Category Archives: Bible Study

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

15 Tuesday Dec 2020

Posted by in 1 Thessalonians, Ministry

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

In sum, know these in men in their office, esteem them their labor, do this work in love. 

            How then are we to appreciate and esteem them? What labor is the congregation called upon to render as a fit reward for such labor.

            Before we look to the text, let us consider the relationship between the work of the elder – that is to instruct – and the reward for such work. What actually convey esteem in such a context?

            There are some who have coached a children’s sports team, gave instruction in piano, taught someone how to read. Parents teach their children how to drive a car. What is the joy of a teacher when seeing a student?

            You are at a piano recital. The teacher is there with her students, the parents and other family are in the room. As each student comes forward and plays their piece, what does the teacher hope? What would give the teacher joy in that moment? Her students doing well; their success. 

            The coach rejoices in a victory. The school teacher rejoices in the students reading. 

            A teacher is rewarded by the student having learned the matter and putting the instruction into practice. And it is just this which Paul writes to this congregation. Turn to 1 Thessalonians 1:2

            We give thanks always for all of you

Why is that. Look at verse 3:

Constantly bearing in mind your work of faith and labor of love and steadfastness of hope in our Lord Jesus Christ

Go now to chapter 2, verse 19:

For who is our hope or joy or crown of exultation? Is it not ever you, in the presence of our Lord Jesus at his coming? For you are our joy and glory.

What then shows esteem and appreciation for the pastor’s work? Your labor, your love, your hope. Your sanctification is the honor shown to your pastor. 

            Think how wicked a thing it would be withhold this esteem and respect to your pastor. If you withhold your own life of holiness so as to refuse esteem because you have decided that the pastor is not worthy of such respect, it speaks of remarkable wickedness. You are injuring yourself to refuse such esteem.

            You would like someone who be burnt to death in your own house because you have a personal grudge against the fireman who comes to save you. You clutch to the flaming beams and shout, I will die here before I give you the honor of saving me!

            Now that you know what you are looking for you will see this point is made throughout the New Testament. Turn over to 3 John 4:

            I have no greater joy than this to hear my children are walking in the truth.

Do you seek to honor your pastor, then honor the truth which he strives to teach you week after week. Walk in the truth.

            This is for your benefit. In the Christian life, the giving what is due is a blessing to the one who gives. “It is more blessed to give than to receive.” Acts 20:35. The work of the church is the work of everyone. Walk in the truth. 

            Who is the one who is blessed? As it says in Psalm 1:2, the blessed man is the one who delights in the law of the Lord. The 119th Psalm begins with these words:

Blessed are those whose way is blameless,

Who walk in the law of the Lord.

            The teacher teaches. You bless the teacher by showing that you have learned your lesson. But in this case, you are the one who is blessed. The pastor who labors to teach the truth and to show you the straight path which leads to the heavenly city is seeking your good. 

            And how do you bless him? By walking in that straight path which leads toward the heavenly city. And what is the cost to you? You will be blessed. This is like a magic treasure that the more you give the more have. Will you esteem your pastor? Then make much of his Lord. The pastor is a steward, the Lord is the pastor’s joy.

            Do you think this wrong? It comes from Paul himself. 

            When Paul was in prison, there were Christians who sought to make Paul’s imprisonment more painful by preaching Christ. This thinking is sad and bizarre. But perhaps these preachers thought: See, we are preaching freely. We are the ones blessed by Christ! Paul is in prison. This only proves that Paul was not all he pretended to be. 

            It is such a strange thing that when we read of this in Paul’s letter to the Philippians, it seems it must not be true. Paul writes that these men “proclaim Christ out of selfish ambition.” Phil. 1:17. These were busy trying to dishonor Paul by preaching Christ. They thought they would “cause [Paul] distress.” 

            How does Paul respond? 

            What then? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is proclaimed; and in this I rejoice.

Phil. 1:18. You see, Paul was not looking for human beings to praise him; he was looking for praise which comes from Christ:

In the future there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, will award to me on that day; and not only to me, but also to all who have loved his appearing.

Let us think again about the fear that a pastor preaching our passage in 1 Thessalonians 5 to respect to esteem a pastor. We immediately think, Oh, we must place this man on a pedestal. This means he wants us to all give praise to him.  But what does Paul say, My joy is in you and in your holiness. My reward is from Christ. Perhaps you did not anticipate that turn in our investigation.

But there is more. In John chapter 5, and you should turn there now to see these words for yourself, Jesus is speaking with the crowd at the temple. And as seems to have always happened, there at the temple a dispute broke out. These people were seeking proof of Jesus’ claim. 

In verse 41, Jesus says, I do not receive glory from men.

Then Jesus applies this principle to all of the people present:

How can you believe, when you receive glory from one-another and you do not seek the glory that is from the one and only God?

            Now think we me along these lines. The esteem which are to show to your pastor is not directly give glory to him. It is not praise for his brilliance. That is not the way to esteem him. 

            There is a story told of the great preacher Charles Spurgeon. After a sermon someone said, “That was a great sermon.” He answered, “I know, Satan already told me.”

            I do not mean that you should never encourage him. The work of being a pastor can be mighty discouraging. To pray for him, to show friendship to him is all very good. When he has helped you learn a thing, it is right to thank him. But do not think that esteeming the pastor is about praising him as if he were some vain entertainer. That is not the point; but do treat him as a dear friend. We do not give vain to our praise to our friends, but we do encourage them. 

            You know how to encourage those you love. Do that. 

            So we have established that walking in the truth is the way in which you actually esteem your pastor. Your holy life is proof of his labor and will become his joy and reward on the day of judgment. 

            Let me show you this one more time how this works. Paul writes to the church at Corinth. Turn to Second Corinthians chapter 3.

            He begins by telling them he is not trying to commend himself: that is, Paul is not seeking to be praised by them. Instead, he writes the Christians of Corinth are actually a letter written by the Spirit:

2 Corinthians 3:1–4 (NASB95) 

            1          Are we beginning to commend ourselves again? Or do we need, as some, letters of commendation to you or from you? 

            2          You are our letter, written in our hearts, known and read by all men; 

            3          being manifested that you are a letter of Christ, cared for by us, written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts. 

            4          Such confidence we have through Christ toward God. 

The steward of Christ’s riches; the minister of grace; the pastor who teaches you truth looks to see if this truth is written in your life. If you walk in the truth, the pastor is blessed and you are blessed. Your life is proof and reward for his work. And a life of holiness is blessing to you, to your pastor, indeed to everyone about you.

            Paul’s command to know, to esteem the pastor is no burden to you. The command is seeking your blessing. But we need one more qualification as we examine this matter of walking in the truth. 

            There is a way in which walking in the truth – or at least an appearance of the truth – can actually be sinful. It sounds so strange that I will need to prove this to you. 

            The Pharisees were known to be precise in their obedience to the law. They, of all people, could be said in a way to be “walking in the truth.” They have, but in a wrong way. Paul, writing to the church at Philippi writes in the third chapter of his life before knowing Christ. Paul writes of himself

            As to the law, a Pharisee… as to the righteousness which comes from the law, found blameless. 

            You can take hold of the truth and misuse it. The wrong use of the law can make one rigid, proud, unloving. The truth can make one positively evil, when it is ingested in the wrong way. But the fault does not lie in the law, the fault lies in us. As Paul writes in the 7th chapter of Romans, the “law is holy, and the command is holy and righteous and good.” (12) But sin in us take the law up in the wrong way and turns that which is good to evil. That is the work of sin.

            How then do we walk in the truth such that it does not turn to sin? The truth taken up in the right way causes no sin; rather, it brings a blessing as we have seen.

            Look over the 2 John 6 and read:

2 John 6 (NASB95) 

                        And this is love, that we walk according to His commandments. This is the commandment, just as you have heard from the beginning, that you should walk in it. 

Now look at 1 John 2:5, 

            but whoever keeps His word, in him the love of God has truly been perfected. 

The truth of God, the command of the Lord is kept in love. It is not a rigid, joyless obedience to a tyrant it is love toward God and love toward man. This is what the Lord himself said:

Mark 12:28–31 (NASB95) 

            28       One of the scribes came and heard them arguing, and recognizing that He had answered them well, asked Him, “What commandment is the foremost of all?” 

            29        Jesus answered, “The foremost is, ‘Hear, O Israel! The Lord our God is one Lord; 

            30        and you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength.’ 

            31        “The second is this, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.”

            What would true obedience look like? It would look like love. Love fulfills the law. This is what Paul wrote to the church at Rome:

Romans 13:8 (NASB95)

           Owe nothing to anyone except to love one another; for he who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law.

Do you hear that? Do you want to truly fulfill the law, love. Paul continues on this point:

Romans 13:10 (NASB95) 

            Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfillment of the law. 

You are supposed to esteem your pastor. How do you do that? You walk in the truth. What does that look like, living in love with one another. And what does love look like? Turn to 1 Corinthians 13. You know the passage well; we always read it at weddings. But I want you to understand something important: Paul wrote this to a church. Yes a marriage should be filled with such love. But it is to a local congregation that Paul gave this instruction.

            Do you want respect your pastor? Do you wish to obey the commandment of this passage? Then live like this. When the members of this congregation come together, this is precisely how we should live. This is the fact of a congregation that esteem the pastor:

1 Corinthians 13:4–7 (NASB95) 

            4          Love is patient, love is kind and is not jealous; love does not brag and is not arrogant, 

            5          does not act unbecomingly; it does not seek its own, is not provoked, does not take into account a wrong suffered, 

            6          does not rejoice in unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth; 

            7          bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. 

You want to bless the pastor, live like this. You want to esteem his labor, bear with one another. You wish to show respect for the Word of God diligently laid before you, explained and made plain? Be patient, be kind. Stop with your arrogance; put an end to seeking your own. 

And do this to and for your pastor. He is a shepherd, but he is also a sheep. Show him patience. Be kind to him. Don’t engage in any silly jealousy. Don’t brag and speak as if you could all of this better. Do not seek your own. Don’t be provoked when he fails, because the work of a pastor does not confer perfect sanctification. Bear with him. Believe the best of his family. Weep with him when he weeps. Rejoice with him when he rejoices. 

And a last note. Part of the love you must show this man and his family is to provide for their livelihood. You have determined that your congregation would best be blessed by a pastor who can devote himself full time to this work.

            Sadly, it is at this point, that many, many congregations and pastors have come to conflict. Congregations routinely begrudge the pastor’s family sufficient money that they should live without constantly burdens. I have known truly sinful ways in which congregations have abused their pastors. 

            It would not profit at this time to rehearse the history of such stories. But know that it seems to be a mark of pride for congregations to impoverish their pastor; as if his poverty was a mark of their holiness! These same people would think it a scandal if they had to live in such straits. But to starve their pastor they excuse because the pastor will receive some heavenly reward. 

            Are their pastors who live too well, who abuse their congregation and “fleece the sheep.” Yes. But stealing from the congregation is the mark of a false teacher. 

            And starving the pastor is the mark of a selfish and sinful congregation. 

            Why should a pastor live worse than a plumber or painter? The plumber and the painter do good honest work and are rightfully rewarded for their skill. But the pastor? It takes years of education to become a pastor. The work and skill needed to become a pastor could easily have been turned to any number of careers such as being a lawyer or professor. The pastor has given up those opportunities to do good to you.

            We want to pay for the best doctor, because we think the doctor can do good or evil to our bodies. And we treat pastors as if their work could be done by anyone, and we pay them accordingly. 

            The pay of a pastor is not the primary point of this passage. The point is to live in love with one another. But one application of that command to live in love is to care for and protect the pastor and his family – just as you should care for and protect the reputation, and the health, and the well-being of everyone in the congregation. 

            Esteem the Lord, walk in the truth, live in love. And in so doing you will become a blessing to your pastor.

[A Final Note: I wrote this sermon for a friend’s congregation. The structure is primarily such that someone who was not a member of the congregation would preach this. The reason for that structure is that in 1 Thessalonians 5, Paul is not commending himself but the current leadership of the church. He is not writing, “esteem me”, but “esteem them”.]

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.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.

Edward Taylor, 28th Meditation.5

13 Tuesday Oct 2020

Posted by in Edward Taylor, John

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

Where Have We Been and Where Are We Going?: The Samaritan Woman encounters Christ at the Well of ...
Paolo Veronese: Christ and the Samaritan woman at the well.

In this last stanza, Taylor shifts the metaphor slightly. Now rather than wine from a cask it is water in a spring. Just as he never directly uses the word “wine,” but rather makes the allusion, here he never uses the word “water.”

The concept of water is apparent from the words “font,” “sea,” “spring,” and to a lesser extent “flow.” The dispersion of the grace from God to Taylor is still one of great to small: a “sea” of grace which “drops” into a “vessel.” The vessel is still “earthen.” 

But here there is something new. The intake of the grace results in dispersion of the grace from Taylor, “Spring up O well. My cup with grace make flow.” The grace which comes to him is not stagnant, but flows out. 

Finally, there is one additional new movement: The reception of grace itself becomes praise: “They drops will on my vessel sing thy praise.” And finally, this will become the basis for Taylor’s praise, “I’ll sing this song, when these drops embrace.” This actually makes for an interesting move in Taylor’s poetry: As he works through a matter, we realize that the poem is not the recollection of some earlier event but is itself the working through the difficulty with God. The poem in the end is the praise which he is seeking to bring at the beginning. 

My earthen vessel make thy font also:

And let thy sea my spring of grace in’t raise

Spring up O well. My cup with grace make flow.

They drops will on my vessel sing thy praise.

I’ll sing this song, when these drops embrace.

My vessel now’s a vessel of thy grace.

In making this movement to the reception and then dispersal of grace under the image of water, Taylor is again mining the Gospel of John. There are two places in John which distinctly makes this move. The first is in John 4, where Jesus sits with the Samaritan woman at the well. He asks her for drink of water. She says the well is deep, and I have nothing to draw water. He then turns the question on her and says, she should ask him for living water:

11 The woman saith unto him, Sir, thou hast nothing to draw with, and the well is deep: from whence then hast thou that living water? 12 Art thou greater than our father Jacob, which gave us the well, and drank thereof himself, and his children, and his cattle? 13 Jesus answered and said unto her, Whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again: 14 But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life. 15 The woman saith unto him, Sir, give me this water, that I thirst not, neither come hither to draw. 

John 4:11–15. This is precisely the position of Taylor: He wants that living water. He knows that if he has this water, the water will well up within him so that he becomes a spring of the water:

My earthen vessel make thy font also:

And let thy sea my spring of grace in’t raise

Spring up O well. My cup with grace make flow.

He wants to become a font of the grace: it flows into and then through him.

The next source for Taylor’s imagery is found in John 7:

37 In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink. 38 He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. 39 (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.) 

John 7:37–39. Again, water flows in and then through. However, on this instance, the imagery is further complicated by introduction of the new element of the Spirit. 

Thus, in this accumulation and complication of imagery, Taylor is not operating in the “normal” vein of a poet who carefully develops a single image. But he is mining his source text for imagery concepts and is not operating in a manner contrary to John’s Gospel.

The final element in the poem comes from the final scene in John’s Gospel. When the Risen Christ appears to the Disciples, Thomas is not present and famously doubts. But when Thomas himself meets Jesus, Thomas praises, “My Lord and my God!” John 20:28.

Edward Taylor, 28th Meditation.4

10 Saturday Oct 2020

Posted by in Edward Taylor, John

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , ,

Let thy choice cask, shed, Lord into my cue

A drop of juice pressed from thy noble vine.

My bowl is but an acorn cup, I sue

But for a drop: this will not empty thine.

Although I’m in an earthen vessel’s place

My vessel make a vessel, Lord, of grace.

Below, I will work through the theological and conceptual structure of this stanza. But first some work play: cask, cue, aCorn, cup – drop. DroP-Pressed-cuP.

There is the repetition of vessel, vessel, vessel. The repetition sounds and words helps to underscore emotional intensity of the situation.

There is an interesting concealment and reveal in these lines. The unsaid subject of the whole is the wine. Look at the images, “juice pressed” it comes from a “vine”, it comes from a “cask.” The wine is to be poured into an “acorn” cup, very small, wooden cup. There is also another contrast between Lord and the poet: one is of grace, one of earth.

The imagery of wine and the Christ goes back to Jacob’s blessing of Judah:

Genesis 49:10–12 (KJV 1900) 

10         The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, 

Nor a lawgiver from between his feet, 

Until Shiloh come; 

And unto him shall the gathering of the people be.

11         Binding his foal unto the vine, 

And his ass’s colt unto the choice vine; 

He washed his garments in wine, 

And his clothes in the blood of grapes: 

12         His eyes shall be red with wine, 

And his teeth white with milk. 

The image of wine is developed further. There are two ways in particular the image of wine and vine work into this stanza. First, the image of vine. This passage comes from the Gospel of John in a conversation of Jesus as he is walking with his disciples onto Mount of Olives where he will be betrayed. The Last Supper and the institution of communion (which will follow) has been made. 

This passage from John is particularly relevant to the theme of the poem. In the beginning of the Gospel, John states that Jesus is the source of all grace. In this passage at the end of Jesus’ life, as his life will be poured out in death, he will become the source of life:

John 15:1–5 (KJV 1900)

I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman. 2 Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away: and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit. 3 Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you. 4 Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me. 5 I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.

And as Jesus said earlier in John 14:19, “Because I live, you also will live.” Earlier in the John 1, Jesus is light and life and grace. When the poet calls himself “earthen,” this also means that she is subject to death: “That which is born of flesh is flesh.” John 3:6. In 1 Corinthians 15, Paul develops at  length the concept that the body is “perishable,” sown in weakness. In particular, 1 Corinthians 15:47, “The first man was from earth, a man of dust.” But there is a resurrection, “But thanks be to God who gives us victory through Jesus Christ.” 

So to be a vessel of grace is not merely a matter of some sort of psychological benefit. It is the question of “salvation;” which is a matter of life:

John 3:16 (KJV 1900)

16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

What is not exactly clear to me in this stanza is whether the “choice cask” has a particular reference.

One further wine reference is necessary. When Jesus institutes the Lord’s Supper, he gives them the cup (again a reference in the poem: the poet’s cup), “Drink of it, all of you, for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.” (Matt. 26:27-28.)

Thus, by asking for the cup, the poet is asking to partake of the “new covenant in my blood” (Luke 22:20). He is calling for grace: which is life, which is salvation from all the effects of the Fall.

Edward Taylor, 28th Meditation.2

30 Wednesday Sep 2020

Posted by in 2 Corinthians, Edward Taylor, Lord's Supper, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

Lord clear the cost: and let thy sweet sun-shine

That I may better speed a second time:

Oh! Fill my pipkin with thy bloodred wine:

I’ll drink thy health: to pledge thee is no crime.

Although I but an earthen vessel be 

Convey some of my fullness to thee.

The image of a coast picks up on the “befogged dark fancy, clouded mind.” In days before the Coast Guard and lighthouses and radar and exhaustive maps, a cloudy coast would be an enormous danger. 

Here the coast is not a physical location, but rather the affections and mind “befogged” by the effects of sin and the fall. Without going through the entire doctrine here, which goes under the title “the noetic effects of sin,” it is sufficient to know that the residual effects of sin persist as long we exist in this world. And while there is improvement in this life under the operation of the Spirit and the Word, the effects persist.

Taylor here prays that the effects of sin be lifted: rather than fog, “let thy sweet sun-shine.” The hope of this transformative effect is that he will be able to rework the poem and create something more worthy. The poem is losing glory, because it lost it ways.

Perhaps Taylor is referring to an earlier version of the poem which he destroyed. But based upon this being a persistent claim, in various forms, which is seen throughout his corpus, it could be just his difficulty at the beginning of the poem.

In the remainder of the stanza he brings up the method of this shining light. Since the poems were written in preparation for communion, the reference of “blood red wine” is to the wine of communion. 

The nature of communion as a joy, while often not emphasized, is not absent from the ceremony. First, the Supper takes over for the Feast of Passover, which while in stressful circumstances also celebrates the escape from Egypt. Second, while the ceremony recalls the Lord’s Death, we also call that day “Good Friday.” Third, the ceremony recalls the Lord’s Death until he comes. The ceremony is based upon the Lord’s life and looks forward to the Lord’s return.

But there is another level of this image: He asks to have his “pipkin,” his small cup, is to be filled with wine. But in the last line, the image of “wine” is recounted as “fullness”:

Convey some of thy fullness into me.

“Fullness” is a reference to the fullness of grace in the moto for the poem, “16 And of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace. 17 For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.” Thus, it is the fullness of grace he is praying to receive.

The pipkin is repeated in the fifth line of the stanza as an “earthen vessel”. The move to an earthen vessel may seem disjointed on the face of the stanza, but when we see the nature of the illusion, Taylor’s relationship makes sense. 

Taylor is referring to 2 Corinthians 4:7, where Paul writes that “we have this treasure in jars of clay.”  While the reference to clay has become a bit of a Christian cliché to refer generally to the weakness of human beings, Taylor picks up this image not merely as a form self-abasement, but because the passage relates to his twin themes in this stanza of fullness of Christ’s grace and light to drive away the fog.

The treasure Paul identifies is  the “light of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.”  The fuller passage reads as follows:

5 For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; and ourselves your servants for Jesus’ sake. 6 For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ. 7 But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us. 

2 Corinthians 4:5–7.

P.T. Forsyth, Three Ways of Reading the Bible

23 Wednesday Sep 2020

Posted by in Hermeneutics, P. T. Forsyth, P.T. Forsyth, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, ,

The man who is exploiting God for the purposes of his own soul or for the race, has in the long run a different religion from the man who is putting his own soul and race absolutely at the disposal of the will of God in Jesus Christ.

P.T. Forsyth in his book, The Work of Christ, has this interesting discussion on reading the Bible.

Supposing, then, we return to the Bible. Supposing that the Church did–as I think it must do if it is not going to collapse; certainly the Free Churches must– supposing we return to the Bible, there are three ways of reading the Bible. The first way asks, What did the Bible say? The second way asks, What can I make the Bible say? The third way asks, What does God say in the Bible?


As to the first question, Forsyth defines this in terms of what we expect from a commentary or a seminary lecture: “The first way is, with the aid of these magnificent scholars, to discover the true historic sense of the Bible.” What the Bible says is a matter of grammatical and historical analysis.
But such information is purely information. Discerning what the text “means” could be interesting in the sense of deciphering an ancient Hittite text; it could be useful for some purpose, such as understanding. But knowing the “meaning” cannot be the end of Bible reading.

Forsyth is interesting in the way which the text has an affect beyond the bare conveyance of information. When he asks “What can I make the Bible say?” he is not attacking the objective meaning of words. Rather, he is concerned with the subjective effect of the words.
To rephrase the question, he is concerned more with “What can I make the Bible do to me?” Or perhaps what does the Bible say to me.
This takes a bit of thinking. One could argue that the words themselves have no definite meaning, as does Humpty Dumpty in Alice Through the Looking Glass:

‘And only one for birthday presents, you know. There’s glory for you!’
‘I don’t know what you mean by “glory,”’ Alice said.
Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. ‘Of course you don’t—till I tell you. I meant “there’s a nice knock-down argument for you!”’
‘But “glory” doesn’t mean “a nice knock-down argument,”’ Alice objected.
‘When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.’
‘The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’
‘The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master—that’s all.’


That often does happen in Bible reading; far more often than we may imagine. When we come to a work like “grace” or “love” it is very common to pour our expectations and meanings into these concepts make the words mean whatever we want the words to mean. The Bible deals with such tendencies by providing a number of contexts in which the word is used so that we come to understand what the word means. God’s “love” plainly does not mean that God protects us from all trials. The word “faith” or “belief” (which is the same word in Greek) is used in a number of contexts through the Gospel of John so we begin to understand the precise nuance of the word in John’s Gospel.


So, making the text mean something “against its will” is not all that uncommon, even among those who would never think doing such a thing. Rather, it is an easier fault to commit than imagine.


Forsyth’s concern is with the subjective application of text: what does this objective text have to do with me? Let’s take a non-biblical example Someone says, “Shut the door.” Is that a command for me to shut that particular door? Is it the punchline of a joke and I’m supposed to laugh? The words are clear, but what the word does to me depend upon subjective elements within me.


Forsyth cautions against any sort of reading which reduces the objectivity of the text:


Now the grand value of the Bible is just the other thing–its objectivity. The first thing is not how I feel, but it is, How does God feel, and what has God said or done for my soul? When we get to real close quarters with that our feeling and response will look after itself. Do not tell people how they ought to feel towards Christ. That is useless. It is just what they ought that they cannot do. Preach a Christ that will make them feel as they ought. That is objective preaching. The tendency and fashion of the present moment is all in the direction of subjectivity.


That objective text then has a subjective effect:
We allow the Spirit of God to suggest to us whatever lessons or ideas He thinks fit out of the words that are under our eyes. We read the Bible not for correct or historic knowledge, but for religious and spiritual purposes, for our own private and personal needs. That is, of course, a perfectly legitimate thing– indeed, it is quite necessary.

He cautions that there are dangers here: we must not unhinge the objective text and the subjective effect. The text is a real objective fact; but that objective fact has an actual affect upon the reader.
One has the experience of only understanding certain Psalms until one has experienced that trial, that suffering, that ache, or slander. The words did not change in their objective meaning, but since I have changed, the words have changed.

And finally Forsyth says we should concern ourselves what God is up to in the text:
The third way of reading the Bible is reading it to discover the purpose and thought of God, whether it immediately edify us or whether it do not. If we did actually become aware of the will and thought of God it would edify us as nothing else could.


He then makes this brilliant observation:
I read a fine sentence the other day which puts in a condensed form what I have often preached about as the symptom of the present age: “Instead of placing themselves at the service of God most people want a God who is at their service.” These two tendencies represent in the end two different religions. The man who is exploiting God for the purposes of his own soul or for the race, has in the long run a different religion from the man who is putting his own soul and race absolutely at the disposal of the will of God in Jesus Christ.

Why the Pharaoh of Exodus is never named

23 Wednesday Sep 2020

Posted by in Exodus

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, ,

“In short, Pharaoh is the very picture of man in rebellion against God. He resented God’s people, rejected God’s promises, and resisted God’s plan. Given his proud opposition, it is not surprising that we are never told his name. He is called “the king of Egypt,” or simply “Pharaoh.” The omission of Pharaoh’s name is theologically significant. James Hoffmeier writes: “The absence of the pharaoh’s name may ultimately be for theological reasons, because the Bible is not trying to answer the question ‘who is the pharaoh of the exodus’ to satisfy the curiosity of modern historians; rather, it was seeking to clarify for Israel who was the God of the exodus.”3 The Pharaoh of Egypt was not a private individual; rather, he represented the entire nation of Egypt, including their gods. To be specific, Pharaoh claimed to be the incarnate Son of Re — the sun god — who was the primary deity in the Egyptian pantheon. This means that the struggle between Israel and Egypt was not about politics but about religion.”

Excerpt From
Exodus: Saved for God’s Glory
Philip Graham Ryken, R.Kent Hughes
This material may be protected by copyright.

Kuyper, Common Grace 1.17: The Two Trees

18 Friday Sep 2020

Posted by in Abraham Kuyper, Genesis

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

In chapter 17, Kuyper considers the nature of the Tree of Life and the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. 

He considers at some length the question of the trees being a symbol and the extent to whether they were given to strengthen faith and the nature of faith.

But the point which occupies the majority of this chapter concerns the dichotomy of the two trees: one tree of life, one tree of wisdom. He parallels the two trees to the two aspects of human life, a physical life and an intellectual or spiritual life.

The tree of life – in Paradise – would have stood as a pointer to an eternal life, which we will obtain in the New Earth. But in Paradise, Adam still needed to eat and sustain life. But there is a promise of something more than the maintenance of life.

The tree of knowledge was to provide another sort of good.

He here makes some fascinating observations. The pair in the Garden were expected to desire to eat from the tree to sustain their physical life. But, when it came to knowledge, they were explicitly forbidden to seek such knowledge from natural means. They were to refrain from that tree.

The knowledge which God had for them came first from refraining to take and obeying the command. They were too seek that knowledge not from the tree but from God.

Then, having fallen by their reversal of God’s instruction for the trees, they were faced with the prospect of continual physical life – should they have taken from the Tree of Life. That would have been a catastrophe beyond measure.

Where then does this leave us. Alone in the world, remembering those trees:

Today the extravagant sinner still grasps for all that nature offers him to strengthen his body weakened by sin, so that he can all the more freely indulge his appetite for sin. The urge to do this springs up of its own accord. Sin gives a feeling of weakness, also in relation to the body. And the first thing the sinner does is to seek not the welfare of his wounded soul, but the renewal of strength for his weakened body. And what then was more natural than that fallen man, feeling God’s wrath upon him and threatened in his existence, was in the first place intent on taking from the tree of life and seeking in its fruit the strengthening of his life?

This quotation reminds of how Nietzsche spoke of the “last man,” pathetic and obsessed with health:

The earth is small, and on it hops the last man, who makes everything small. His race is as ineradicable as the flea-beetle; the last man lives longest….

One is clever and knows everything that has ever happened: so there is no end of derision. One still quarrels, but one is soon reconciled—else it might spoil the digestion.

One has one’s little pleasure for the day and one’s little pleasure for the night: but one has a regard for health.

And so the irony of our state: in seeking to be gods, we became small and weak — even the smallest strand of virus, a necklace of amino acids so small as to be incomprehensible may fell us. And we spend are small lives obsessed with health.

A comparison of Plutarch and Paul

15 Tuesday Sep 2020

Posted by in Plutarch, Romans

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

, ,

The brilliant moralist and essayist Plutarch (born AD 49 and thus his life overlapped with St Paul who died around 65/66 AD) raised an issue concerning a good ruler – which was also a concern of Paul: the law written on the heart. But they came to rather different conclusions on the matter:

Who then shall have power to govern a prince? The law, without doubt; which (as Pindar saith) is the king of mortal and immortal beings; which is not written without in books nor engraven on wood or stone, but is a clear reason imprinted in the heart, always residing and watching therein, and never suffering the mind to be without government. The king of Persia indeed commanded one of his lords that lay in the same chamber to attend him every morning, and to sound these words in his ears: Arise, O king! and take care of those affairs and duties that Oromasdes requires of thee. But a wise and prudent. prince hath such a monitor within his breast as always prompts and admonishes him to the same effect.

The law on the heart is a peculiar attribute of a good ruler. The law restrains the prince: it is knowledge which governs the governor. If the knowledge is present will effectively direct reason.

Paul raises the same issue of the law written on the heart in his letter to the Roman Church:

12 For all who have sinned without the law will also perish without the law, and all who have sinned under the law will be judged by the law.

13 For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified.

14 For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law.

15 They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them

16 on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus.

Rom2.12-16

The law is present upon every heart. But the law does exactly govern although it does judge. The law sets up as tribunal and gives a judgment. This judgment of the law proves the law has been written on every human heart. It also acts a warning of the greater judgment to come.

This law is different than Plutarch’s version because it belongs to all – but more importantly it gives judgment but does not convey the power to conform:

19 Now we know that whatever the law says it speaks to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may be held accountable to God.

20 For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin.

Rom3.19-20

This perhaps demonstrates the fundamental similarity and distinction between a worthy moralist such as Plutarch and Paul.

In the Bible the fault is far deeper than knowledge. Reason also does not restrain desire; and twisted desire brings madness:

And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done.

Rom1.28

The prophet Jeremiah in a vivid section describes sin against known law so:

23 How can you say, ‘I am not unclean, I have not gone after the Baals’? Look at your way in the valley; know what you have done- a restless young camel running here and there,

24 a wild donkey used to the wilderness, in her heat sniffing the wind! Who can restrain her lust? None who seek her need weary themselves; in her month they will find her.

Jer2.23-24

And so the Christian can not rely upon education alone because the fault is worse than ignorance.

I think history demonstrates that even the wisest rulers have made spectacularly poor decisions when driven by foolish desire. And thus the judgment for depth of treatment and accuracy of human nature go to Paul.