Author Archives: memoirandremains

Sermon on 1 Thessalonians 5:12-13 (Part One)

13 Sunday Dec 2020

Posted by in 1 Thessalonians, Sermons

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, ,

1 Thessalonians 5:12–13 (NASB95) 

12      But we request of you, brethren, that you appreciate those who diligently labor among you, and have charge over you in the Lord and give you instruction, 

  13      and that you esteem them very highly in love because of their work. Live in peace with one another. 

            There is an awkwardness in any pastor standing at his home pulpit to preach this passage. A man stands before you to read a text which says to acknowledge or respect or honor him to show him great esteem. What we hear in such words is honor me, highly esteem me. This easily leads us to rebel against such an apparent display of pride: Who does he think he is? Why does he think himself so very special? There are others who preach better, who pray better, who care better, who live better. There are others who are more holy, and so on, as think how to knock him down from his perch. 

            How does any man preach this passage faithfully and avoid sounding like a egotist? How can he tell you to esteem those who teach, all the while referring to himself, because we know the application is he is the one who is teaching you.

            And even if we surmount that first barrier, what could it possibly mean to esteem, to respect? Is the congregation subservient to some man who happens to have the job? Can we disagree with him, ever? 

            Let us take the objection first. Until we get over the trouble here, we can never get to the application. Even if it is not everyone, someone will be fussing the entire time, ready to object about the apparent self-serving nature of this passage. 

            Let us then concede that one could easily preach this passage as the work of a vain egotist, seeking to gain adherents for himself. But such vanity is not in the text; it is nowhere to be found in these words. The vanity would be in the man. And it is a real temptation for a pastor to take up these words and misuse them for his own ends.

            When a judge applies the law, the judge does not make himself a king over others. The authority which the judges exercises is in his robes and in his seat. The judge is given authority to apply law. When he takes off the robes and steps down from the bench, he lays that authority aside. If a judge pronounces sentence in a courtroom, the sentence stands. If he pronounces judgment in his living room, it means nothing more than the sound of the words. 

            The authority is in the office and the exercise of that office. The authority is not in the individual human being. 

            And so it is with the pastor. The pastor’s authority lies in the office, not in the man.

            But that still needs some qualification. The authority of the pastor is not precisely the office, either. 

            If a judge begins to make-up rules and apply his own whims and claim the authority of law for his imagination, he loses that authority. Other judges will reverse his decision, because he has become a lawless judge. He will be removed from his office, because he has abused the authority of his office. 

            A pastor has authority only so far as the Word of God has authority. His authority is in the Word, not in himself. Look down at the text. If you start in the middle of verse 12 you will this:

                        Appreciate those ….

And now go to the end

                        Who give you instruction.

            It does not say that you are to give this appreciation to a bishop because of his consecration. It says that appreciation is to be given to those who teach. If someone takes the office and exercises the apparent authority and then also does not do the work of the office; if he does not instruct, the office has become a weapon and the outcome is merely sin. If a police officer uses the authority to stop and search to harass and abuse, the officer is a criminal even though he wears a badge. 

            Appreciate those who give instruction. And it is right you should.

            The work of delivering a sermon may look easy. Someone stands and speaks for some period of time and then is done. It all seems so easy. But the hour on Sunday comes after hours and hours throughout the week. And that comes after years of experience and school.

            Every task appears simply when it is done by someone with skill. To see a task performed well is to hide all the difficulty which came before. Watch a musician or athlete. The great ones look like they are at perfect ease. When we watch them we say they play. They play an instrument; they play a game. This wor looks like play. But that play comes after years of work. 

            That does not mean that you show this appreciation and esteem to the pastor because he has worked hard. It is just to say that you should not despise his work because it appears easy to you. 

            Moreover, you are not respect the pastor because he has done a good job. It is not the appreciation of his personal worth. Perhaps you respect the athlete because of his performance, but the appreciation of a pastor is not a matter of appreciation his effort. 

            You are showing respect for the office he holds; and even more than that, you are showing respect to the Word of God which establishes the office and gives authority and worth to what he does. 

            There is another way which showing esteem for the pastor shows esteem for the Word of God. Look down at your Bible. This instruction to appreciate, to esteem those who teach is an instruction found in your Bible. By complying with this instruction, you are showing that you give honor to the Word of God. You cannot say that you honor the Word of God and then decide which commands you will abide. If you refuse a command, you are refusing the one who gave the command. 

            But someone will say, This particular ma nis not as good a pastor some others I have known. He does not preach as well Mr. X, or whatever comparison you may wish to make.

            Now if the concern with the pastor is one of sin; then the Scripture is clear on how to respond. If the concern is the pastor is not truly fit for the work, then perhaps he should find another way in which to serve. But I hope that you had made such a determination before you retained him for the work. 

            But if the concern is merely a matter of preference, what is it that you are truly seeking to do? Is your concern first for the honor of God and good of the Church? Or is you concern rather for your own control, your own taste? Perhaps it is you are wrong in the matter. 

            Moreover, there are many directions which God gives for us to follow in the matter of relationship. And in these directions, God does not specify that you must be personally pleased before you give obedience. 

            You are to honor your parents. Not because they are the best parents, but because they are your parents. 

            You are to honor governors. Not because you have the best governor, but because the governor is the governor.

            Wives are to respect their husbands. Not because they have the best husband, but because he is her husband.

            Husbands are to willing lay down their lives for their wives. Not because they have the best wife, but because she is his wife. 

            You must fulfill these duties because God has told you to do so. You are not given some veto. 

            An old illustration may help you understand this. Let us say I have lent to you one million dollars. You are to pay me back $100 per week. On the first week you come to me with your crisp $100 bill. I tell you to give the bill to so-and-so, who happens to be someone you dislike. 

            You refuse.

            I remind you, that you owe me the money and you must pay it as I direct. You pay the money, not because you owe so-and-so. You pay the money because you owe me. 

            The illustration is imperfect, but it should help. Our Lord has the right to demand of you, even your life. How many of our brothers and sisters throughout the world, throughout the history of the Christian Church have given their liberty or even their lives because they would not refuse to obey Christ? 

            They have been obedient even to death. And yet you think that you should not be troubled to even hold your tongue? Your children must honor you, but you have no duty to esteem the pastor?

            This I trust is sufficient to deal with the most troublesome objections to this passage, but there is one further matter to consider before we move on to the matter of what does it mean to appreciate and show esteem. 

            Ask yourself, Why does it irk me so to be told to honor my governor, honor my spouse—especially when they have not pleased me.

            We must admit that there is rebellion here, a refusal to obey a direct command of God. Nowhere does it say to honor the governor because I think it is a good idea. Nowhere does it say submit to your husband because he is particularly amazing or because he thinks what I think is best. Nowhere are children permitted to cast the vote on honor, nor may husbands refuse to love their wives, even to the point of giving their own lives. 

            Can you see, that this rebellion is because we want to make our own rules. Can’t you hear an echo of the Serpent’s, ye shall be God in the refusal to give honor to whom God says we must?

            But to the actual command in this verse? So far we have seen that the command is binding upon us, but what does the command entail? 

            First there are two sets of commands. One command is to the congregation, and that is clear. But there is a second command implied: this the command which describes the work of the pastor, to work diligently, to keep charge, to teach. We will leave the pastor’s duty to the side.

            What then are the commands to the congregation? Paul gives two commands, first, “appreciate”; second, to highly esteem. We will look at those two commands, and then spend some time figuring how we actually do the work of appreciating and esteeming.

            The command to appreciate comes in verse 12. Look at the beginning of the verse

            But we request of you, brethren, that you appreciate ….

If you have another translation than the NASB, you may read, “acknowledge” or “respect” or “honor”. The reason for the differences in the translations is because the original word simply means “to know.” 

            But here the word cannot simply mean to know about the pastor, nor can it mean to simply have acquaintance with the pastor. That is certainly part of the idea, but it does not meet the usage here. 

            Here it means to meet him in the context of a particular relationship. You know this pastor in the context of the work which he does. 

            Let us say Mrs. Smith, you neighbor is a heart surgeon, but you know her as your neighbor. You know that she smiles and waives. You know how she keeps her lawn. You know when she takes out the garbage cans. There is not much in that to esteem her. 

            But then the day comes when your infant child comes near to death. The baby needs heart surgery. In the hospital, it is Mrs. Smith who is now Dr. Smith you operates and saves your child’s life. Before you knew her as your neighbor. Now, you know her as the surgeon who spared you untold sorrow. When you look at her, you look at her now through the prism of his new relationship. 

            Before you had an opinion about how she kept her yard. But now you know her, you respect and acknowledge what she has done for you. Your knowledge of her takes on a new and very special color because you now know her as a doctor. 

            The same is true of your pastor. One time you may have known him only as your neighbor. But now you know him as one who painfully labors to teach you the Word of God. And this is precisely how you are to know him

            In 1 Corinthians 4:1, Paul writes

            Let a man regard us in this manner, as servants of Christ and stewards of mysteries of God.

Such knowledge is precisely how Paul instructs the Thessalonians in his letter. Look down at verse 13

            Esteem them very highly in love because of their work.

It is the work which is the basis and sphere of your knowledge and esteem. 

Thomas Manton, The Temptation of Christ, Sermon 1.b

10 Thursday Dec 2020

Posted by in Thomas Manton

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , ,

II. The reasons why Christ submitted to it.

A. With respect to Adam, that the parallel between the first and second Adam might be more exact. … 

Manton draws out a series of parallels here:

And as in other respects, so in this;

 in the same way we were destroyed by the first Adam, in the same way we were restored by the second. 

Christ recovereth and winneth that which Adam lost. 

Our happiness was lost by the first Adam being overcome by the tempter; 

so it must be recovered by the second Adam, the tempter being overcome by him. 

He that did conquer must first be conquered, that sinners might be rescued from the captivity wherein he held them captive. 

The first Adam, being assaulted quickly after his entrance into paradise, was overcome; and therefore must the second Adam overcome him as soon as he entered upon his office, and that in a conflict hand-to-hand, in that nature that was foiled. 

The devil must lose his prisoners in the same way that he caught them. Christ must do what Adam could not do. 

The victory is gotten by a public person in our nature, before it can be gotten by each individual in his own person, for so it was lost. 

Adam lost the day before he had any offspring, so Christ winneth it in his own person before he doth solemnly begin to preach the gospel and call disciples; and therefore here was the great overthrow of the adversary.

2. In regard of Satan, who by his conquest got a twofold power over man by tempting, he got an interest in his heart to lead him ‘captive at his will’ and pleasure, 2 Tim. 2:26; and he was made God’s executioner, he got a power to punish him: Heb. 2:14, ‘That through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil.’ 

The note on Hebrews 2:14 is interesting, because it is a passage which receives strikingly little comment by preachers or commentators. 

Therefore the Son of God, who interposed on our behalf, and undertook the rescue of sinners, did assume the nature of man, that he might conquer Satan in the nature that was conquered, and also offer himself as a sacrifice in the same nature for the demonstration of the justice of God. 

This argument has affinity with Anslem:

The argument is briefly this: man must render satisfaction, and he cannot do it; but only man ought to, and only God can; hence, God became man in Jesus Christ. “This cannot be done except by a complete satisfaction for sin, which no sinner can make” (ii. 4, 3). “There is no one therefore who can make this satisfaction except God Himself.… But no one ought to make it except man; otherwise man does not make satisfaction.… If, therefore, as is evident, it is needful that that heavenly state be perfected from among men, and this cannot be unless the above-mentioned satisfaction be made, which no one can make except God, and no one ought to make except man; it is necessary that a God-man make it” (ii. 6, 4 and 5). Christ is God-man, not by conversion of the Divine nature into the human, nor by the blending of the two natures into a tertium quid, but by the co-existence of the two natures in one person (ii. 7). He must be of the race of Adam, in order to make satisfaction for it (ii. 8). Being sinless, He did not need to die (ii. 10). “But there is nothing more severe and arduous that a man can suffer for the honour of God of his own accord, and not as a matter of debt, than death. And a man can in no way more entirely give himself up to God, than when he delivers himself up to death for His honour” (ii. 11, 21). Christ’s death was therefore voluntary, and herein consisted its supreme value: His merits are infinite, hence superabundant and available for man’s rescue. It is then shown “how His death outweighs the number and greatness of all sins” (ii. 14, 1). The merit of His death is derived from the uniqueness of His personality; “because a sin which is committed against His person surpasses beyond comparison all those which can be conceived of apart from His person” (ii. 14, 7). “The life of this Man was so exalted and so precious, that it may suffice to pay what is due for the sins of the whole world, and infinitely more” (ii. 17, 40).

George Cadwalader Foley, Anselm’s Theory of the Atonement: The Bohlen Lectures, 1908 (London; Bombay; Calcutta; New York: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1909), 129–130.

Manton then draws an interesting observation concerning Christ as an example. There is a school which reads all of Christ’s work as solely exemplary. But Manton here states example then merit:

First, Christ must overcome by obedience, tried to the uttermost by temptations; and then he must also overcome by suffering. By overcoming temptations, he doth overcome Satan as a tempter; and by death he overcame him as a tormentor, or as the prince of death, who had the power of executing God’s sentence. 

So that you see before he overcame him by merit, he overcame him by example, and was an instance of a tempted man before he was an instance of a persecuted man, or one that came to make satisfaction to God’s justice.

And how that example can act as a comfort to us: We can trust Jesus:

C. With respect to the saints, who are in their passage to heaven to be exposed to great difficulties and trials. Now that they might have comfort and hope in their Redeemer, and come to him boldly as one touched with a feeling of their infirmities, he himself submitted to be tempted. [Heb. 2:18, 4:15] …..

Christ hath experienced how strong the assailant is, how feeble our nature is, how hard a matter it is to withstand when we are so sorely assaulted. His own experience of sufferings and temptations in himself doth entender his heart, and make him fit for sympathy with us, and begets a tender compassion towards the miseries and frailties of his members.

This also has a hint of Anselm in it: The value of Christ’s obedience was increased because it was given in the face of temptation:

4. With respect to Christ himself, that he might be an exact pattern of obedience to God. The obedience is little worth, which is carried on in an even tenor, when we have no temptation to the contrary, … Now Christ was to be more eminent than all the holy ones of God, and therefore, that he might give an evidence of his piety, constancy, and trust in God, it was thought fit some trial should be made of him, that he might by example teach us what reason we have to hold to God against the strongest temptations.

Thomas Manton, The Temptation of Christ, Sermon 1.a

08 Tuesday Dec 2020

Posted by in Matthew, Thomas Manton, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

SERMON I

Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness, to be tempted of the devil.—

Matt. 4.1

Jesus Tempted, Giovanni Battista

The first step in exegesis is an examination of the grammatical/logical elements of the text:

This scripture giveth us the history of Christ’s temptation, which I shall go over by degrees.

In the words observe:—

1. The parties tempted and tempting. The person tempted was the Lord Jesus Christ. The person tempting was the devil.

2. The occasion inducing this combat, Jesus was led up of the Spirit.

3. The time, then.

4. The place, the wilderness.

Following this outline of the elements, he proposes an observation of what is to be learned from the text:

From the whole observe:—

Doct. The Lord Jesus Christ was pleased to submit himself to an extraordinary combat with the tempter, for our good.

Next he provides the elements of his sermon, which will be both an examination of the elements and an exhortation based upon the same:

1. I shall explain the nature and circumstances of this extraordinary combat.

2. The reasons why Christ submitted to it.

3. The good of this to us.

Now the examination:

I. The circumstances of this extraordinary combat. And here—

Manton looks at the Who, What, How, When

A. The persons combating—Jesus and the devil, the seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent. It was designed long before. Gen.3:15 ….

B. The manner of the combat. It was not merely a phantasm, that Christ was thus assaulted and used: no, he was tempted in reality, not in conceit and imagination only. It seemeth to be in the spirit, though it was real; as Paul was taken up into the third heaven, whether in the body or out of the body we cannot easily judge, but real it was. I shall more accurately discuss this question afterwards in its more proper place.

He emphasizes that this was a historical reality. Even though it involved at one non-physical being (the Devil), we should not consider spiritual engagements as less real. Next he considers, how did this come about:

C. What moved him, or how was he brought to enter into the lists [who arranged for this combat to take place] with Satan? He was ‘led by the Spirit,’ meaning thereby the impulsion and excitation of the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of God. Luke 4:1.

From this, Manton draws a deduction: 

He did not voluntarily put himself upon temptation, but, by God’s appointment, went up from Jordan farther into the desert.

At this point, Manton begins to draw a lesson. He presumes that the life of Jesus is exemplary for the conduct of our life. This is consistent with Peter’s teaching that Jesus’ conduct [at the passion] is exemplary for our life. 1 Peter 2:21. Paul writes that we are being conformed into the image of Jesus. Col. 3:10. Paul applies this in particular to our response to difficulties. Rom. 8:28-29. And so, Manton’s application in this manner is warranted. 

We learn hence:—

1. That temptations come not by chance, not out of the earth, nor merely from the devil; but God ordereth them for his own glory and our good.

He then provides examples, Job 1:12; Luke 22:31; Matt. 8:31

If we be free, let us bless God for it, and pray that he would not ‘lead us into temptation:’ if tempted, when we are in Satan’s hands, remember Satan is in God’s hand.

2. Having given up ourselves to God, we are no longer to be at our own dispose and direction, but must submit ourselves to be led, guided, and ordered by God in all things. So it was with Christ, he was led by the Spirit continually. Luke 4:1; Romans 8:14.

From the factual conclusions, Manton draws a conclusion as to our conduct:

3. That we must observe our warrant and calling in all we resolve upon. To put ourselves upon hazards we are not called unto, is to go out of our bounds to meet a temptation, or to ride into the devil’s quarters. Christ did not go of his own accord into the desert, but by divine impulsion, and so he came from thence. We may, in our place and calling, venture ourselves, on the protection of God’s providence, upon obvious temptations; God will maintain and support us in them; that is to trust God; but to go out of our calling is to tempt God.

And finally an observation as to human will and the power of God:

4. Compare the words used in Matthew and Mark, chap. 1:12, ‘And immediately the Spirit driveth him into the wilderness.’ That shows that it was a forcible motion, or a strong impulse, such as he could not easily resist or refuse, so here is freedom—he was led; there is force and efficacious impression—he was driven, with a voluntary condescension thereunto. There may be liberty of man’s will, yet the victorious efficacy of grace united together: a man may be taught and drawn, as Christ here was led, and driven by the Spirit into the wilderness.

Manton now come to when this took place.

D. The time.

1. Presently after his baptism. Now the baptism of Christ agreeth with ours as to the general nature of it. Baptism is our initiation into the service of God, or our solemn consecration of ourselves to him; and it doth not only imply work, but fight. (Rom. 6:13, 13:12 ….).  

Which raises the question of why would Jesus be baptized?

….His baptism was the taking of the field as general; we undertake to fight under him in our rank and place.

What is the connection between the baptism and the temptation? The temptation comes immediately upon the baptism and the Father’s recognition of Jesus as the Son (Mark 3:16-17)

2. Thus many times the children of God, after solemn assurances of his love, are exposed to great temptations.…God’s conduct is gentle, and proportioned to our strength, as Jacob drove as the little ones were able to bear it. He never suffers his castles to be besieged till they are victualled.

Why does the temptation come immediately before his public preaching ministry (his prophetical office):

3. … Experience of temptations fits for the ministry, as Christ’s temptations prepared him to set a-foot the kingdom of God, for the recovery of poor souls out of their bondage into the liberty of the children of God: … Christ also would show us that ministers should not only be men of science, but of experience.

4. The place or field where this combat was fought, the wilderness, where were none but wild beasts: … In this solitary place Satan tried his utmost power against our Saviour.

This teacheth us:—

a. That Christ alone grappled with Satan, having no fellow-worker with him, that we may know the strength of our Redeemer, who is able himself to overcome the tempter without any assistance, and to ‘save to the uttermost all that come unto God by him,’ Heb. 7:25.

b. That the devil often abuseth our solitude. It is good sometimes to be alone; but then we need to be stocked with holy thoughts or employed in holy exercises, that we may be able to say, as Christ, John 16:32, ‘I am not alone, because the Father is with me.’ Howsoever a state of retirement from human converse, if it be not necessary, exposeth us to temptations; but if we are cast upon it, we must expect God’s presence and help.

c. That no place is privileged from temptations, unless we leave our hearts behind us. David, walking on the terrace or house-top, was ensnared by Bathsheba’s beauty: 2 Sam. 11:2–4. Lot, that was chaste in Sodom, yet committed incest in the mountain, where there were none but his own family: Gen. 19:30, 31, &c. When we are locked in our closets, we cannot shut out Satan.

The world has had enough experience

06 Sunday Dec 2020

Posted by in Politics

≈ Leave a comment

One would think that the world has had enough experience of revolutionary change to obviate any claims that political and social “transformation” lead to anything remotely resembling human fulfillment. Ordinary human observation and experience arrive at such a negative verdict.

Robert Benne presenting the Lutheran position in Five Views of the Church and Politics

Happiness and Christianity

05 Saturday Dec 2020

Posted by in Happiness

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, ,

It is a central principle of Christianity that humans naturally seek to be happy. Now this desire for happiness often goes askew – and this is sin. Sin a sort of failure to actually achieve happiness. As it reads in Proverbs 13:15, “the way of transgressors is hard.”

This is not say that happiness is the immediate lot of the Christian. As Jesus himself says, “In the world you will have tribulation.” John 16:33. Rather this happiness is not found in the world; it is a gift of God.

Thomas Watson commenting upon the text

So let no one boast in men. For all things are yours whether Paul or Apollos or Cephas or the world or life or death or the present or the future-all are yours and you are Christ’s, and Christ is God’s. 1Cor3.21-23. Writes as follows

Happiness is the mark and centre which every man aims at. The next thing that is sought after Being, is being happy; and surely, the nearer the soul comes to God, who is the fountain of life and peace, the nearer it approacheth to happiness; and who so near to God as the believer, who is mystically one with him? he must needs be the happy man: and if you would survey his blessed estate, cast your eyes upon this text, which points to it, as the finger to the dial: ‘For all things are yours

And so the happiness is to be found in God. Augustine begins from a different place. In the City Of God, he casts his eye upon the pagan gods of the Romans. Happiness is what we should seek, but who could find happiness among such gods?

For, to whom—if not to Felicity alone—should men who want eternal life dedicate themselves, if, indeed, Felicity were divine. But, since happiness is not a goddess, but a gift of God, to what God save the Giver of happiness should we consecrate ourselves? For, we love with religious charity that eternal life where there is a true and complete beatitude. I think, from what I have said so far, that no one can imagine that the Giver of happiness is any of those gods who are worshiped with such indecent rites, and are more indecently angry when they are not so worshiped, and who thus show themselves to be nothing but unclean spirits.

What is to pray without ceasing

04 Friday Dec 2020

Posted by in Prayer, Thomas Manton

≈ Leave a comment

From Thomas Manton’s sermon on 1 Thess. 5:17.

Since to pray “without ceasing” could misunderstood, Manton works the possibilities and then concludes

“This praying without ceasing is to be interpreted of the universality and the frequency of the return of the occasions and opportunities of prayer; and we may be said to do that without ceasing which we do very often. So that though the act of prayer be intermitted, the course of prayer should not be interrupted; for we are to pray at all times, in all conditions, and in all businesses and affairs.”

As for all times means at the least daily

“We need daily bread, daily pardon, daily strength against temptations. Yea, there seemeth to be a double standing occasion; every day in the morning for direction, in the evening for protection; as God appointed a morning and evening sacrifice: Num. 28:4,”

It is also in every condition in which we may find ourslef

“In all estates and conditions, afflicted and prosperous. In an adverse or afflicted estate: James 5:13, ‘Is any among you afflicted? let him pray.’ That gives vent to our sorrow, and turneth it into a spiritual channel. In a prosperous estate we are to pray that we may not forget God.”

And finally prayer is not to spiritual matters alone

“In every business, civil or sacred: ‘In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths,’ Prov. 3:6. In business secular. Abraham’s servant beggeth success in his errand: Gen. 24:12, ‘O Lord God of my master Abraham! I pray thee send me goodspeed this day.’ In matters sacred: 2 Thes. 3:5, ‘The Lord direct your heart into the love of God.’ So that a serious sensible christian seldom wanteth an errand to the throne of grace, and if we be not strangers to ourselves, we cannot be strangers to God.”

Prayer as Desire

04 Friday Dec 2020

Posted by in Prayer, Thomas Manton

≈ Leave a comment

Thomas Manton in his sermon on 1 Thess. 5:17 (pray without ceasing) defines prayer as desire

“It is an offering up of our desires. Desires are the soul and life of prayer, words are but the body. Now as the body without the soul is dead, so are prayers unless they are animated with our desires: Ps. 10:17, ‘Lord, thou hast heard the desire of the humble.’ God heareth not words, but desires.”

He then further specifies the nature of this offering up of prayer.

First the desire is offered with the right heart.

“These desires are offered unto God, or brought before the Lord in this solemn way: Zeph. 3:10, ‘My suppliants, even the daughters of my dispersed, shall bring mine offering;’ that is, shall reverently express their desires to God. An offering was either a sacrifice, and prayer is a spiritual sacrifices: 1 Peter 2:5,”

The prayer is offered up not on our own account but we come bearing Christ’s name

“They are desires presented in the name of Christ, in whom alone we are acceptable to God: John 16:23, ‘Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, he will give it you.’”

Finally these are agreeable to God

“All our desires must be regulated by his revealed will, and subordinated to his secret will, so far as God seeth it fit for his glory and our good; for upon other terms he is not bound to us.”

Kuyper, Common Grace.19 (Original Righteousness Continued)

01 Tuesday Dec 2020

Posted by in Abraham Kuyper, Anthropology

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

The previous post in this series may be found here.

Kuyper continues on with the issue of original righteousness in Adam: Was righteousness a supernatural addition to human nature? In this chapter Kuyper examines the issue from a different direction: Whence disordered or rebellious desire in human beings?

He presents the contrast between the Roman Catholic and the Reformed understanding of the question. 

The Roman Catholic view (he cites to Bellarmine) explains it thus: The mater which makes up human nature is inherently subject to this defect. To create a human being is to create a being capable of defecting and such defection is an unavoidable consequence of making human beings from matter:

Bellarmine, the skillful Roman Catholic polemicist, who has argued the case for the Roman Catholic side of this doctrine most thoroughly, returns time and again to the point that the temptation to sin lies in the makeup of our nature. Thus he says among other things, “The desire of the flesh is at present a punishment for sin, but for man in his natural state this condition would undoubtedly have been natural, not as a given positive aspect of his nature, but as a deficiency, yes, even as a certain sickness of his nature, that flowed from the constitution of matter.”

If this is so, then there is something matter which is inherently contrary to God. If God could have created a human without this defect inherent in matter, then God could have/should have done so. That God did not create such a human being argues that God could not make such a being and still use matter. There thus must be something ultimately incorrigible in matter.

So, the “fountain of sin” lies in the very fact that we are human beings: which is a deduction Kuyper makes from Bellarmine’s understanding of human nature. Since this “fountain” bubbles up as its own accord, a sinful desire is not sinful. It only become sinful when the will consents to the desire. There must be a second move to turn a desire for sin into a sinful desire. 

He makes the observation that the Reformed and Roman Catholic positions differ not on the doctrine of the Trinity but on the doctrine of humanity. Our anthropologies differ: this is the place where the two diverge. Sin does not have its origin in something inherent in the physical body and the soul, but rather has its source in the spiritual (not the physical). Satan a pure spirt without body introduced humanity to sin. 

Human beings were created with original righteousness, not as a supernatural addition but as something inherent in humanity – but that this original righteousness exists in our dependence – not independence from God. 

Kuyper then draws out an implication from this fact of dependence: Human beings were not created with humanity as the end, the purpose of humanity. Human beings were created for God and God’s purposes. Human beings were specifically created to glorify God; God creates us for His glory. 

There is another corollary which Kuyper draws: If human beings have some purpose other than God’s glory, if there is some purpose, some end which we should/may achieve other than God’s glory, then God becomes an instrument to help us achieve that end. God becomes a tool in our effort to achieve our glory. 

God created Adam in such a way, with excellency and glory, because such an Adam was needful for God’s aim. God did not need Adam, but it did please God to create Adam and to work through Adam and to so sustain Adam by grace. 

Edward Taylor, My Shattered Fancy.6

01 Tuesday Dec 2020

Posted by in Edward Taylor

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , ,


But, Lord, as burnished sunbeams forth out fly,
Let angel-shine forth in my life outflame,
That I may grace Thy graceful family
And not to Thy relations be a shame.
Make me Thy graft, be Thou my golden stock.
Thy glory then I’ll make my fruits and crop. 

The rhythm of this final stanza is quite regular until the accent on the first syllable of the fifth line:

MAKE ME, thy GRAFT, be THOU my GOLDen STOCK

The emphasis works particularly well here: it puts an emphasis on an element of the prayer. The entire poem has been a meditation upon what it would be to be grafted into Christ and here he makes his prayer: Make me that graft. The spondee on the first foot of the line makes the prayer a plea, a demand: DO THIS FOR ME!

The language of the angels and fire is not mere commonplace for bright. In Hebrews 1:7 it reads


Of the angels he says

He makes his angels winds,

And his ministers a flame of fire. 

And thus, while he is not praying to be made an angel for a fire, the allusion to angles and flame has a basis in the glory given to Christ. The rest of the chapter in Hebrews describes the greatness of Christ over the angelic host. 

This last stanza is not merely a prayer that the wonder of being joined to Christ should be Taylor’s. There is the issue honor and shame. 

The concept of shame and honor are a major theme throughout the Bible. Shame is first seen in Genesis 2 when Adam and Eve. They experience shame as a result of their sinfulness. The biblical concept of shame contains both an objective and subjective element – both of which are present in the Genesis account. 

First, there is the subjective element: I feel ashamed of what I have done. I am not mere guilty, but I worthy to be excluded. This is shown by the human pair both hiding in the trees and trying to make clothing. They feel they cannot be seen by God.

Second, there is an objective element: shame from the position of the other. This is typically seen as being vulnerable to the power of another. For instance in Psalm 25:2, the prayer reads:

O my God, in you I trust let me not be put to shame

Let not my enemies exult over me.

To be in shame is for the enemy to exult. Or in 37:1

In you, O LORD, do I take refuge; 

Let me never be put to shame

In your righteousness deliver me. 

To be protected from shame is to be rescued. 

There is also the reversal of shame. Since suffering, particularly at the hands of an enemy is shameful. But, as Peter writes, the apparent shame of suffering will be reversed by Christ:

1 Peter 1:6–8  

6 Wherein ye greatly rejoice, though now for a season, if need be, ye are in heaviness through manifold temptations: 7 That the trial of your faith, being much more precious than of gold that perisheth, though it be tried with fire, might be found unto praise and honour and glory at the appearing of Jesus Christ: 8 Whom having not seen, ye love; in whom, though now ye see him not, yet believing, ye rejoice with joy unspeakable and full of glory: 

Now shame is something which one can convey to others. To be in the company of one who is shameful is to shame me. This is seen by the nature of being unclean under Mosaic Law: one can convey uncleanness by contact. 

To bring Taylor into the relations around Christ has the power to bring shame upon the family. And so Taylor prays that he not bring such shame

But, Lord, as burnished sunbeams forth out fly,

Let angel-shine forth in my life outflame,
That I may grace Thy graceful family
And not to Thy relations be a shame.

Thus, to avoid such shame, Taylor is dependent upon Christ to make him glorious. Taylor is not contending that such glory is inherent in him – he is asking that be made in him. 

This particular prayer has an interesting relation to Hebrews 2 which describes Christ’s relationship to humanity. That God would be sinful humanity would cast shame upon God. God should be ashamed to be with human beings, who are not glorious (which is obvious if you have ever met one of us). But the Son is not ashamed to be called our brother:

Hebrews 2:10–13 (KJV 1900)

10 For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory, to make the captain of their salvation perfect through sufferings. 11 For both he that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one: for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren, 12 Saying, I will declare thy name unto my brethren, in the midst of the church will I sing praise unto thee. 13 And again, I will put my trust in him. And again, Behold I and the children which God hath given me.

The Son is not ashamed because he sanctifies – he makes holy (which is glorious) – his own. Therefore, he is not ashamed to call them brothers. He makes his people who are not glorious glorious and so fit to live with him. 

There is a line in C.S. Lewis to the effect that the least saint in glory would be such a wonder we would all be tempted to worship that human being were we to see such a one. 

And indeed that hope to be glorious is not a matter of vanity; it is lovely. We are often so petty and ridiculous because we seek to make ourselves glorious – and not receive true glory from our Creator. 

Edward Taylor, My Shattered Fancy.5

25 Wednesday Nov 2020

Posted by in Edward Taylor

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

This stanza presents a question without an answer, but it does mention the response.

My Lord, what is it that Thou dost bestow?
The praise on this account fills up, and throngs
Eternity brimful, doth overflow
The heavens vast with rich angelic songs.
How should I blush? How tremble at this thing,
Not having yet my gam-ut learned to sing.

The introductory question, “What is that thou does bestow?” is not directly answered. The implied answer is, An engrafting of your life into my life, which results in you being brought into my web of relationships.

The rhythm of the first line puts the emphasis on the first word of the question, “What”. It does this by placing the word immediately after a pause and accented syllable. 

my LORD, WHAT is IT that THOU dost BEstow?

Yes, what is it? The rhythm makes it impossible to run past the question. 

It is now interesting that the question is not answered.  It is assumed by the word “this”


The praise on this account fills up, and throngs
Eternity brimful

But he never clearly says what “this” is.  He does raise the matter of relations again in the next stanza, “Thy graceful family”.  But here it is merely implied.

The result of this “this” is unceasing praise throughout heaven:

The praise on this account fills up, and throngs
Eternity brimful, doth overflow
The heavens vast with rich angelic songs.

In this, Taylor is again on solid scriptural ground. First, Taylor has come to a gathering:

Hebrews 12:22–23 (KJV 1900)

22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, 23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,

Second, the most common scene in the pictures of heaven is one of singing:

Revelation 5:8–14 (KJV 1900) 

8 And when he had taken the book, the four beasts and four and twenty elders fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints. 9 And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation; 10 And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth. 

11 And I beheld, and I heard the voice of many angels round about the throne and the beasts and the elders: and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands; 12 Saying with a loud voice, Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honour, and glory, and blessing. 13 And every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, heard I saying, Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever. 14 And the four beasts said, Amen. And the four and twenty elders fell down and worshipped him that liveth for ever and ever. 

The picture of heaven being “brimful” and overflowing with song is remarkable. We normally do not picture songs as occupying a space, but here the songs are palpable. 

As is most common in Taylor, he pauses for a moment at the fact that he is not fit to be present in this company. Taylor’s treatise on the Lord’s Supper begins with a discussion of the scene in Matthew 25 of the man who is present at the wedding feast but lacks the proper garments. That image seems to lie behind Taylor’s unfitness which these preparations were met to remedy.

He says:

How should I blush? How tremble at this thing,
Not having yet my gam-ut learned to sing.

His gamut would be the full range music. The original usage from Gamma (the Greek letter) which in Medieval music was on tone lower than middle A + ut. The concept developed into the full range of musical notes which a voice or instrument could produce. In our modern usage, the origin in music has dropped out and now the concept is merely the full range. Here, Taylor has the musical usage in mind:

How can I possibly participate in this singing and not be ashamed – I don’t know how to sing with these angels.