29 July 2024
Nothing originates here.
In the Covenant of Moses, God sometimes spoke through the Urim and Thummim. Near as we can tell it was stones of somewhat uniform size and shape, but different colors (dark and light). Elaborate questions could require more than two colors, but we aren't aware of any instances. Today we would use glass marbles.
They were stored in a skin bag. You simply removed the ones you didn't need for each event; what you put in for a drawing depended on the nature of the query. If you got a word from the Lord, it wasn't necessary. If no one got a prophetic message, and you needed to ask God for direction, you would ensure it was randomized according to the nature of the question. This is how they worked out the guilty party for the disaster at Ai. They got a word that required them to use the Urim and Thummim. The elders were called to witness the process.
If the priests obeyed the applicable ritual requirements, God always spoke clearly that way. It worked only when the folks involved were faithful to God and His Word. This kind of miracle belongs to the Covenant. There were other details we don't have in Scripture, but we can guess. Just sensing the need to use this kind of divination was a matter of conviction.
At the same time, the nation was forbidden to use any other form of divination, with the exception of perhaps drawing straws. The whole point was that the question arose from the Covenant in the first place, and God had promised to answer that way. Why don't we use it any more?
There's nothing in the New Testament prohibiting it. What we see today is a cultural prejudice against it, except among certain groups. If you approach it from a Covenant commitment, all it takes is learning what you should expect. If you aren't on good terms with God, then it would be random chance. But you are placing things in God's hands; be prepared to honor His decision at all costs. The first few times the outcomes may well be nothing more than Him testing you. Expect that.
Most of the time, you should with some patience learn to know God's will through your convictions. However, it's a learning process. You need to be warned that some types of questions will not receive the kind of answer you might expect. The issue is moral truth, not facts. For example, if you ask God about whether to give money or resources to someone or some cause, you may be surprised the answer will frequently be "yes". That's often simply a way to extend your covering, or merge with another for a specific purpose. It allows God to speak into various situations. Note: It's very a bad idea to let the recipient set the amount. That almost never works out, especially when they aren't operating in covenant fellowship.
When you extend some portion of your covering, be prepared for God to uncover things you didn't know. Sometimes it will be painful; be ready for that.
Signs and wonders, as well as disasters will often tell you something, if you are paying attention and sensitive to Covenant priorities. You should never be surprised when the activities of the Unseen Realm echo here in this world in peculiar ways. The Bible is loaded with symbolism of this very sort. Convergence of symbols and synchronicity are not accidents; God and His staff work that way.
Again, don't try to read divination into something that God didn't suggest in His Word. However, there's nothing at all wrong with seeing portents and omens after the fact. The Bible uses that kind of language often enough. For example, are you aware that piercing one ear is associated with someone accepting enslavement in a preferred household? Yes, it's usually associated with the threshold of the house, but that's just symbolism in itself. There are other kinds of thresholds.
Don't read too much into that; by the same token, don't ignore it.
We've already studied Pageau and a few others who refer to symbolism and how to read God's hand in things. Humans don't have full control, so you can be sure some spiritual force was involved. It didn't originate here.
Comments
Jay DiNitto
I can only think of Acts 1 as the mention of lots in the NT, when St. Matthias was chosen. It seems like a neutral mention, but I'd think if casting lots were a negative thing, the consequences would've been explained.
This document is public domain; spread the message.