Study Guide, Thomas Boston, The Crook in the Lot.3

03 Saturday Jun 2023

Posted by in Study Guide, Thomas Boston

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , ,

Boston now gives an overview of his work:

In which words are proposed, (1.) The remedy itself, (2.) The suitableness thereof.

First, The remedy itself is a wise eying the hand of God in all we find to bear hard upon us: Consider the work (or, See thou the doing) of God, to wit, in the crooked, rough, and disagreeable parts of thy lot, the crosses thou findest in it. Thou seest very well the cross itself; yea thou turnest it over and over in thy mind, and leisurely views it on all sides; thou lookest withal to this and the other second cause of it; and so thou art in a foam and fret: but, wouldst thou be quieted and satisfied in the matter, lift up thine eyes toward heaven, see the doing of God in it, the operation of his hand: look at that, and consider it well; eye the first cause of the crook in thy lot, behold how it is the work of God, his doing.

Here is the phrase, “Consider the work of God.”

He proposes two different ways or perspective to understand our circumstance; what are these two ways.

Primary and secondary causes: Boston refers to a “secondary cause”. When we consider the nature of God’s work in this world, we must distinguish between the primary, the first cause, which is God’s action; and the secondary cause, which is the “natural” cause we see in the world When a rock falls, we say it falls because of gravity. That is a secondary cause. It is real and it can be understood in some manner by directly observing the rock fall. But gravity does not exist on its own. The existence of continuation of gravity is an action of God. God created and sustains gravity and the rock.

What is the result of thinking of the world in light of either the primary cause (God) or the secondary cause (what I did to you, or the car not working, or the inability to pay rent, or disease)? How does he describe the emotional effect of both perspectives?

He uses an unexpected description of the phrase “consider the work of God”. How is this a “remedy”?

 Secondly, As for the suitableness of this remedy, that view of the crook in our lot is very suitable to still indecent risings of heart, and quiet us under it: for who can (that is, none can) make that straight which God hath made crooked? As to the crook in thy lot, God hath made it; and it must continue while he will have it so. Shouldst thou ply thine utmost force to even it, or make it straight, thine attempt will be vain: it will not alter for all thou canst do, only he who made it can mend it, or make it straight. This consideration, this view of the matter, is a proper means, at once to silence and satisfy men, and so to bring them unto a dutiful submission to their Maker and Governor, under the crook in their lot.

What are the “indecent risings of heart”?

What is the opposite of these risings (it comes immediately after the phrase “indecent risings of heart”)?

How what word does Boston use to describe this remedy, it is ________________.

What is the point of reality which we need to acknowledge for this remedy to work?

What are the two things this view of reality will effect __________ and _____________ men.

That then brings us into what sort of relationship?

Boston proposes that a right understanding of the “crook in the lot” will cause a change in us. What do you suppose are aspects of our heart which need changing?

He then states the structure of the remaining work. Restate these propositions in your own words (at the very least, Boston’s language is old fashioned

Now we take up the purpose of the text in these three doctrines. I. Whatsoever crook there is in one’s lot, it is of God’s making. II. What God sees meet  [fit, appropriate]  to mar [distort, injure, ruing] one will not be able to mend in his lot. III. The considering of the crook in the lot, as the work of God, or of his making, is a proper means to bring one to a Christian deportment [manner of life, conduct] under it.

(498)

Study Guide, Thomas Boston, The Crook in the Lot.2

02 Friday Jun 2023

Posted by in Study Guide, Thomas Boston

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , ,

The next paragraph will consider the context for the verse he will explicate. To follow his argument it is best for read the chapter:

Ecclesiastes 7:1–13 (ESV)

7 A good name is better than precious ointment,

and the day of death than the day of birth.

            2           It is better to go to the house of mourning

than to go to the house of feasting,

                        for this is the end of all mankind,

and the living will lay it to heart.

            3           Sorrow is better than laughter,

for by sadness of face the heart is made glad.

            4           The heart of the wise is in the house of mourning,

but the heart of fools is in the house of mirth.

            5           It is better for a man to hear the rebuke of the wise

than to hear the song of fools.

            6           For as the crackling of thorns under a pot,

so is the laughter of the fools;

this also is vanity.

            7           Surely oppression drives the wise into madness,

and a bribe corrupts the heart.

            8           Better is the end of a thing than its beginning,

and the patient in spirit is better than the proud in spirit.

            9           Be not quick in your spirit to become angry,

for anger lodges in the heart of fools.

            10          Say not, “Why were the former days better than these?”

For it is not from wisdom that you ask this.

            11          Wisdom is good with an inheritance,

an advantage to those who see the sun.

            12          For the protection of wisdom is like the protection of money,

and the advantage of knowledge is that wisdom preserves the life of him who has it.

            13          Consider the work of God:

who can make straight what he has made crooked?

First, Boston comments upon the paradoxes which begin this chapter. The contrast he raises here are between the “sense”, that is the way things just appear without reference to God. He then contrasts that understanding with putting things into the context of God’s work, that is, the sight of faith.

Before looking at his reading, we can consider the most striking example in history: The death of Jesus was cruel murder for political opportunity. From the eye of “sense” Jesus had failed. The story of the unnamed disciple and Cleopas on their dismal journey to Emmaus shows how his death appeared without reference to faith:

Luke 24:13–21 (ESV)

13 That very day two of them were going to a village named Emmaus, about seven miles from Jerusalem, 14 and they were talking with each other about all these things that had happened. 15 While they were talking and discussing together, Jesus himself drew near and went with them. 16 But their eyes were kept from recognizing him. 17 And he said to them, “What is this conversation that you are holding with each other as you walk?” And they stood still, looking sad. 18 Then one of them, named Cleopas, answered him, “Are you the only visitor to Jerusalem who does not know the things that have happened there in these days?” 19 And he said to them, “What things?” And they said to him, “Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, a man who was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people, 20 and how our chief priests and rulers delivered him up to be condemned to death, and crucified him. 21 But we had hoped that he was the one to redeem Israel. Yes, and besides all this, it is now the third day since these things happened.

They did not understand that Jesus had conquered death and was speaking with them at that moment. Boston is going to read through Ecclesiastes 7 with the same two-focal vision of the text: how it appears from one perspective, then how it appears from another perspective. This ability to understand temporal events, things of this life, through an eternal perspective, things of faith, is a key to the counsel Boston will give in this book:

It is under this view, that Solomon, in the preceding part of this chapter, advances several paradoxes, which are surprising determinations in favour of certain things, that to the eye of sense, looking gloomy and hideous, are therefore generally reputed grievous and shocking.

He pronounceth the day of one’s death to be better than the day of his birth, namely, the day of the death of one, who, having become the friend of God through faith, hath led a life to the honour of God, and service of his generation; and thereby raised himself the good and savoury name better than precious ointment, ver. 1.

In like manner, he pronounceth the house of mourning to be preferable to the house of feasting, sorrow to laughter, and a wise man’s rebuke to a fool’s song; for that, howbeit the latter are indeed the more pleasant, yet the former are the more profitable, ver. 2–6. And observing with concern, how men are in hazard, not only from the world’s frowns and ill usage, oppression making a wise man mad, but also from its smiles and caresses, a gift destroying the heart; therefore, since whatever way it goes, there is danger, he pronounceth the end of every worldly thing better than the beginning thereof, ver. 7, 8.

And, from the whole, he justly infers, that it is better to be humble and patient, than proud and impatient, under afflicting dispensations; since, in the former case, one wisely submits to what is really best; in the latter, he fights against it, ver. 8.

And he dehorts from being angry with our lot, because of the adversity found therein, ver. 9. cautions against making odious comparisons of former and present times, in that point insinuating undue reflections on the providence of God, ver. 10.

And, against that querulous and fretful disposition, he first prescribes a general remedy, namely, holy wisdom, as that which enables one to make the best of every thing, and even giveth life in killing circumstances, ver. 11, 12. And then a particular remedy, consisting in a due application of that wisdom towards the taking a just view of the case, Consider the work of God: for who can make that straight which he hath made crooked?

Crook, pp. 497–98.

This ability to read an event with the eyes of faith is a key to the work which Boston will set before us. Therefore, we should not rush by too quickly. I have broken out the individual paradoxes. For each paradox, first set the view of the problem from the perspective of “sense”.  Then re-read the paradox from the point of view of “faith”.

Ecclesiastes 7:1–13 (ESV)

7 A good name is better than precious ointment,

and the day of death than the day of birth.

            2           It is better to go to the house of mourning

than to go to the house of feasting,

                        for this is the end of all mankind,

and the living will lay it to heart.

For example:

Sense: Life is better than death. The day a child is born is the happiest of day for his family. The day of death is a terrible thing and is pain to everyone. Moreover, a feast, a party is more enjoyable than going to a funeral and mourning the dead. But Solomon says death is better. This makes no sense.

Faith: Death is no longer death to the one who is in Christ. Death has been defeated by Jesus.  Rather than death being the end of life, death has become the beginning of life.

            3           Sorrow is better than laughter,

for by sadness of face the heart is made glad.

            4           The heart of the wise is in the house of mourning,

but the heart of fools is in the house of mirth.

            5           It is better for a man to hear the rebuke of the wise

than to hear the song of fools.

            6           For as the crackling of thorns under a pot,

so is the laughter of the fools;

this also is vanity.

 Sense:

Faith:

            7           Surely oppression drives the wise into madness,

and a bribe corrupts the heart.

            8           Better is the end of a thing than its beginning,

and the patient in spirit is better than the proud in spirit.

Sense:

Faith:

            9           Be not quick in your spirit to become angry,

for anger lodges in the heart of fools.

Sense: [shouldn’t you get revenge? Stand up for yourself?]

Faith:

            10          Say not, “Why were the former days better than these?”

For it is not from wisdom that you ask this.

Sense:

Faith:

            11          Wisdom is good with an inheritance,

an advantage to those who see the sun.

            12          For the protection of wisdom is like the protection of money,

and the advantage of knowledge is that wisdom preserves the life of him who has it.

Sense:

Faith:

            13          Consider the work of God:

who can make straight what he has made crooked?

The way in which a problem that will not be resolved and will not go away is good will the be the problem of this book.

Study Guide: Thomas Boston, The Crook in the Lot.1

01 Thursday Jun 2023

Posted by in Study Guide, Thomas Boston

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, ,

Study Guide Crook in the Lot

Consider the work of God: for who can make that straight which he hath made crooked?

Eccl. 7:13

The book takes it title from this verse. The “lot” is the circumstance in which we find ourselves. The crook is painful circumstance in which we find ourselves.

When faced with a painful circumstance, we have three options. First, we can seek to alter the circumstance so that it is no longer painful. This is our first and natural response to trouble. The limitation of this procedure is that many circumstances cannot be fixed. If there is a fire, I can flee the fire. If the sun is burning the sky, there is nowhere to which I can run. The text cited speaks of those times where the circumstance cannot be change: If God has made the matter “crooked” then no one can make it “straight”.

Second, we can alter our body in some manner so we cannot experience the unpleasant circumstance.  Any number of means of been devised to make body not feel pain:

6    Give strong drink to the one who is perishing,

and wine to those in bitter distress;

7    let them drink and forget their poverty

and remember their misery no more.

Proverbs 31:6–7 (ESV)   

Third, we can alter our relationship to the event. This is one of the purposes of various philosophies and therapies. If the event cannot change, I must change.

These are the options when confronted with an unshakeable circumstance. And it is with this third option that Boston begins his instruction. He states that we must begin with the way in which we perceive the event:

A JUST view of afflicting incidents is altogether necessary to a Christian deportment under them: and that view is to be obtained only by faith, not by sense. For it is the light of the word alone that represents them justly, discovering in them the work of God, and consequently designs becoming the divine perfections. These perceived by the eye of faith, and duly considered, one has a just view of afflicting incidents, fitted to quell the turbulent motions of corrupt affections under dismal outward appearances.

Boston, Thomas. The Whole Works of Thomas Boston: Sermons, Part 1. “The Crook in the Lot.” Edited by Samuel M‘Millan, vol. 3, George and Robert King, 1848, p. 497.

Sense and faith here primarily carry the meaning of understanding the world with or without reference to God. To understand the world without reference to God, merely on the basis of immediate physical sense is one sort of knowledge. To understand the world with reference to God, as both God’s Creation and under the continual care of God’s Providence, is to understand it by faith.

When we face a difficult circumstance in light of the knowledge that God has caused this circumstance to exist, we will understand it and relate to it in a far different manner than merely as a troublesome event. We will understand the circumstance as something which God has purposefully presented to us for our good.

He then proposes a reason which God gives us difficult circumstances: the process of learning to understand our troubles as coming from God will change us:

These perceived by the eye of faith, and duly considered, one has a just view of afflicting incidents, fitted to quell the turbulent motions of corrupt affections under dismal outward appearances.

So the process will move like this: We will alter our relationship to the event, and that change in relationship will have an additional effect of changing us.

What Can God Do With Trials

There are a number of results God can obtain in our lives through means of trials. These explanations for trials are sometimes called “theodicies”. Here is a list of the explanations or theodicies found in the Bible:

Laato and de Moor summarize both ‘strong’ and ‘weak’ theodicies found in the Old Testament according to the following categories:48

A retributive theodicy: God allows or inflicts suffering because he is meting out justice for sin. An educative theodicy: God allows or inflicts suffering so that we grow spiritually and learn how to live more wisely.

An eschatological theodicy: whatever God’s people suffer in the here and now, the inbreaking of the new age will rebalance all losses and abundantly reward faithfulness.

Mystery: God’s ways are so much higher than ours, and there is so much we do not know, that God cannot be blamed when tragedy occurs.

A theodicy of communion: suffering prompts an intimacy with God that could otherwise not occur, especially in the sense of experiencing divine pathos in which God partakes in our sufferings.

Determinism: although not a comfort, some Old Testament texts explain suffering as determined and inescapable.

Ortlund, Eric. Piercing Leviathan: 56 (New Studies in Biblical Theology) (pp. 173-174). InterVarsity Press. Kindle Edition. Ortlund then provides one additional effect of suffering which he finds God’s response to Job at the end of the book:

sometimes God allows us to suffer, not because he is angry, not in order to cause us to grow into deeper Christlikeness, but only as a means of giving himself to us more deeply. He is, in fact, about the business of saving our souls and fitting us for eternity in so doing, for a relationship with God in which God is loved for his own sake and not as a means to some other end is the only kind of relationship that will save us. After all, every secondary blessing will be lost in death, and our worship in the eschaton will be a worship of God when he is ‘all in all’ (1 Cor. 15:28).

Ortlund, Eric. Piercing Leviathan: 56 (New Studies in Biblical Theology) (p. 181). InterVarsity Press. Kindle Edition. This single quotation is an inadequate presentation of all that Ortlund explains on this point, but it is sufficient to realize that suffering can cause us to know God.

There are many things which can effect through suffering. But these good effects can only be achieved if we understand that God is sovereign over what we suffer. This is a hard idea, but it is one Boston will develop at length.

Should I Look for Signs to Know God’s Will?

30 Tuesday May 2023

Posted by in Biblical Counseling

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

,

(Background: I had a question from a dear Christian who is earnestly seeking to do God’s will. Like many people, he is wondering whether he should be looking for “signs” to know how to make a good decision. He apparently was asked to leave a congregation as a result of telling others about a sign and his decision based upon that sign. He had told the story because he wanted to show his thankfulness to God. Below is a note which I sent him in return. Since this is such a common concern, I hope this short note may be use to someone else.)

First, your desire to always give God glory is good and right. Second, encouraging someone to leave church even if you think they have a mistake in their theology is rarely the right thing to do. You do not sound, nor have you acted like someone who is unwilling to learn and grow—quite the opposite. If someone has bad theological ideas, such as the Trinity is false; and this person insisted on teaching everyone their bad idea; and, this person also refused to be corrected: that is one you would have to ask to leave. (Titus 3:10) But you have not been like that. I have observed your interaction and have seen someone is eager to learn and to do what is right.

As for your particular concern, it will take a bit to give you a full answer. It is a complicated question.

Before I address what is happening with you specifically, I am going to lay out the larger issues which will inform the way I respond.

The Will of God:

There are two kinds of will when it comes to God. Here is a good article to read more on this issue: https://www.desiringgod.org/articles/are-there-two-wills-in-god

Briefly: God has a will which is expressed in the explicit commands in the Bible. For instance, “Do not murder.”  Often, these are called God’s precepts: thus, the “perceptive will of God.”

Second, there are God’s decrees. This is what God by his sovereign power brings about. This is called God’s “decretive will”, because these are God’s decrees. This is also known as God’s providence. 

You can read about this at much more length here: https://westminsterstandards.org/westminster-confession-of-faith/ In particular read Articles III, IV, & V. You will see there are Bible references to read along with the statements.

We quite appropriately desire to do what God wants us to do; what God “wills.”  But the problem arises at the level of God’s two wills. God’s precepts are easily known: they are written down in the Bible.

But we want to know is God’s decrees. What will actually happen as a result of deciding this thing or that.

Motivations to Know God’s Decrees:

There are a few motivations for this desire to know the decrees. One, sometimes people are concerned that they may fail God or even sin if they do not do the precise thing which God has commanded them to do—but that command or decree is not well known to them.

For instance, should I take job A or B? We can be fearful that we would sin if we don’t choose the “right” job. Both jobs look like a good choice, and they are evenly weighed. Yet we fear that if we choose the “wrong” job something bad will happen.

Two, the same sort of idea but rather than being a sin the choice merely means what is “right” or “best” for me. Which job will work out the best? God knows and I need to figure out which one God knows already to be best.

What are we Expected to Do?

This desire to learn God’s secret will easily results in anxiety for the poor Christian.

It is also one of the most common things which concerns Christians. I don’t know anyone who has not fretted about this issue at some time or another.

The good or bad news is that we are never commanded to know God’s secret will. We are only expected or asked to know the precepts which God has ordained. This means there is no duty of any sort to figure out what God ‘really wants us to do.’ We are only expected to exercise wisdom and obedience in light of the circumstances of our life and the written instructions of Scripture.

Didn’t God Give Specific Instructions to People in the Bible?

We can consider this issue also from the examples of the Bible. When you look at the Bible you see very little direct instruction for a specific circumstance. There are a few people who are given specific instructions to do a particular thing at a particular time. Abraham receives instructions to leave his home (Gen. 12:1). But when Abraham leaves Canaan to go to Egypt it was a matter of Abraham’s decision not specific instruction (Gen. 12:10)

Other examples could be given (for example Moses) of God giving specific instructions to a specific man which acts as a commandment for him in that circumstance. But even with those men, there are only a few instances over an entire lifetime. There certainly are not day-by-day instructions to do this and not that.

Prophets may receive more instructions, but their instructions are directed toward a specific ministry event (Jonah to Nineveh). They also may receive words to proclaim to others.

We have non-Hebrew kings who have dreams which require interpretation which ends up bringing an obscure Hebrew into the king’s presence (Joseph and Daniel).

What Then Should we Do?

How then does the Bible provide instruction on what to do? While it is more complicated than this, the basic paradigm is (1) obey any direct instructions (do not murder, do speak with grace); and (2) act with wisdom (don’t be lazy, et cetera). The best book I know on the subject is Decision Making and the Will of God, by Gary Friesen.

But What About an “Open Door”?

Another more vague standard is Paul’s use of the phrase an “open door” (1 Cor. 16:9, 2 Cor. 2:12; Col. 4:3). However, this means nothing other than an opportunity:

The content of Paul’s request is that God might open a door for our message.16 An “open door” is a natural metaphor for the idea of ready access to an opportunity and is therefore widely used in the ancient world.17 It occurs in the New Testament to refer to an opportunity for evangelistic ministry (Acts 14:27; 1 Cor. 16:9; 2 Cor. 2:12; cf. Rev. 3:8, 20). These parallel texts, along with the context here, make it probable that Paul is asking prayer for his (and others’) evangelistic ministry in particular. Strikingly, however, Paul does not pray that he or some other minister might have an open door to walk through, but that there might be an open door for our message.

16 The “that” here in the TNIV and in most other versions translates Gk. ἵνα, which usually indicates the content rather than the purpose of praying (Harris, 193).

17 See J. Jeremias, TDNT 3.174. Somewhat different in nuance are Ps. 78:23, where God “opens the doors of heaven” to pour manna on his people; Isa. 45:1, which speaks of God “opening doors” (gates of cities?) for the conquests of Cyrus; Rev. 4:1, which refers to the opening of a door in heaven through which John can enter to see his visions; and Rev. 3:20, which urges the community to open its “door” for the Lord to enter (probably).

Moo, Douglas J. The Letters to the Colossians and to Philemon. William B. Eerdmans Pub. Co., 2008, p. 322.

There is nothing unusual; it is just a form speech:

9. For a great and effectual door is opened to me. He assigns two reasons for remaining for a longer time at Ephesus — lst, Because an opportunity is afforded him there of furthering the gospel; and 2dly, Because, in consequence of the great number of adversaries that were there, his presence was particularly required. “I shall do much good by prolonging my stay here for a little while, and were I absent, Satan would do much injury.” In the first clause, he makes use of a metaphor that is quite in common use, when he employs the term door as meaning an opportunity. For the Lord opened up a way for him for the furtherance of the gospel. He

Calvin, John. 1 Corinthians. Electronic ed., Ages Software, 1998, p. 1 Co 16:9.

Some Specific Questions

Having said this, there is nothing quite as common as the devout Christian earnestly trying to figure out what he should do in some circumstance. We all have hoped to have perfect clarity in making a decision. Because of that desire, we often look for some clue in circumstances or chance encounters to know how to respond.

Could God?

Could God do such a thing? There certainly is no reason it would be beyond God. Has God done such a thing? I know of many people who have told me that they knew what to do based upon some “sign” whether a circumstance, a communication, a number, a word.  Sometimes they have made a decision based upon such things and it has turned out well. They have reported to me that this was “God’s will” and by that they mean there was some specific instruction which applied to them which they discerned through these unusual events.

But on the whole, this not something we should expect or seek. There is no basis in Scripture for such a task of looking for or interpreting these signs. It goes against the overall pattern of Scripture that we exercise good wisdom in making decisions.

Does that mean that God would not have someone communicate some specific message to us at an opportune time? Of course not. For all of us who have come to faith, someone at some time communicated a message to us and we believed that message.

But we have no worry that we must figure out anything based upon signs.

But What About My Experience?

Does that mean that God has not used this process with you personally? Again, it is not impossible that God could do such a thing. It is also not impossible that God has protected you even if you were mistakenly using such a process to make decisions. God’s providence makes use of sin and error just as well as wisdom and righteous action.

Do I think anything bad about you on this count? Not at all. As I told you this is one of the most common questions Christian’s have; and looking for signs to discern God’s will is something which most if not all Christians have done at some time or another. It comes from a good desire to be obedient and to honor God.

And so, while I am pleased that this has brought you to a good place; I cannot encourage you to keep looking for signs or events to figure out what to do. The outcome of such actions will eventually lead you to make a poor decision and then you will think God has abandoned you or that you misinterpreted the signs.

You have not sinned. But an increase in maturity will lead you to learn to make decisions in the way of obedience and wisdom.

Also, since this is such a common thing for people to do and seek, your experience will be a blessing to others, because you will be able to be sympathetic and patient as you explain how to proceed.

What If It Works?

25 Thursday May 2023

Posted by in Biblical Counseling, Theology of Biblical Counseling

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

[A current project is to examine the following question in terms of the discipline of biblical counseling. The question arises as follows there is some technique or therapy which works in that it will reliably produce symptom reduction. For instance, some presents with “anxiety.” (I am not questioning the existence of anxiety with the quotation marks, but merely marking off a semi-formal diagnosis.) If there were a technique which reliably resulted in a correction of anxiety, but that technique could not be based in the Scripture, or in Christian theology in application more generally (that is, it is a wholly “secular” technique), should/must a biblical counselor learn and utilize that counsel? Below is merely the draft introduction to the problem.]

There are three potential grounds upon which a biblical counselor could justify the acceptance of some proposition or technique from “secular psychologies.”[1]  These are not distinct arguments but rather three versions of the same argument, which each contention emphasizing a somewhat different element of the same basic contention.

First, there is the argument from common grace.[2] This foregrounds the theological proposition that God has provided good to human beings even in their fallen state.  Having dealt with this proposition previously, I will consider no more here.[3]

Second, there is the argument from “science”. This is a restatement of the “common grace” argument, but this time the emphasis is upon the means by which one obtains information from the world. An aspect of common grace is the ability to accurately make observations about the world and then to draw conclusions about the nature of reality from these observations.

The work of science is point-of-view neutral, because such observations should be independent of the observer’s personal presuppositions.[4] It ultimately rests upon the self-authenticating function of the senses. While this proposition is subject to a number of critiques, both at the level of the observer’s presuppositions and at the level of the senses; we can broadly agree that the fact that stones fall to the ground and fire is hot are incorrigible aspects of experience.

A difficulty of the science justification is whether a particular proposition can be justified as a matter of “science.” The methods of scientific justification were developed in the arena of “hard sciences”, such as physics and chemistry. Soft science

scientism

The related question of mathematical demonstration need not concern for three reasons. First, that while mathematics does provide an extraordinary tool for creating models of reality; the relationship between our mathematical models and reality as empirically observed is very difficult to explain or understand. Second, the means of logical proof used by mathematics is built up by rules of logical inference, not observation. Numbers and functions do not exist anywhere in the tangible world. Third, while mathematical demonstrations do map on the physical world, math does not provide any useful information about why I love my wife or hate my sin.

A third justification used primarily to justify the incorporation of some technique or medication into the practice of biblical counseling is pragmatism. And I mean pragmatism here both in the broad sense of “it works”, but also in the more strictly philosophical manner: not merely that “it works”, but rather that because it works it is true.

The motto, “All Truth is God’s Truth” is trivially true. However, that motto provides no real guidance in this area, because true is the point of debate.

Justification on the ground of “it works” cannot settle the question of whether we as biblical counselors should incorporate a technique into our system.  To say it is “true” because it “works” likewise does not answer the question.

In the mid-20th century, one could purchase a watch which could be read in the dark. The technique used to create glow-in-dark numbers was ingenious and more importantly, “it worked.” No one denies that the technique worked and would work today. But you will not be able to purchase this style watch online or at your jeweler’s shop:

During World War II, radium dials and gauges allowed pilots to fly at night without cockpit lights. This helped the pilots avoid being seen by enemy soldiers.

Radium is highly radioactive. It emits alpha, beta, and gamma radiation. If it is inhaled or swallowed, radium is dangerous because there is no shielding inside the body. If radium is ingested or inhaled, the radiation emitted by the radionuclide can interact with cells and damage them. During the production of radium dials, many workers who painted clock or instrument dials with radium developed cancer. To create fine tips on their paint brushes for small surfaces, many radium dial painters licked the bristles of their paintbrushes. In doing this, they often swallowed some of the radioactive paint. In the body, radium acts similar to calcium, so the radium that workers ingested was deposited into their bones. Many of these workers developed bone cancer, usually in their jaws. Eventually, scientists and medical professionals realized that these workers’ illnesses were being caused by internal contamination from the radium they ingested. By the 1970s, radium was no longer used on watch and clock dials.[5]

Techniques come loaded with presuppositions and with consequences. The argument in favor of incorporating a technique based upon the jejune basis that “it works” cannot satisfy the biblical counselor who understands that the task of the church is to make disciples and our chief end is to glorify God and enjoy him forever.

As one who has lived long enough to have experienced fear, pain, loss, in myself and to have seen it in others, I cannot justify a “technique” solely on the basis that it would alleviate such fear, pain, or loss. I say this with fear and trembling and compassion. I realize such a bold statement will itself require substantial justification, because there is a self-evident argument that ending pain is a per se good.

I ask only, dear reader, that you grant leave to make my argument before you condemn my conclusion.

[1] This is obviously an inadequate description of the class of theory and observation at issue. But the phrase will work well-enough for our immediate concerns.  By referring to such as a “secular”, I mean nothing more than non-biblical. It should also be noted there is not a uniform biblical psychology. However, to fully develop a taxonomy the various genus and species of psychological theory would overly tax my knowledge and the lengths of this article.

[2] For example:

More specifically, it is my conviction that the Holy Spirit distributes certain blessings through secular psychotherapy as an aspect of common grace. Christians may use these blessings in order to help believers with relational, intrapersonal, and even spiritual problems. They may also engage with secular psychotherapy at a scientific and philosophic level in order to find insights that bless humankind.

Lydia Kim-van Daalen , “The Holy Spirit, Common Grace, and Secular Psychotherapy,” Journal of Psychology and Theology Vol. 40, no. 3 (2012): 229–239

[3]  Edward Wilde, “Why Common Grace is Not Enough,” Journal of Biblical Soul Care, Vol. 1, no. 2 (2022): 58-72;  

Edward Wilde, “Why Common Grace is Not Enough,” Journal of Biblical Soul Care, Vol. 2, no. 2 (2022): 5-30.

[4]

Scientific objectivity is a property of various aspects of science. It expresses the idea that scientific claims, methods, results—and scientists themselves—are not, or should not be, influenced by particular perspectives, value judgments, community bias or personal interests, to name a few relevant factors. Objectivity is often considered to be an ideal for scientific inquiry, a good reason for valuing scientific knowledge, and the basis of the authority of science in society.

Reiss, Julian, and Jan Sprenger. “Scientific Objectivity.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 30 Oct. 2020, plato.stanford.edu/entries/scientific-objectivity/. As might be expected with anything involving philosophy, the reality of the property is far more complex than the proposition that all scientific knowledge is “objective.”

[5] US EPA, OAR. 2018. “Radioactivity in Antiques.” US EPA. November 30, 2018. https://www.epa.gov/radtown/radioactivity-antiques.

Upon a Sundial and a Clock

23 Tuesday May 2023

Posted by in William Spurstowe, William Spurstowe

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

,

William Spurstowe, the Spiritual Chymist

MEDITATION XXXVII

Upon a Sun-Dyal and a Clock

These two artificial measures of time give one and the same account of its motions, but in a very differing, if not contrary, manner. The clock at does it by a motion of its own; but the sun dial, while itself is fixed, by an extrinsic motion of the Sun up on those lines drawn upon it effects the same thing. 

And this occasioned me to think and what a differing way the same services and duties of religion are done by those that profess it. Some, like clocks, have a spring of motions in themselves, and the weight that quickens [enlivens] and actuates it’s love: they pray, confer, exercise holiness in their conversation [conduct, behavior] in a progressive manner, salvation being nearer to them than when they first believed. 

Others again are like sundials, useless posts in a gloomy day, and are destitute of all principles of motion. The sun moves up on them, they stand still: the Spirit comes up on them, as it did on Saul, but themselves are not in the least moved by those duties that others may think they profit by. There is a light and shine which passes upon their gifts and abilities that they may render them useful as well as visible to others, but it affects no alteration in their hearts to the bettering of themselves. 

What divine visions and prophecies did Balaam see and utter concerning Israel?And how remarkable is the preface which he sets before them? The man whose eyes are open has said, it his heart is fixed to his last have covetousness, and he is so far from taking the lease step towards their tents, which with admiration he holds to be goodly, as that he gives Balack cancel how to destroy them. 

Let not been any rest in a bare illumination our transient work of the Spirit upon them, as if that such things would be sufficient evidences of the goodness of their condition.

Light may make a good head, but it is heat in motion that must make a good heart, without which all profession of religion is but an unsavory carcass [a disgusting corpse]. Be wise therefore O Christians, and build not the foundation I’ve your eternal happiness upon such uncertain principles. 

May not the Spirit assist where it never inhabits? 

May it not move upon him, whom it never quickens [makes alive]? 

Were not many workers of iniquity, or workers of miracles? 

Were not many famous for their prophecies, who are infamous for their profaneness? 

Are not such things made by Christ, the plea of many in the last day for their admittance into heaven, whom he will not know? Why then should any be so foolish to make that a plea to the Judge when he knows before hand it will be rejected? 

The best way to discern your condition is not to argue the goodness of it from the light which the Spirit darts in upon us, but by the motions which he produces in us. As many as are the sons of God are led by the Spirit in a constant way of progression, from grace to grace, from virtue to virtue. Such light as it is sudden in its directions, so also in its interruptions; the one oft times are as speedy and momentary as the other. Look therefore to the attractions of the Spirit by which you were removed and drawn to walk in holy ways, rather than to such motions of the Spirit which pass only upon you, but do not beget any motion or stirring in you.

John Newton On the Three Witnesses 1 John 5:10 [Annotated]

22 Monday May 2023

Posted by in Assurance, John Newton

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

This is letter 8 from “Forty One Letters on Religious Subjects. Comments are in italics. Outline markers are all added.

This letter concerns assurance of salvation. More particularly, what is the “witness” we have to this knowledge as referenced in 1 John 5:10. He states the issue thus:

Issue:  I readily offer you my thoughts on 1 John 5:10; “He that believeth on the Son of God, hath the witness in himself;” though, perhaps, you will think I am writing a sermon, rather than a letter.

I.          Setting Up the Issue

A.         The Importance of the Topic

If we believe in the Son of God, whatever trials we may meet with in the present life, our best concerns are safe, and our happiness is sure. If we do not, whatever else we have, or seem to have, we are in a state of condemnation; and, living and dying so, must perish.

B.         Having stated the importance of the proposition, he sets forth the problem in two parts.

1.         What if we error in this knowledge?

Thousands, it is to be feared, persuade themselves that they are believers, though they cannot stand the test of Scripture. And there are many real believers, who, through the prevalence of remaining unbelief, and the temptations of Satan, form hard conclusions against themselves, though the Scripture speaks peace to them.

2.         How does this relate to the text?

But how does this correspond with the passage before us, which asserts universally, “He that believeth hath the witness in himself?” for can a man have the witness in himself, and yet not know it?

3.         The problem in ourselves: interpretation, not the text. The differences of opinions among Christians even to the point of error could result from a fault of the text or a fault of the reader. The “orthodox” position would be to put the fault in the reader. Newton takes that framework and applies to the question of this witness mentioned in 1 John 5:10. He affirms the witness and places any fault in the knowledge upon the one interpreting the text.

a.         It may be answered, the evidence, in its own nature, is sufficient and infallible; but we are very apt, when we would form a judgment of ourselves, to superadd rules and marks of trial, which are not given us (for that purpose) in the Bible.

i.          That the word and Spirit of God do witness for his children, is a point in which many are agreed, who are far from being agreed as to the nature and manner of that witness.

ii.         It is, therefore, very desirable, rightly to understand the evidence by which we are to judge whether we are believers or not.

II.        Examination of the Text

A.        Presentation of the Text in its Elements

The importance and truth of the Gospel salvation is witnessed to in heaven, by “the Father, the Word, and the Spirit.” It is witnessed to on earth by “the Spirit, the water, and the blood,” ver. 7, 8.

B.         Signification of the Terms

1.         The Spirit, in ver. 8, (I apprehend) denotes a Divine light in the understanding, communicated by the Spirit of God, enabling the soul to perceive and approve the truth.

2.         The water seems to intend the powerful influence of this knowledge and light in the work of sanctification.

 3.        And the blood, the application of the blood of Jesus to the conscience, relieving it from guilt and fear, and imparting a “peace which passes all understanding.”

C.         All Witnesses Must be Present

And he that believeth hath this united testimony of the Spirit, the water, and the blood; not by hearsay only, but in himself. According to the measure of his faith (for faith has various degrees), he has a living proof that the witness is true, by the effects wrought in his own heart.

III.       Where the Problem arises

One common fault of instruction is to simply state a proposition “the right way” and then expect someone to understand.  Careful instruction requires not merely making a correct presentation, but also explaining how misunderstanding or misapplication may occur. The most common faults are to be considered and resolved.

A.         The reason we face a difficulty with this passage is that we fail to require all of the witnesses to be present together.

1.         These things, which God has joined together, are too often attempted to be separated.

2.         Attempts of this kind have been a principal source and cause of most of the dangerous errors and mistakes which are to be found amongst professors of religion.

a.         Some say much concerning the Spirit; and lay claim to an inward light, whereby they think they know the things of God.

This was common among the Quakers. Contemporary examples of this often from Charismatic groups who claim to possess a unique revelation from God. We could see this also in the desire of many to obtain direct revelation as to what to do this or that situation. It is desire to have unmediated understanding of God; a revelation of the Spirit around the Word.

b.         Others lay great stress upon the water; maintaining a regular conversation, abstaining from the defilements of the world, and aiming at a mastery over their natural desires and tempers.

This is a sort of legalism which lays its weight upon behavior in isolation from a true adoption; works without faith or love. I don’t drink or chew and I don’t hang out with those who do.

c.         Both of these errors lead to a “Christianity” without Christian and without redemption.

But neither the one nor the other appear to be duly sensible of the value of the blood of atonement, as the sole ground of their acceptance, and the spring of their life and strength.

d.         Others, again, are all for the blood; can speak much of Jesus, and his blood and righteousness; though it does not appear that they are truly, spiritually enlightened to perceive the beauty and harmony of Gospel truths, or that they pay a due regard to that “holiness without which no man can see the Lord.”

These people are sometimes found under the banner of “free grace.” They believe they have been saved because they are imperfect. They want a savior who is not their Lord—which the confession of the Christian is Christ is Lord.

e.         Summary of the errors which follow from separating the witnesses

But Jesus came, not by water only, or by blood only, but by water and blood; and the Spirit bears witness to both, because the Spirit is truth.

i.          The water alone affords but a cold, starched form of godliness, destitute of that enlivening power which is derived from a knowledge of the preciousness of Jesus, as the Lamb that was slain.  [A narrow legalism]

ii.         And if any talk of the blood without the water, they do but turn the grace of God into licentiousness: [Grace is no excuse to sin.]

iii.        so, likewise, to pretend to the Spirit, and at the same time to have low thoughts of Jesus, is a delusion and vanity; for the true Spirit testifies and takes of his glory, and presents it to the soul. [Your own personal Jesus]

iv.        But the real believer receives the united testimony, and has the witness in himself that he does so.

B.         Conclusion

To have the witness in ourselves, is to have the truths that are declared in the Scripture revealed in our hearts.

III.       The Unity of the Witnesses Results in a Well-Founded Assurance of Salvation

This brings an experimental conviction, which may be safely depended on, “that we have received the grace of God in truth.”

A.         The Unity of Witnesses Comes from a True “Spiritual Perception”

A man born blind may believe that the sun is bright, upon the testimony of another; but, if he should obtain his sight, he would have the witness in himself. Believing springs from a sense and perception of the truths of the Gospel; and whoever hath this spiritual perception is a believer.

1.         This witness is given by the Spirit. This may seem a bit contradictory to his statement above concerning the one who seeks a witness of only the Spirit.  Such a witness of direct revelation around the Scripture, without sanctification is not a true revelation of the Spirit. Moreover, the Spirit is he who gives us an understanding of the Scripture which results in sanctification.

He has the witness in himself. He has received the Spirit: his understanding is enlightened, whereby he sees things to be as they are described in the word of God, respecting his own state by sin, and the utter impossibility of his obtaining relief by any other means than those proposed in the Gospel.

2.         The knowledge of these witnesses cannot be had around the revelation of God.

These things are hidden from us by nature.

3.         The complete revelation is needed so that we may avoid presumption or despair.

He has likewise received the blood. The knowledge of sin, and its demerits, if alone, would drive us to despair; but by the same light of the Spirit, Jesus is apprehended as a suitable and all-sufficient Saviour. All that is declared concerning his person, offices, love, sufferings, and obedience, is understood and approved. Here the wounded and weary souls find healing and rest.

B.        The knowledge afforded by these witnesses results in a transformed life. This may seem like a contradiction from proposition above that the life of behavioral change is not true knowledge. There is no contradiction, because behavioral transformation alone is not real sanctification. It may have some superficial behavioral correspondence. But bare behavior is never the telling mark. We are not saved by good works but for good works.  John Piper gives an illustration of a wife who presents his wife with flowers and then says I have done this out of duty. But flowers given as an unforced gesture arising from love is quite a different thing.

Then the Apostle’s language is adopted, “Yea, doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord.” [Phil. 3:8 Newton here points to a correspondence in the doctrine between John and Paul.]

1.         He has likewise received the water, considered as the emblem of sanctification.

2.         Sanctification is a benefit of salvation

a.         To a believer, all that the Scripture teaches concerning the nature, beauty, and necessity of holiness, as a living principle in the heart, carries conviction and evidence.

b.         A deliverance from the power, as well as from the guilt of sin, appears to be an important and essential part of salvation.

c.         Notice that sanctification is offered as  a means to come to know and commune with God.

He sees his original and his proper happiness, that nothing less than communion with God and conformity to him, is worth his pursuit. And therefore he can say, “My soul thirsteth for thee: I delight in the law of God after the inward man.”

d.         Sanctification is a natural development of this three-fold knowledge:

In a word, his judgment and his choice are formed upon a new spiritual taste, derived from the written word, and correspondent with it, as the musical ear is adapted to relish harmony: so that what God has forbidden, appears hateful; what he has commanded, necessary; what he has promised, desirable; and what he has revealed, glorious.

C.         Conclusion

Whoever has these perceptions, has the witness in himself, that he has been taught of God, and believes in his Son.

IV.       Application

What then are the practical implications of this understanding of the passage?

A.         It is not a bare subjective knowledge

1.         If you think this explanation is agreeable to the Scripture, you will be satisfied that the witness spoken of in this passage, is very different from what some persons understand it to be.

2.         It is not an impulse, or strong persuasion, impressed upon us in a way of which we can give no account, that “we are the children of God,” and that our sins are freely forgiven: nor is the powerful application of a particular text of Scripture necessary to produce it: neither is it always connected with a very lively sensible comfort.

3.         While this subjective belief may be a result of a true witness, it is not the witness itself:

These things, in some persons and instances, may accompany the witness or testimony we are speaking of, but do not properly belong to it: and they may be, and often have been, counterfeited.

4.         But what I have described is inimitable and infallible; it is indubitably, as the magicians confessed of the miracles of Moses, the finger of God; as certainly the effect of his Divine power as the creation of the world.

B.         Not Everyone Will Experience Assurance

It is true, many who have this witness walk in darkness, and are harassed with many doubts and perplexities concerning their state:

C.         What is the Cause?

The trouble arises because they expect some preternatural evidence:

1.         but this is not because the witness is not sufficient to give them satisfaction, but because they do not account it so: being misled by the influence of self-will and a legal spirit, they overlook this evidence as too simple, and expect something extraordinary;

2.         at least, they think they cannot be right unless they are led in the same way in which the Lord has been pleased to lead others with whom they may have conversed.

D.        Do Not be Troubled That Not Everyone Experiences the Same Assurance

But the Lord the Spirit is sovereign and free in his operations: and though he gives to all, who are the subjects of his grace, the same views of sin, of themselves, and of the Saviour; yet, with respect to the circumstantials of his work, there is, as in the features of our faces, such an amazing variety, that perhaps no two persons can be found whose experiences have been exactly alike: but as the Apostle says, That “he that believeth,” that is, whosoever believeth (without exception), “has this witness in himself;” it must consequently arise from what is common to them all, and not from what is peculiar to a few.

V.         Final Observations

Before I conclude, I would make two or three observations.

A.         Justification Results in Sanctification

1.         In the first place, I think it is plain, that the supposition of a real believer’s living in sin, or taking encouragement from the Gospel so to do, is destitute of the least foundation in truth, and can proceed only from an ignorance of the subject.

2.         Justification causes one to hate sin

a.         Sin is the burden under which he groans; and he would account nothing short of a deliverance from it worthy the name of salvation.

b.         A principal part of his evidence that he is a believer, arises from that abhorrence of sin which he habitually feels. It is true, sin still dwelleth in him; but he loathes and resists it: upon this account he is in a state of continual warfare;

c.         if he was not so, he could not have the witness in himself, that he is born of God.

B.         A True Witness Will Affect Our Understanding of Scripture

1.         Again: From hence arises a solid evidence, that the Scripture is indeed the word of God, because it so exactly describes what is exemplified in the experience of all who are subjects of a work of grace.

2.         While we are in a natural state, it is to us as a sealed book: though we can read it, and perhaps assent to the facts, we can no more understand our own concernments in what we read, than if it was written in an unknown tongue. But when the mind is enlightened by the Holy Spirit, the Scripture addresses us as it were by name, explains every difficulty under which we laboured, and proposes an adequate and effectual remedy for the relief of all our wants and fears.

C.         Subjective Assurance May not be Constant

1.         Lastly: It follows, that the hope of a believer is built upon a foundation that cannot be shaken, though it may and will be assaulted.

2.         It [assurance] does not depend upon occasional and changeable frames, upon any that is precarious and questionable, but upon a correspondence and agreement with the written word.

3.         [The subjective experience of assurance is not a bare logical argument.] Nor does this agreement depend upon a train of laboured arguments and deductions, but is self-evident, as light is to the eye, to every person who has a real participation of the grace of God. It is equally suited to all capacities.

1.         By this the unlearned are enabled to know their election of God, and “to rejoice with a joy unspeakable and full of glory.”

2.         And the wisest, if destitute of this perception, though they may be masters of all the external evidences of Christianity, and able to combat the cavils of infidels, can see no real beauty in the truths of the Gospel, nor derive any solid comfort from them.

I have only sent you a few hasty hints: it would be easy to enlarge; but I sat down, not to write a book, but a letter. May this inward witness preside with power in our hearts, to animate our hopes, and to mortify our corruptions!

I am, &c.

Edward Taylor, Meditation 44, Entire

16 Tuesday May 2023

Posted by in Edward Taylor

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

Meditation 44

Motto:

7 I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith: 8 henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing.

2 Timothy 4:7–8 (AV)

Taylor references only verse 8; 7 has been included to understand the context better.

Introduction: the motto comes from Paul’s last letter to Timothy, commonly taken to have been written shortly before his death after a second imprisonment in Rome. Paul  looks at what will be his execution. But he is not in despair over his circumstance, because he believes he will be rewarded by his Lord. Calvin explains the reference thus:

Henceforth there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness. Having boasted of having fought his fight and finished his course, and kept the faith, he now affirms that he has not labored in vain. Now it is possible to put forth strenuous exertion, and yet to be defrauded of the reward which is due. But Paul says that his reward is sure. This certainty arises from turning his eyes to the day of the resurrection, and this is what we also ought to do; for all around we see nothing but death, and therefore we ought not to keep our eye fixed on the outward appearance of the world, but, on the contrary, to hold out to our minds the coming of Christ. The consequences will be, that nothing can detract from our happiness.[1]

A crown, Lord, yea, a crown of righteousness.

Oh! What a gift is this? Give Lord I pray

An holy head, and heart to possess

And I shall give thee glory for the pay.

A crown is brave, and righteousness much more.                                  5

The glory of them both will pay the score.

Notes:

This poem begins in a different place than most of the others. Rather than commence with a lamentation over his sin and repentance for his own evil, he begins what he hopes to obtain. This is a poem built upon hope of what will come.

A crown, Lord, yea, a crown of righteousness.

The accentuation of this first line places the emphasis heavily upon “Lord”. 

a CROWN, LORD, YEA a CROWN of RIGHTeousness

The phrase “a CROWN” will open the second stanza.

The rhythm of the second line again places an emphasis upon the LORD. There is also the alliteration on the “g” of Give and Gift.

Oh! What a gift is this? Give Lord I pray

The effect of these two lines is to emphasize the following thought: Lord give the gift of this crown.

It must be noted that the word “give” does double duty here.  At first, “give” points backward toward the gift of the crown. But as we read on to the next line, the word “give” points forward to the “head” to wear the crown. This then expands the work of the Lord in this scene: Both the gift of the crown and the head worthy to wear the crown come from God.

The second and third line make for an interesting temporal element of this poem:

                                                      Give Lord I pray

An holy head, and heart to possess

In the passage referenced by Taylor, Paul is looking forward to a ‘crown of righteousness’ to be received as an eternal reward.

“there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day”.   We can understand the prayer of the poet in two ways. He may be asking that he receive the crown of righteousness now. This would be based upon the present tense “give” and the prayer that he have a holy head and heart, which would necessarily be present.

The other way to understand the prayer is as a present prayer for holiness to make him fit to receive the eventual eternal reward. I think the second possibility the better reading here.

What then can be the “pay” for such a reward?

And I shall give thee glory for the pay.

How exactly does the poet give God glory by being crowned? It would be understood as the praise, which this poem provides. But it is better to understand the glory as resulting from God saving the poet and crowning him.

The salvation of the believer is not a payment for the believer’s effort. It is better understood as God’s work of redeeming, sanctifying, and then glorifying the believer. The believer is made glorious, and the glory of the believer (in glory) redounds to the glory of God. If you God make me holy and give this crown, I will be glorious which will give you glory.

This understanding is confirmed by the couplet which closes the whole:

A crown is brave, and righteousness much more.                                  5

The glory of them both will pay the score.

Brave here does not mean courage. It means more something which is splendid or glorious. Shakespeare’s great in The Tempest, “Oh brave new world.”

The crown is splendid. Righteousness is more splendid. They are glorious and by being glorious God will receive the glory.

A crown indeed consisting of fine gold

Adherent, and inherent righteousness

Stuck with their ripe ripe fruits in every fold

Like studded carbuncles they to it dress                                     10

A righteous life doth ever wear renown

And thrust the head at last up in this crown.

Notes:

“a CROWN inDEED” This is the third use of the phrase “a crown. Here line is regular and flowing.  The “C” of “consisting” connects to “crown”.  The meditation upon this future crown as commended by Puritan near contemporaries of Taylor, such as Thomas Manton:

Do you send your desires and thoughts as harbingers to prepare a place for you? When the soul thus longs for the sight of God and Christ, we do as it were tell God we long to be at home. As Paul, 2 Tim. 4:8, ‘Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness.’ He was reckoning what a happy time it would be when the crown of righteousness should be set upon his head, when he shall get home to his father’s house, and enjoy his inheritance and the happiness God hath provided for him. By these marks you may inquire whether you have this faith, to count yourselves strangers and pilgrims here

Manton, Thomas. The Complete Works of Thomas Manton. James Nisbet & Co., 1973, pp. 320–21.

Having said the crown is “fine gold” (a not surprising although appropriate image), Taylor moves on to the adornment of the crown. It is called a “crown of righteousness.” Righteousness would be the right standing before God.

He lists two different types of righteousness. First ‘adherent righteousness.”  This seems to be Taylor’s own construction for what is usually termed “imputed righteousness.”  “Finally, the Bible teaches that, as a result of his atoning work, Christ’s righteousness is set to the believer’s account. Although not yet perfectly holy or morally righteous, believers nevertheless are justified before the law of God, and they are “clothed” with the imputed righteousness of Christ.” Elwell, Walter A., and Philip Wesley Comfort. Tyndale Bible Dictionary, Tyndale House Publishers, 2001, p. 630. This corresponds to Protestant understanding of justification.

Taylor next raises “inherent righteousness.” This would be the holy life of the believer. The righteousness is not merely counted to the believer, but it is made part of transforms the believer. “And if you would give evidence of your interest in imputed righteousness, you must do it by inherent righteousness. Shew your faith by your works. Faith without works is dead, being alone. Amen.” Boston, Thomas. The Whole Works of Thomas Boston: Sermons, Part 2. Edited by Samuel M’Millan, vol. 4, George and Robert King, 1849, p. 195. This corresponds to the doctrine of sanctification.

The relationship of righteousness in the life of the believer as a condition precedent to receiption of the crown of righteousness is found in Paul’s letter to Timothy. Paul does not begin with merely the crown being “laid up”, that is, awaiting him. Paul begins the thought with an affirmation that he has continued in the faith until his death. His life of righteousness precedes his attaining the crown of righteousness.

Adherent, and inherent righteousness

Stuck with their ripe ripe fruits in every fold

Like studded carbuncles they to it dress                                     10

A righteous life doth ever wear renown

This righteousness is an adornment of the believer’s life and thus adorns the crown.  I admit the idea of a crown with “folds” seems odd, but I looked at pictures of crowns with rubies and the late Queen wore a crown with rubies which one could say has “folds”.

The righteousness of the believer’s life becomes the embellishment of the believer’s crown. This is a striking way to understand the relationship between life and reward. With the protestant emphasis on imputed righteousness it is can sometimes be hard to understand the relationship of life and reward. From experience, most contemporary Protestants I know seem to think there is some sort of complete division between this world and the world to come such that nothing of this life except perhaps the barest elements of my identity and perhaps the power to recognize some others survives.

Here, Taylor seems to pick up an idea which seems similar to the morality play Everyman where Good Deeds alone can accompany him to heaven after death.  His righteous life now becomes adornment in the future because it continues with him.

The final line of this stanza contains a remarkable image: The righteous life is not merely an adornment of that crown, it actually thrusts one up into the crown:

And thrust the head at last up in this crown.

A milkwhite hand sets ‘t on a righteous head.

An hand unrighteousness cant’ dispose it nay

It’s not in such a hand. Such hands would bed                                         15

Black smuts on’t should they fingers on it lay.

Who can the crown of righteousness suppose

In an unrighteous hand for to dispose?

Notes:

This stanza makes a simple point: The one who gives a crown of righteousness must himself be righteous. If someone unrighteous were to bear the crown, the crown itself would be damaged.

This is a principle of the Law of Moses. If something clean touches something unclean, they both become unclean:

Haggai 2:10–14 (AV )

10 In the four and twentieth day of the ninth month, in the second year of Darius, came the word of the Lord by Haggai the prophet, saying, 11 Thus saith the Lord of hosts; Ask now the priests concerning the law, saying, 12 If one bear holy flesh in the skirt of his garment, and with his skirt do touch bread, or pottage, or wine, or oil, or any meat, shall it be holy? And the priests answered and said, No. 13 Then said Haggai, If one that is unclean by a dead body touch any of these, shall it be unclean? And the priests answered and said, It shall be unclean. 14 Then answered Haggai, and said,

            So is this people, and so is this nation before me, saith the Lord;

            And so is every work of their hands;

            And that which they offer there is unclean.

Such an idea would have been well-known by a Puritan pastor in the 17th Century.  It perhaps is interesting to observe that this rule did not apply to Jesus. When touched someone clean, they became clean:

Mark 1:40–42 (AV 1873)

40 And there came a leper to him, beseeching him, and kneeling down to him, and saying unto him, If thou wilt, thou canst make me clean. 41 And Jesus, moved with compassion, put forth his hand, and touched him, and saith unto him, I will; be thou clean. 42 And as soon as he had spoken, immediately the leprosy departed from him, and he was cleansed.

The rhythm of this stanza is largely regular.

The most interest effectcomes in the second line of the stanza (line 14):

An hand unrighteousness cant’ dispose it nay

The more common construction is adjective –  noun.

Here are the examples in this poem

An unholy head

Inherent righteousness

Ripe fruit

Studded carbuncles

Righteous life

Milkwhite hand

Black smuts

The poem does contain the phrase: crown of righteousness, where a noun + of  + noun construction creates an adjectival use of the second noun. This is an effect borrowed from Hebrew. Paul uses it in his letter, and the structure has been brought over to the English translation which Taylor takes up.

But in line 14 we have construction: indefinite article + noun + adjective. The construction makes sense, but it is unusual. Perhaps Taylor only used for the force or meter:

an HAND unRIGHTeous versus  an unRIGHTeous HAND

But the result is to throw the concept of “unrighteous” to the foreground: the unworthiness of such  a hand is the point of the stanza. This phrase, by being put forth in an unusual manner makes that plain.

When once upon the head it’s evergreen

And altogether used in righteousness,                                                           20

Where blessed bliss, and blissful peace is seen

And where no jar, nor brawler hath access.

Oh! Blessed crown what hold the breadth of all

The state of happiness in heaven’s hall.

Notes:

Here, Taylor places the reception of the crown in the world to come, “In heaven’s hall”.  (line 24)

The nature of this crown: When it given, it is perpetual in its glory, “When once upon the head it’s evergreen.” This relates to Augustine’s four-fold state of the human will:

“Augustine argued that there are four states, which are derived from the Scripture, that correspond to the four states of man in relation to sin: (a) able to sin, able not to sin (posse peccare, posse non peccare); (b) not able not to sin (non posse non peccare); (c) able not to sin (posse non peccare); and (d) unable to sin (non posse peccare). The first state corresponds to the state of man in innocency, before the Fall; the second the state of the natural man after the Fall; the third the state of the regenerate man; and the fourth the glorified man.” https://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/onsite/augustinewill.html

To be in heaven is to not be able to sin. Incidentally, one might ask how one could be free and be able to not sin. You can think of freedom in many ways. One way to understand freedom is freedom from, here freedom from sin. God is the more free than any creature and God cannot sin. When sin is understood as a limitation, than freedom, than the choice to sin is not freedom.

The crown, once gained, is not merely eternal but it perpetuates righteousness.

Next comes the best line in the poem:

Where blessed bliss, and blissful peace is seen

The rhythm of the line is perfectly regular. Taylor’s use of irregular lines would spoil the effects

Where

                  Blessed

                                    Bliss

And

                                    Blissful

                  Peace

Is seen.

We have the alliteration on B (with a matching P).  We have bliss, noun; and blissful (adverb): the same concept in two forms. The line makes a sort of chiasm with Bliss/Blissful in the center. The bliss is blessed and the peace is blissful.

The state of righteousness is a state of evergreen bliss.

The state of peace and bliss is marked by what is not present:

And where no jar, nor brawler hath access.

Jar does not mean the container; think, “jarring”, upsetting.

No one can come here to fight, ‘no brawler”

In the KJV (which would likely have been Taylor’s Bible) twice has Paul rejecting “brawlers:”

1 Timothy 3:2–3 (AV 1873)

2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; 3 not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous;

Titus 3:1–2 (AV 1873)

Put them in mind to be subject to principalities and powers, to obey magistrates, to be ready to every good work, 2 to speak evil of no man, to be no brawlers, but gentle, shewing all meekness unto all men.

If upon earth, brawlers are to be excluded from the church, how much more in heaven.

He then turns to address the crown directly:

Oh! Blessed crown what hold the breadth of all

I am not sure how to understand, “what hold the breadth of all”.  There are two interesting points of this line: First, “what hold”.  I think I should take “what” as a relative pronoun, something along the lines of “that holds”. Second, the crown entails the breadth of all – what? The second question is answerd in the next line

The state of happiness in heaven’s hall.

I would take idea here to be that the crown is sufficient and entails, encompasses all the happiness of heaven. Righteousness thus being a supreme joy of heaven.

A crown of righteousness, a righteous head,                           25

Oh naughty man! My brain pan turret is

Where swallows build and hatch: sins black and red.

My head and heart do ache, and throb at this.

Lord were my turret cleansed made by thee

The grace’s dovehouse turret much might be.                        30

Notes

The gap between what the poet hopes to become and the life he now inhabits opens as he meditates upon this crown.

A crown of righteousness would be most fitting upon a righteous. It is as if he is musing on this:

A crown of righteousness, a righteous head,

And then struck by the incongruence between his head and that crown:

Oh naughty man!

The connotations of the word “naughty” are only serious for Taylor. The modern diminishment of this particular word as denoting serious wrongdoing was not then present.  The uses of the word previously create an interesting combination of concepts. First, the word would reference something profane, evil, lewd. Second, the word would denote something empty or unworthy.

From thinking of his head, Taylor moves to the idea of top of a tower. The picture of a crown on a head becomes the image of a tower with turrets. His own body standing erect is the tower and his head the top of the tower.  This image of a man as a tower and a tower as a man is the scene of the remainder of this stanza:

                                                      My brain pan turret is

Where swallows build and hatch: sins black and red.

My head and heart do ache, and throb at this.

Lord were my turret cleansed made by thee

The grace’s dovehouse turret much might be.

The brain pain is the skull. The tower is envisioned as ill-kempt place. The turrets are not clean, but rather birds are building nests and raising young. While bird and their young can be quite lovely, the space around and beneath the nest quickly become filthy. A tower overrun by birds would be disgusting.

Now why he chooses swallows for the undesirable bird, I do not know. A search of the King James Bible does not help much. Psalm 86: 3, “Yea, the sparrow hath found an house, and the swallow a nest for herself, where she may lay her young, even thine altars, O LORD of hosts, my King, and my God.” Which hardly explains the use of swallow here.

The word “Sins” in line 28 receives a tremendous emphasis. First, the word follows a colon in the middle of the line. This brings the line to a pause following an accent on the word “hatch.” Second, rather than an unaccented syllable to keep the line regular iambic, the word “sins” receives an emphasis. Third, it is an “extra” accent in this line.

where SWALlows BUILD and HATCH: SINS BLACK and RED

The swallows in his brain are raising upon sins to live where crown should be.

He bemoans the effect of the realization of his:

My head and heart do ache, and throb at this.

He then ends the stanza with a prayer:

Lord were my turret cleansed made by thee

The grace’s dovehouse turret much might be.

The switch to Doves is likely suggested by the image of the Holy Spirit as a Dove at the baptism of Jesus. A dovehouse would be the place the Spirit resides.

“It is the Spirit of God in the saints that is the spirit of prayer: now God’s Spirit is a dove-like, meek, quiet, and peaceable spirit.”  Burroughs, Jeremiah. Causes, Evils, and Cures of Heart and Church Divisions. Carlton & Phillips, 1855, p. 65.

But the switch between birds is admittedly not wholly successful. If the first bird were peculiarly loathsome (say a vulture), then the emphasis would be on the particular kind of bird. The switch from vulture to dove would be effective.

But since the first bird is a swallow, the usage must imply that it is being a place of bird nests which is in view The switch to doves does not help much here. Perhaps it is a Dove house rather than a tower with bird perched willy-nilly which is in view.

But if God were to cleanse this tower, it would be lovely. If God were to cleanse his head, it would be fit for the crown.

Now for the prayer

Oh! Make it so: then righteousness pure, true,

Shall roost upon my boughs, and in my heart

And all its fruits that obedience grew

To stud this crown like gems in every part.

Is then garnished for this crown, and thou                                                 35

Shalt have my songs to diadem thy brow.

Notes: Here we see the image of a tree, which was hinted at in the second stanza with the reference to righteousness as fruit. We do have the direct repetition of the image of “fruit” in line 33. Also, we have a return of the word “stud”, but here obedience is the fruit which studs the crown.

This stanza brings the prayer: “Make it so.”

What does he hope to be made so? Make me righteous in my life, make my heart pure and true.  Righteousness appears here like birds:

Make … righteousness … roost upon my boughs. The birds of the previous stanza have returned, but these are no longer the disruptive swallows. Apparently, these are the doves he hoped to receive.

As noted above, fruit has returned, but this time of obedience. The fruit does not grow upon the boughs but in the heart. This seems to be an allusion to a passage from the Sermon on the Mount:

Matthew 7:16–20 (AV)

16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? 17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. 19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. 20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

The life of the heart demonstrates itself in the life of obedience. Obedience beautifies righteousness, like jewels upon a crown.

Obedience then produces praise:

And all its fruits that obedience grew

To stud this crown like gems in every part.

Is then garnished for this crown, and thou                                                 35

Shalt have my songs to diadem thy brow.

This is a connection I cannot say that I have well thought of before. Surely, it is hard to praise when disobedient. And praise is often connected in the Psalms as the result of repentance and forgiveness. But here he says (1) obedience is itself praise, and (2) obedience is intimately connected with expressed praised.

This poem is thus also a jewel, because it is a song which sits like a crown upon his Lord:

                                                      and thou                                                    35

Shalt have my songs to diadem thy brow.

Oh! Happy me, if thou wilt crown me thus.

Oh! Naughty heart! What swell with sin? Fie, fie

Oh! Gracious Lord, me pardon: do not crush

Me all to mammocks; crown and not destroy.                                          40

I’ll tune thy praises while this crown doth come

Thy glory bring I tucked up in my song.

Notes:

There is an interesting movement in the discussion of this last stanza. He addresses God, if you will grant by prayer, I will be happy:

Oh! Happy me, if thou wilt crown me thus.

He addresses himself. The sinful tendency of his heart is seen as an irrational intruder: I would be happy without sin and yet here it is:

Oh! Naughty heart! What swell with sin? Fie, fie

Having rebuked himself, he turns to God for pardon:

Oh! Gracious Lord, me pardon:

The lines continue in a manner seen in many Psalms, such as:

Psalm 6:1 (AV)

O Lord, rebuke me not in thine anger,

Neither chasten me in thy hot displeasure.

Oh! Gracious Lord, me pardon: do not crush

Me all to mammocks; crown and not destroy.

Do not level upon me the punishment which I deserve.

A mammock is an archaic English dialect word meaning a shard, a scrap, anything very small.

The English Dialect Dictionary gives his quaint usaged, “Aw never seed sitch a little mommick” (https://archive.org/details/englishdialectdi06wriguoft/page/n751/mode/2up?view=theater) See also the OED for additional meaning and background.

Do not make me nothing.

Finally, he ends:

I’ll tune thy praises while this crown doth come

Thy glory bring I tucked up in my song.

One could utterly misunderstand the nature of what happens here. He is not saying, Don’t hurt me and I’ll do something nice for you.  That is often how we understand ourselves in God; as if God needs our praise; or if God is arbitrarily cruel.  If only I could be good enough, he’d like me.

But consider then the entire poem: he is longing for an eternal blessing which God will bestow. The trouble lies in the poet’s own rebellion: Here is this thing I desire and yet I irrationally am sabotaging my own happiness. Oh God, forgive me and also make me sane. I will bless for healing me.

This can be seen if notice that Taylor is working with a bit of a chiasm here. I am going to reorder the stanzas, matching first and last; second and penultimate; …

A crown and praise.

A1

A crown, Lord, yea, a crown of righteousness.

Oh! What a gift is this? Give Lord I pray

An holy head, and heart to possess

And I shall give thee glory for the pay.

A crown is brave, and righteousness much more.                                  5

The glory of them both will pay the score.

A2

Oh! Happy me, if thou wilt crown me thus.

Oh! Naughty heart! What swell with sin? Fie, fie

Oh! Gracious Lord, me pardon: do not crush

Me all to mammocks; crown and not destroy.                                          40

I’ll tune thy praises while this crown doth come

Thy glory bring I tucked up in my song.

Adorning the Crown

B1

A crown indeed consisting of fine gold

Adherent, and inherent righteousness

Stuck with their ripe ripe fruits in every fold

Like studded carbuncles they to it dress                                     10

A righteous life doth ever wear renown

And thrust the head at last up in this crown.

B2

Oh! Make it so: then righteousness pure, true,

Shall roost upon my boughs, and in my heart

And all its fruits that obedience grew

To stud this crown like gems in every part.

Is then garnished for this crown, and thou                                                 35

Shalt have my songs to diadem thy brow.

Sin Defiles the Crown

C1

A milkwhite hand sets ‘t on a righteous head.

An hand unrighteousness cant’ dispose it nay

It’s not in such a hand. Such hands would bed                                         15

Black smuts on’t should they fingers on it lay.

Who can the crown of righteousness suppose

In an unrighteous hand for to dispose?

C2

A crown of righteousness, a righteous head,                           25

Oh naughty man! My brain pan turret is

Where swallows build and hatch: sins black and red.

My head and heart do ache, and throb at this.

Lord were my turret cleansed made by thee

The grace’s dovehouse turret much might be.                        30

The center of the poem: The Happiness of Righteous Heaven

When once upon the head it’s evergreen

And altogether used in righteousness,                                                           20

Where blessed bliss, and blissful peace is seen

And where no jar, nor brawler hath access.

Oh! Blessed crown what hold the breadth of all

The state of happiness in heaven’s hall.

The key to this poem is the “blessed bliss and blissful peace” which exists when no sin tarnishes; nor irrational desires invade. We can sometimes be coy about sin and think this or that small thing would be too much to lose. But what evil in this world is not the fault of sin. The thing hoped for is joy and bliss and peace. These are not boring. We have never experienced them as they are meant to be. And we have never experienced them with a crown of righteousness upon our head.

[1] Calvin, John. 2 Timothy. Electronic ed., Ages Software, 1998, p. 2 Ti 4:8.

Edward Taylor, Meditation 44.5

09 Tuesday May 2023

Posted by in Edward Taylor

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

A crown of righteousness, a righteous head,                           25

Oh naughty man! My brain pan turret is

Where swallows build and hatch: sins black and red.

My head and heart do ache, and throb at this.

Lord were my turret cleansed made by thee

The grace’s dovehouse turret much might be.                        30

Notes

The gap between what the poet hopes to become and the life he now inhabits opens as he meditates upon this crown.

A crown of righteousness would be most fitting upon a righteous. It is as if he is musing on this:

A crown of righteousness, a righteous head,

And then struck by the incongruence between his head and that crown:

Oh naughty man!

The connotations of the word “naughty” are only serious for Taylor. The modern diminishment of this particular word as denoting serious wrongdoing was not then present.  The uses of the word previously create an interesting combination of concepts. First, the word would reference something profane, evil, lewd. Second, the word would denote something empty or unworthy.

From thinking of his head, Taylor moves to the idea of top of a tower. The picture of a crown on a head becomes the image of a tower with turrets. His own body standing erect is the tower and his head the top of the tower.  This image of a man as a tower and a tower as a man is the scene of the remainder of this stanza:

                                                      My brain pan turret is

Where swallows build and hatch: sins black and red.

My head and heart do ache, and throb at this.

Lord were my turret cleansed made by thee

The grace’s dovehouse turret much might be.

The brain pain is the skull. The tower is envisioned as ill-kempt place. The turrets are not clean, but rather birds are building nests and raising young. While bird and their young can be quite lovely, the space around and beneath the nest quickly become filthy. A tower overrun by birds would be disgusting.

Now why he chooses swallows for the undesirable bird, I do not know. A search of the King James Bible does not help much. Psalm 86: 3, “Yea, the sparrow hath found an house, and the swallow a nest for herself, where she may lay her young, even thine altars, O LORD of hosts, my King, and my God.” Which hardly explains the use of swallow here.

The word “Sins” in line 28 receives a tremendous emphasis. First, the word follows a colon in the middle of the line. This brings the line to a pause following an accent on the word “hatch.” Second, rather than an unaccented syllable to keep the line regular iambic, the word “sins” receives an emphasis. Third, it is an “extra” accent in this line.

where SWALlows BUILD and HATCH: SINS BLACK and RED

The swallows in his brain are raising upon sins to live where crown should be.

He bemoans the effect of the realization of his:

My head and heart do ache, and throb at this.

He then ends the stanza with a prayer:

Lord were my turret cleansed made by thee

The grace’s dovehouse turret much might be.

The switch to Doves is likely suggested by the image of the Holy Spirit as a Dove at the baptism of Jesus. A dovehouse would be the place the Spirit resides.

“It is the Spirit of God in the saints that is the spirit of prayer: now God’s Spirit is a dove-like, meek, quiet, and peaceable spirit.”  Burroughs, Jeremiah. Causes, Evils, and Cures of Heart and Church Divisions. Carlton & Phillips, 1855, p. 65.

But the switch between birds is admittedly not wholly successful. If the first bird were peculiarly loathsome (say a vulture), then the emphasis would be on the particular kind of bird. The switch from vulture to dove would be effective.

But since the first bird is a swallow, the usage must imply that it is being a place of bird nests which is in view The switch to doves does not help much here. Perhaps it is a Dove house rather than a tower with bird perched willy-nilly which is in view.

But if God were to cleanse this tower, it would be lovely. If God were to cleanse his head, it would be fit for the crown.

Where to Start

07 Sunday May 2023

Posted by in Biblical Counseling, Theology of Biblical Counseling

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Below is the introduction for a biblical counseling course I teach at Masters University. I may organize the material into a book:

Where to Start?

To begin, put this down and go read the first chapter of Genesis. The first lesson is biblical counseling is that we must read the Bible. When you finished read the Genesis chapter one, come back…..

In addition to reading the Bible, biblical counseling involves thinking carefully about the Bible. A few things to note. First, who is the chapter about? Who is the main actor in this story? Obviously, that is God.  What does God? He creates, everything. Note that little phrase at the end verse 16, “and the stars.”  So where do we live? Inside of the creation. And can we ever see or know beyond that? Well, not unless God tells us something.

Look down to verses 26-27. What about human beings? We are creations, also. We have a special status. What two things do you notice about our status? We have dominion over the rest of the creation. We are created in God’s image.

Let us take stock about what we learn from Genesis 1: There is a Creator. Everything else is creation. The planet is all the creation. The stars, however far away they may be, are the creation. We human beings are creatures. In this, we are like trees and stars and oceans. We are something God has made. In this we are also like angels and cherubim and seraphim; we are all creatures.

But unlike these other creatures, we occupy a special place. We have dominion over the rest of the creation. In addition, we are created in something called the “image and likeness” of God.

At this point in our study, we will not be taking too much time to consider these points. However, these elements will become very important when we begin to think about counseling directly. At this point, we are making taking stock of issues which should consider.

We are beginning with Genesis, because this section of the Bible provides a useful layout of the matters we will need to consider when it comes to determine the problems for which people will come for counsel.  It also will help us to understand why we must counsel in the way we do—and also, why we must be careful about using observations or techniques gained from other psychologies.

A Brief Note on the Word, “Psychology”

This word and this concept have engendered a great deal of controversy and discussion among Christians who sincerely hope to do good.

A complete discussion of this topic would go wildly beyond our present purposes. However, a few notes are in order.

There is no one who does not a working psychology. Psychology is nothing other than the study of how human beings function. It is an enormously broad concept.  Psychology considers the basic functioning of the nervous system and other bodily functions which might bear upon thought, emotion, or behavior. Psychology studies thought, emotion, behavior, whether cognitive or habitual. It does not rule, per se, “mind” or “soul,” although the relationship to such concepts is “complicated.” It studies human interactions. In this way, it enters into history, politics, sociology, education, et cetera.

When you had a conversion with someone else and asked, “Why did she say that?” you have engaged in psychology.

Psychology also entails responses and helps relating to change in another person (or ourselves). If you have tried to break a habit, you have engaged in psychology. If you have given a friend advice, like “don’t worry about.” You have engaged in psychology.

People who have made a career out of psychology may have studied some aspect at length. We might consider a university professor to be an expert psychologist. But for that matter, Shakespeare and Dostoevsky are expert psychologists.

There is thus no simple thing which is “psychology.” It entails what we human beings spend most of our time doing, thinking about ourselves and other people, and engaging with others, or thinking about what we are not doing so.

A comprehensive psychology will require an extensive set of conclusions about the nature of human beings. If you start with the assumption that all human psychology is explained by the body and environment, and that human bodies are the result of innumerable mutations acted upon by death, you will understand irrational events as the result of haphazard machinery in a difficult place. You will not conclude that human life or decisions are truly meaningful (even though someone might care about their own decisions or what others do to them).

To be a biblical counselor will entail beginning with a biblical understanding of what we are and how we got here. The information which we gain from the beginning of Genesis will set an agenda for what will start with as our “givens” when it comes to constructing a method of counseling.

For instance, if we are bare machines and our thoughts and emotions are really just epiphenomenon of behavior, then deliberate use of behavioral psychology would be an appropriate decision. Likewise, we would start with Jung or Adler or Rogers or something else if we began with different presuppositions.

The directions we will take from the rest of Scripture on how to counsel are rooted and grounded the soil of creation and Genesis.

End.

Genesis 2

Genesis 2 is going to provide us with additional information to fill out our agenda of matters to consider in the future. So, as before, go read Genesis 2.

This time, since you are learning how to counsel, I want you to make a list of observations answer this question: What in this chapter might be use when trying to understand what is going on with a human being alive today?  This question is slightly different than “What does this mean?”

You are not going to need to break out a Hebrew Bible (though if you read Hebrew, please feel free to do so). This is not a question about difficult exegetical points.

I will give you one idea to begin with: God creates Adam. We learn it is not good for a human being to be alone. The issue of relationship, marriage, solitude, loneliness, is thus something we will need to consider when we consider the troubles which might beset someone alive today.

The desire for friendship and marriage, the pain of loneliness will be matters which will need to address in counseling.

So read through the chapter pen or pencil or computer or other recording implement in hand. Start making a list of things which might be pertinent to the understanding of human beings.

Now that you have completed your task, let us consider what we have read.

How is Adam created? He is formed and then God breathes into him. How is Eve formed? She is made from Adam’s body. Just preliminary notes, but there might be something important about the breath of life in a body. What about Eve coming from Adam? Well, we all come from Adam and Eve, therefore, there is at least some minimal amount which we all must share together. We are all distant cousins at least. We all have a common human nature. What went on with these people has some effect upon us.

Now, where do we find Adam? In the Garden. What is he doing there? He is there to tend and keep the Garden. When we come to this issue, we will learn that this “tend and keep” language points us toward the question of worship and we might want to consider this garden as having some relationship to the Temple.

But stick with the Garden for a moment longer. What else can we see here: This Garden is quite a bit different than our current life. It does not appear to present any dangers. The animals do what is useful for Adam. There is abundant food. Adam has work. Adam also has direct and apparently free communication with God.

The relationship between Adam and Eve are quite joyous (Adam seems as pleased as any human being has ever been upon receiving the woman). There is this peculiar observation that they did not have clothing.

In short, Genesis 2 tells us about a world of which we have no firsthand experience. It sounds wonderful, but it is not where we live.

This is a little out of order, but now go and read the final two chapters of the Bible. I’ll wait.

I just want you to notice how significantly the end of the story, the New Heavens and the New Earth seem to replicate aspects of Genesis 2.  I’ll ask you one more question. When Mary Magdalen first saw Jesus after he had resurrected, who did she think he was?

And yes, there is something about a tree, but we will pick up the tree in Genesis 3.

Genesis 3

This is the most important chapter we will consider as make our first data gathering run through the beginning of the Bible. With that having been said, read through Genesis 3 and make a list of matters which you anticipate may have a bearing upon present counseling issues. There is probably no single chapter of the Bible which is more important to laying out the backdrop for what we do as counselors.

For this exercise, you need to do more than just read through the chapter. I want you to also go find some secondary source to help you work through this material. Go find some sermons on the chapter or use a commentary to help you (the notes from your study bible won’t count).

Also, I want you to take the time to prayer for help in understanding this chapter. Since you should not be able to complete this task in one sitting, you must specifically pray for comprehension and insight each time before you begin your study.

Prayer for help understanding the Bible will be something you must always do from here on out.

Where do we find ourselves at the beginning of the chapter? First, who is there? Notice down in verse 6. Who was there? Where were they?

Second, who begins talking?

Think about the conversation for a moment. Look up at chapter 2. When was the command concerning the tree given, before or after Eve’s creation? So how then would Eve know about the commandment?

Now think: Name everyone slandered by the Serpent in this question.

We can put aside the question about touching the tree. Some people make quite a deal of this point; others find it unimportant. We don’t need to decide that question, because there are other things quite clear. Does Eve know the commandment? Does she have some idea of the consequences (remember, “die” may not be a clear concept for her; but she apparently at least knows it is a bad thing)?

Here is another observation which we will consider later: A cognitive knowledge of the commandment is insufficient to guarantee obedience. An extremely common error in biblical counseling is belief that sin is purely the result of a lack of knowledge. If you merely knew that you should not covet, you would not covet. At this point, go read Romans 7 and then come back. Does merely telling someone the commandment mean there will be obedience?

Why then do you think insisting upon a commandment will ever be sufficient to result in obedience? (We will talk about the nature and importance of obedience later.) So here is another issue to flag for later consideration.

I want you to think of some of the absurdities of the Serpent’s approach. For instance, by definition, something said by God is true. Look back at Genesis 1, what happens when God speaks? It is impossible for God to lie. (Heb. 6:18)

What does the Serpent promise Eve? Two things.

We will develop these issues at greater length below; but let us consider why these points might be important. You will be like God. Go back and read Genesis 1:26-27.  They are already created in the Image of God. And the second point: you will be given the right to decide what is good or evil. How well has that gone for us?

Read 1 Timothy 2:14. If Adam was not deceived, what is the nature of his sin? Read Romans 5:12: what was the effect of Adam’s sin upon you?

What is the emotional effect, the subjective effect upon eating the fruit? How do Adam and Eve experience the world immediately upon sinning?

Here is another point to hold for later: Shame (and guilt) come in with sin and accompany sin. We will learn that shame is the experience of sin and the experience of being sinned against.

Consider the nature of God’s approach to Adam and Eve. In verse 8, what is God doing? Compare the nature of their relationship with God to our current relationship with God. What are some differences?

When God begins to ask questions, how do Adam and Eve respond in turn? Think a little bit about Adam’s excuse. Who are the persons blamed for his behavior?

In counseling, a very common thing you will encounter is someone explaining how they are not responsible for their own conduct.  Someone else has made them the way they are? Is there a difference between causation (gravity causes the apple to fall to the ground), and influence (a strong breeze might move the apple a bit as it falls).

Counseling is an impossible and pointless enterprise if one person can cause another person to do or act. Moreover, sin is impossible if we can be forced to sin by another person’s conduct.

Now, I want you to read through the Genesis 3:14-19. In verses 14-15, we read of a coming conflict. Who will be the participants in this conflict?

Let us consider this matter a little more broadly: let us take the Serpent and Seed as also representatives of certain populations. With whom will human beings have an ongoing conflict. Go read Mark 1:21-27.  Now that you have read it, answer the question again. There is admittedly a great deal of dispute concerning this particular issue: to what extent if any should a current day Christian be concerned with host fronted by the Serpent? I am not going solve that issue, but we must put that on the agenda.

Next, look at the result for the woman. We have two sets of troubles for her. What are they?

Finally, look down at the man: what are his troubles going to be.

You may have taken a class at some point where a teacher tried to summarize the sort of plots you might encounter, Man vs. Nature, Man vs. Man, and so on. Let’s see if we can make a list of the sort of conflicts we may expect:

Rebellious Spirits vs. human beings.  Most particularly in the life of Jesus Christ.

Child birth, which should merely be the beginning of life, is itself a potential time of death.

There will be conflicts between human beings: If the first pair can have conflict, we cannot expect better.

There will be conflict between human beings and the rest of creation. The world will be resistant to proving us food (which is quite the opposite of the state in the Garden).

Next, our work will be painful and difficult. But we will be unable to avoid the necessity of this work.

Finally, our bodies will get sick and then die.

Let’s finish up the chapter: What is the result of story for Adam and Eve?

Is it possible to return to this Garden?

Before we turn our attention to chapter 4, Let’s take stock of our circumstance at the end of chapter 3.

When I was in college, my anthropology professor said the trouble with human beings is that we live in the wrong environment. We evolved to live on the Savanna but we now live in temperature controlled buildings with artificial light.  I would agree to a point: we certainly live in the wrong environment. But I would change his evaluation as follows: We were created to live a sinless life in the Garden in immediate fellowship with God.

The world which was created to sustain our lives is not in open rebellion against us. In fact, it’s out to kill us.

Let us consider the effect this Fall upon human nature. You’re going to need to stop again. God Read Romans 1-3.

When I taught these chapters to Junior High and High School students, I asked them to remember the two things sin does to human beings: It makes us stupid and crazy.

Here is an exercise. Try to summarize the state of being a human after the Fall in one paragraph. Close the book and go write.

Here are some of the elements which should be in your summary: Human beings are living in the wrong place. Human beings are stupid and crazy. We live in bodies that are in rebellion against us on a planet which seeks to kill us. In fact, without the miraculous intervention of God, we will suffer death.  The normal response to such overwhelming negative odds would be fear or sorrow (if you want to put that into modern “psychological terms” anxiety and depression).  To deal with the fear and sorrow, we routinely engage in beliefs and behaviors which might make us somehow feel better for a moment. Moreover, we will routinely not know what to do.

That will lead us to understand the three basic categories of situations we will face in biblical counseling: Wisdom (what to do).  Relief (dealing with painful emotional/cognitive relationships to life). Mortification of sin (dealing with sin).

Genesis 4

One last section to prepare our agenda. Please read the story of Cain and Abel. I’ll wait.

There are points from this story which I would like you to notice. First, what are Cain and Able both doing? They are engaged in overt acts of worship. This is the first time we see human beings involved in bringing a sacrifice to God. Second, what happens? What is the first thing we learn about human interaction after we have left the Garden? Compare this end point with the very first human interaction recorded in Genesis 2.

Some Notes Toward an Agenda

Having reviewed the introductory chapters to the Bible, make a list of the sort of issues we should expect to consider when engaged in biblical counseling.

Relational

We were created to be in relationship with God. We will see this point reiterated in the commandment to love God with all of our heart, soul, mind, strength. That relationship was eviscerated at the Fall.  Were it not for the gracious act of God to restore that relationship, nothing we do could attempt to remedy the loss. We cannot reach up to God, so God had to reach down to us.

We were created to be in relationship with other human beings. Again, we see that point taken up by the law to love our neighbor as ourselves.  Yet, even the close relationship between brothers could end in murder.

Of human relationships, those in the family are given particular importance. Immediately with sin, we find the first couple blaming others for their own troubles. We see Adam not driving off the Serpent.  And parents, mirroring the act of God in giving counsel to the newly minted Adam, have a duty to give instructions to their children, who, like Adam, are new to this world.

Worship

I think we should understand Adam’s gardening work as the predecessor for our work of worship.  The first picture we have of human beings after being driven from the Garden is the act of worship between Cain and Abel. Perhaps foreshadowing the sorry wars of religion, one murdered the other.

The defective practice of that most human of actions, worship, marks much of the narrative in the Bible. We have the repeated warnings and discussions of idolatry before the coming of Christ. And we have John’s warning after the resurrection, Keep yourselves from idols.

This aspect of human life is another way to consider the breakdown in the divine/human relationship.

Death and Sin

The twin monster of sin and death relate in some interesting ways. There is the obvious movement of sin to punishment, eternal death.  However, there is another movement from death to sin which is mentioned in places such as Hebrews 2:14-15, where fear of death creates the condition for enslavement to sin.

Vanity

With death and the loss of the Garden, we find ourselves in world subjected to futility. Responding to that futility has been the constant work of civilization. It has also lead to a variety responses ranging from despair to war, from debauchery to asceticism. This axis is similar to the death and sin issue, but focuses more upon the loss of everything around me, in addition to my own death.

The Noetic Effects of Sin

Sin has made us crazy and stupid. Romans 1, any history book, the news, just knowing any other human beings (as well as our own hearts), will prove this point. And even after salvation, we must face the task of renewing minds which have been warped and twisted.

This leads us to any number of sinful responses, as well as a desperate need for wisdom.

Sin Itself

Sin follows upon sin. No sooner had primeval pair rebelled by eating, but they turned on one another.  Their children would murder. By the time we come to Noah, the world is filled with violence. It takes no effort to learn about sin, because we lie as soon as have the chance. No one has ever needed to teach a child to be self-centered or cruel.

Sin asks as a sort of adaptive response to the post-Fall state of life. Taking, hording, hiding, lying, coveting, slandering, and so on, make a sort of perverted sense. If I am going to die and if all is pointless, explain to me why I should not steal something when I will never receive punishment. Now it might be useful for everyone if no one stole; but imposing the rule upon you and having no rule upon me would be best for me.

Environmental

We live in the wrong place and always will. We were created for dominion and die from microbes. We were created for direct interaction with God, and find that relationship difficult to maintain. We are in the wrong place, far from home, and will not be where we belong until we no longer live here in this age.

Conflicts

In working through the sentence pronounced by God, we saw that our post-Fall life was one of seeming perpetual conflict with the entire Creation.  Surviving and responding to such conflict is an essential aspect of being a human being.

The Image of God

We also must consider that highly debated proposition that human beings were created in the image and likeness of God.  Being renewed in that image is the end which God has set before us. (Col. 3:9-10)

What Shall We Do?

One of the great faults of much which goes by the name of counseling, is the failure to adequately comprehend the nature of the trouble faced by human beings. We can easily attempt to reduce the “solution” to a pat formula. One of the fundamental problems with all psychology which does not begin with the Bible is the failure to have an adequate comprehension of a human being. Freud was right that there is a conflict between our conscience and desire: he just did not have the faintest idea what that means or from whence it came. Skinner was right about behavioral habits. But as important as behavioral habits may be, they do provide a full description human life (although my professor of behavioral psychology at UCLA attempted mightily to persuade me otherwise. She explained to me that did not actually love another; I just enjoyed certain sorts of positive rewards).

A frightful amount of counseling comes off as if the only trouble faced by a counselee was ignorance of some proposition.  Insisting on do and do not and incomprehension at the lack of immediate obedience to the dictates delivered is too common for the church’s good.

And so on.

Which leaves us with, what shall we do? Where do we start? And what is our aim?   Before we turn to the practice of counseling, let us take a moment to consider the why of counseling.