This has remained a live, unresolved question among serious, Bible-believing Christians for centuries, not because one side hasn't read Scripture carefully enough, but because Scripture itself holds both divine sovereignty and genuine human responsibility together in ways that resist easy systematic resolution. This comment's own closing humility — "search this out diligently for yourself" — may be the most durable takeaway regardless of where any individual reader eventually lands.