Thursday, September 4 A highway will be there, yes, a way called the Way of Holiness.​—Isa. 35:8.

[Áine]

Thursday, September 4

A highway will be there, yes, a way called the Way of Holiness.—Isa. 35:8.

 

The Jews returning from Babylon were to become “a holy people” to their God. (Deut. 7:6) That did not mean, though, that they did not need to make changes in order to please Jehovah. Most of the Jews born in Babylon had apparently become accustomed to some of the thinking and standards of the Babylonians. Decades after the first Jews returned to Israel, Governor Nehemiah was astonished to find out that children born in Israel had not even learned the language of the Jews. (Deut. 6:6, 7; Neh. 13:23, 24) How could those young ones learn to love and worship Jehovah if they could not understand Hebrew—the main language in which God’s Word was written? (Ezra 10:3, 44) So those Jews had significant changes to make, but it would be much easier for them to make those changes in Israel, where pure worship was gradually being restored.—Neh. 8:8, 9. w23.05 15 ¶6-7

[dljbsp]

The road called holy was not just about leaving Babylon behind — it was about leaving Babylon within behind. Change was required, but Jehovah lovingly provided the place and the help for that change to grow. Walking on his highway means learning new steps, shedding old ways, and discovering the joy of worship that is pure.

[jwhess]

The Watchtower cited (May 2023) has this article which was a printed version of Br. Splane's wonderful talk from the Annual Meeting.  It is well worth lostening to again.  It is about 24 minutes in length.

 

https://www.jw.org/en/library/videos/#en/mediaitems/VODPgmEvtAnnMtg/pub-jwb-086_5_VIDEO

 

[dilip kumar]

Had a question when going thru today's daily text. 

 

 

The Egyptians were allowed to come and live with the Israelites when crossing grin Egypt.

 

But at Ezra 10 : 44 they are asked to leave their wives and children.

 

So why couldn't they live with them?

[eliakem]

50 minutes ago, dilip kumar said:

Had a question when going thru today's daily text. 

 

 

The Egyptians were allowed to come and live with the Israelites when crossing grin Egypt.

 

But at Ezra 10 

The key to understanding this lies in the context and the spiritual state of the nation at each time.

1. The Exodus: A Time of Inclusion for Believers

When the Israelites left Egypt, a "vast mixed company" went with them (Exodus 12:38). This included Egyptians who had come to recognize Jehovah as the true God because of the Ten Plagues. For example, after the plague of hail, even some of Pharaoh's officials feared Jehovah's word and brought their servants and livestock inside (Exodus 9:20).

The Law that God later gave at Mount Sinai made specific provisions for foreigners who wanted to join Israel. If they were willing to abandon false worship and serve Jehovah, they were welcomed and treated with love and fairness.

· Exodus 12:48-49 states that if a foreigner living among them wanted to celebrate the Passover (the most important festival commemorating their salvation), he must first be circumcised. This signified a dedication to Jehovah and acceptance of His covenant. After that, "he is to be treated like a native of the land."
· The Law repeatedly commands: "You must love the foreign resident as yourself" (Leviticus 19:34).

So, the Egyptians who left with Israel were not just "coming along for the ride." They were, in effect, proselytes—people who had turned from Egyptian idolatry to worship the one true God, Jehovah. They were integrated into the nation upon the basis of faith.

2. The Time of Ezra: A Time of Purity and Separation

Now, let's fast-forward nearly 1,000 years to the time of Ezra. The situation was completely different.

· The Sin: The Israelite nation had been exiled to Babylon for 70 years as punishment for their rampant idolatry and disobedience. Now, a faithful remnant had returned to Jerusalem to rebuild the temple and restore pure worship. However, Ezra discovered that many of the leading men, including priests and Levites, had taken wives from the surrounding pagan nations—the Canaanites, Hittites, Perizzites, Jebusites, Ammonites, Moabites, Egyptians, and Amorites (Ezra 9:1-2).
· The Problem: This was a direct violation of God's clear law. He had commanded them not to intermarry with these nations not for racial reasons, but for spiritual and religious reasons (Deuteronomy 7:3-4). God stated the reason plainly: "For they will turn your sons away from following me to serving other gods."
· The Critical Difference: These foreign wives in Ezra's day had not abandoned their pagan worship. They continued to serve their own gods, creating a powerful, idolatrous influence within the very households that were supposed to be the foundation of restored worship in Jerusalem. This threatened to lead the entire nation back into the same sin that had caused their exile in the first place.

The action taken in Ezra 10 was a drastic emergency measure to save the nation's spiritual health. It was about divorcing paganism from their midst, not about rejecting people of a certain nationality.

Conclusion: The Unifying Principle

The unifying principle in both accounts is this: Jehovah requires exclusive devotion.

· In the Exodus, Egyptians who chose to give Him exclusive devotion were welcomed and integrated.
· In Ezra's time, foreign wives who held onto pagan worship and threatened the nation's exclusive devotion to God had to be removed.

It was never about race or nationality. It was always about the worship of Jehovah. God's people are commanded to be "a special people, holy to Jehovah your God" (Deuteronomy 7:6). This holiness, or cleanness, is defined by their worship and obedience.

This principle still applies today. Christians are commanded not to "become unevenly yoked with unbelievers" (2 Corinthians 6:14) for the same spiritual reason—to protect their faith and their relationship with God. The door is open to everyone, from every nation, who wishes to come in and worship Him "with spirit and truth" (John 4:24), but it requires leaving behind practices that God condemns.

I hope this explanation helps to clarify the different contexts.