• About
  • Books

memoirandremains

memoirandremains

Category Archives: 1 Timothy

Some Notes on the Mechanics of Discipleship in the Church

28 Friday Dec 2018

Posted by memoirandremains in 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, Discipleship, Titus, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, Discipleship, Titus

Primary obligation:

Create disciples: Matthew 28:18-20

1) Baptism — introduction into congregation

2) Teach them to observe

 

Means of instruction:

1) Propositional

A) Congregational

i) Entire congregation

ii) Smaller gatherings

iii) Personal (counseling)

iv) Other than elder

a) one – another

b) particular elements, e.g., Titus 2

2) Example

A) Right life

i) Elders

ii) Everyone in congregation does this whether good or ill

B) Exhortation/encouragement

i) Elders

ii) One-anothers

Immediate discipleship of the Spirit.

Shepherding:

  1. Confirming that everyone in our charge is being instructed

A) Generally

B)Specifically approriate instruction

2) Confirming that everyone is leading a godly life

Mechanism: Instruct enough men well enough so that the individual instruction, exhortation, example and confirmation can take place. [2 Timothy]

 

Outline of the argument in 1st Timothy

Thesis: We seek to create a godly life (1:5). This is done primarily by giving propositional instruction –which includes confronting error & selecting appropriate instructors (1:3-4; 1:18-20; 2:1; 2:12; 3:1-7, 4:1-5, 4:6-10; 4:11; 6:2b; 6:20-21). Right doctrine leads to right life (1:6-11; 1:18-20). In addition to propositional instruction, be a tangible example of proper (1 Tim. 4:15-16; 6:11).

 

This is implicit in the qualifications of elders: First, they must be of a godly character: their character demonstrates their fitness for office and fitness as an example. Second, they must be able to instruct.

 

The letter is structured around the command to teach right doctrine:

 

1:3-4: Initial command

 

3 As I urged you when I was going to Macedonia, remain at Ephesus so that you may charge certain persons not to teach any different doctrine,

4 nor to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies, which promote speculations rather than the stewardship from God that is by faith.

 

6:20-21: Closing command

 

20 O Timothy, guard the deposit entrusted to you. Avoid the irreverent babble and contradictions of what is falsely called “knowledge,”21 for by professing it some have swerved from the faith. Grace be with you.

 

Command: Protect the doctrine delivered to you.

Enemy: those who teach a different doctrine.

Purpose: Right doctrine leads to faith.

End sought:

1:4

The aim of our charge is love that issues from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith.

Doctrine leads to life: Throughout the letter, Paul ties proper doctrine to proper conduct.

1:6-11 charts the movement from wrong doctrine to wrong life. He ends the proposition that a sinful life does not “accordance with the gospel of the glory of the blessed God with which I have been entrusted” (v. 11).

vv.12-17: Paul gives praise that God who transformed him by faith.

vv.18-20: Paul makes two argument to encourage Timothy to this work: (1) God selected him for this work (v. 18; 2 Tim. 1:6); (2) those who have swerved from the doctrine have shipwrecked (v. 19-20).

Mechanics of instruction:

Prayer for leaders/peaceful life: 2:1-7

Selection of instructors

Men, not women: 2:8-14

Only certain men: 3:1-7

Selection of deacons (men and women): 3:8-13

Encouragement and warning:

The supernatural redemptive nature of faith: 3:14-16

Warning about false teaching: 4:1-5

Train yourself: 4:6-10

Avoid needless wrangling 4:7

Train to godliness: 4:8

Remember the end: 4:9

 

Train others: 4:11-16

Propositional instruction: 4:11

Be an example for others to imitate: 4:12-15

 

Details on manner of life: 5:1-6:3

Effectively fleshes out the household codes in Ephesians and Colossians.

Notes: a defective life denies the faith (5:8).

Special rules involving widows: 5:9-16

Special rules respecting elders: 5:17-25

These rules concern the conduct and treatment of elders. Thus, this relates to the imitation basis of discipleship.

Instruction about instruction: 6:2b-5

Give these instructions: 6:2b

Those who pursue a different doctrine will be those who create division: 6:3-5

Instruction about example: 6:6-16

Warning about contentment: 6:6-10

Warning about godliness: 6:11-16

 

Side note for the rich :6:17-19

Guard the doctrine. Remember doctrine affects life. 6:20-21

Second Timothy

 

Encouragement to the work: chapter 1.

Train men to do the work: chapter 2

Train faithful men to do the work 2:1-2

Don’t get distracted from this task: 2:3-7

Content of the Gospel 2:8-13

Doing the work:

Do not permit digressive quarrels 2:14

Be competent  with the Scripture 2:15

Protect doctrine! 2:16-19

Prepare for work: 2:20-21

Avoid distractions: 2:22-26

There will be false teachers: 3:1-9 [Titus 3, the “factious man”, ie. false teacher]

But Scripture is sufficient for the work: 3:10-17

Preach the word: 4:1-4

Counterpart to the encouragement of chapter 1: I am being poured out (4:6-8). Remember to encourage me (4:9-18)

closing 4:19-22

 

TITUS

Appoint elders to do the work: 1:5-9

Good conduct

Able to teach

Watch out for the sins of your environment 1:10-16

Instruct: 2:1

Household codes 2:2-9

Teach them to be instructors and examples of one-another

Note the conduct of the intra-congregational instruction

You be an example 2:8-9

The doctrine creates right conduct 2:11-14

Instruct: 2:15

Instruct in good works: 3:1-10

Watch out for those who cause division [i.e., teach a different doctrine]

The Invisibility of God

15 Sunday Mar 2015

Posted by memoirandremains in 1 Timothy, 2 Corinthians, Apologetics, Deuteronomy, Matthew, Sovereignty, Theology

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

1 Timothy 1:17, 2 Corinthians, Apologetics, Deuteronomy 29:2-5, Empiricism, Invisibility, Invisibility of God, Luke 24:15-16, Mark 10:10-12, Mark 6:51-52, Matthew 11:25-26, Romans 1:18

The invisibility of God: Here is an iron-clad complaint of empiricism: only that which can be seen or determined therefrom is real. However Christians celebrate the invisibility of God:

Immortal, invisible, God only wise,
In light inaccessible hid from our eyes,
Most blessèd, most glorious, the Ancient of Days,
Almighty, victorious, Thy great Name we praise.

-Walter Smith

This of course is based in part on 1 Timothy 1:17 (ESV) “To the King of the ages, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honor and glory forever and ever. Amen.”

Where then is God hiding? It is an interesting thing to see that the God of Scripture claims to hide in plain sight. For example, at the end of Deuteronomy, Moses recounts all that has taken place for Israel. He tells the people that despite all that they have experienced, they still do not understand:

2  And Moses summoned all Israel and said to them: “You have seen all that the Lord did before your eyes in the land of Egypt, to Pharaoh and to all his servants and to all his land, 3 the great trials that your eyes saw, the signs, and those great wonders. 4 But to this day the Lord has not given you a heart to understand or eyes to see or ears to hear. 5 I have led you forty years in the wilderness. Your clothes have not worn out on you, and your sandals have not worn off your feet. ….”

Deuteronomy 29:2–5 (ESV)

One wonders what story they told themselves which made sense of what they experienced. This run runs throughout Scripture. For example, the disciples had seen Jesus feed thousands with next to nothing, yet they did not see the miracle. For shortly thereafter, they see Jesus walk on the water and yet they cannot understand what is happening:

51 And he got into the boat with them, and the wind ceased. And they were utterly astounded, 52 for they did not understand about the loaves, but their hearts were hardened.

Mark 6:51–52 (ESV)

When look to other passages, we can see that God himself takes credit for his invisibility; even in the most obvious places. Thus, after Jesus rises from the dead, he walks along with some disciples who cannot recognize him:

15 While they were talking and discussing together, Jesus himself drew near and went with them. 16 But their eyes were kept from recognizing him.

Luke 24:15–16 (ESV)

Jesus even goes so far as to state a purpose of his work is to purposefully blind some to the truth while proclaiming it:

10 And when he was alone, those around him with the twelve asked him about the parables. 11 And he said to them, “To you has been given the secret of the kingdom of God, but for those outside everything is in parables, 12 so that
“they may indeed see but not perceive,
and may indeed hear but not understand,
lest they should turn and be forgiven.”

Mark 4:10–12 (ESV). That does not mean that we are not culpable; it is equally our own desire for blindness which keeps are our eyes closed:

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth.

Romans 1:18 (ESV).

This blindness is taken away by the Gospel, alone. The light is bright enough to be seen; it is the willful and supernatural blindness which causes the sorrow:

3 And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing. 4 In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

2 Corinthians 4:3–4 (ESV)

It is only the gracious act of God which reveals his truth:

25 At that time Jesus declared, “I thank you, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that you have hidden these things from the wise and understanding and revealed them to little children; 26 yes, Father, for such was your gracious will.

Matthew 11:25-26 (ESV)

The invisibility of God does not lie in his absence but in the hardness of our heart, the malice of the Devil and the will of God.

“Train Yourself for Godliness”

16 Thursday Oct 2014

Posted by memoirandremains in 1 Timothy

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

1 Timothy 4:7, godliness

Comment on 1 Timothy 4:7

In contrast to following the vapid vagaries of the false teachers, Timothy was to seek after God. Paul borrowed a metaphor from the sphere of athletics to describe the pursuit of godliness (cf. 1 Cor 9:24–27). Paul urged Timothy to concentrate his energy on vigorous training for genuine godliness. For Paul genuine godliness involved both right belief and obedient action. Godly habits would not appear without determined human purpose and effort. Timothy was to persist in that Christian discipline which would prepare him for God’s highest purposes

Thomas D. Lea and Hayne P. Griffin, 1, 2 Timothy, Titus, vol. 34, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1992), 134.

The Rare Jewel of Christian Contentment, Study Guide.9

26 Tuesday Aug 2014

Posted by memoirandremains in 1 Timothy, Biblical Counseling, Contentment, Discipleship, James, Jeremiah Burroughs, Philippians, Uncategorized

≈ 4 Comments

Tags

1 Timothy 6:10, 1 Timothy 6:17-19, Contentment, James 1:9-11, Jeremiah Burroughs, Matthew 6:19-21, Matthew 6:24, money, Prosperity, providence, Study Guide, The Rare Jewel of Christian Contentment

The previous post in this series may be found here

 The 

 

  1. Read Philippians 4:12: What are the categories of temptation which Paul lists?
  2. What temptation to discontentment does Burroughs list on page 103?
  3. Burroughs mentions two types of “trouble” on pages 103-4. What are they?
  4. Read 1 Timothy 6:10. What sort of trouble does money bring?
  5. What is the precise “root” – note the language used.
  6. Look to the second half of 6:10: how does Paul further define the effect of money; what does it produce in a human being?
  7. Contentment necessarily includes “having enough”. How then does money tempt one to be discontent? Is it possible to desire money and be content?
  8. Read the definition of contentment on page 40 of the book and compare that to what Jesus says in Matthew 6:24. How does money directly attack contentment?
  9. Stop and consider when or whether you have been tempted to discontentment desiring money? Has desire for money ever led you to sin? Have you been angry, covetous, envious, et cetera as a result of the desire for money?
  10. In addition to discontent caused by the desire for money, Burroughs mentions the discontentment caused by the possession of money. He uses the image of a town which deceives one upon entry. Read 1 Timothy 6:17-19. How does money which you have tempt you to discontentment?
  11. Read James 1:9-11: How does money possessed tempt one to sin?
  12. Read Matthew 6:19-21: How does money possessed tempt one to sin?
  13. Burroughs gives a picture of the effects of money possessed by discussing the behavior of insects around light or honey. He is explaining that money attracts temptations, like light or honey attract pests.
  14. Now, most of us do not consider ourselves rich –rich people always have more money than us. Yet, the average life of a human in the West is far beyond what most people in the history of the world could imagine for themselves – and far beyond what most people in the world currently experience. Moreover, even small amount of property is sufficient to encourage sin – when Jesus preached, he primarily spoke to poor people. How then have you found yourself tempted to sin by the possession of money? Consider the examples given in 1 Timothy, James & Matthew.
  15. On pages 105-6, Burroughs expands the weight of prosperity beyond just money. There is a prosperity of position which also brings along certain burdens. Look at the picture of Presidents on the day they were sworn into office and the day they retired. Consider persons who have positions that include a certain degree of respect or responsibility, what is the effect upon them? Or consider single people who think that if they had a spouse and children their life would be better – and then consider the difficulties which come with marriage & parenthood.
  16. On pages 106-7, Burroughs mentions the particular burdens which come with ministry. This was something Burroughs knew very well: When he was a poor and little known pastor and when he was a well-known pastor he experienced a great deal of trouble. In fact, he wrote The Rare Jewel when he was apparently prospering in ministry because he realized the difficulties and temptations.
  17. Consider all of the ways in which God has prospered you. Now, consider: What duties does your prosperity and position require of you?
  18. After you consider you duties, how do you think you will do when it comes time for you to give an account to God as to whether you have fulfilled your duties?
  19. On page 109, Burroughs states the “most dreadful evil”; what is it?
  20. How often have you been discontent because God has not given you what you most desire?
  21. Do you think that you are desiring the “most dreadful evil”?
  22. How is your heart’s desire the “most dreadful evil”?
  23. At the bottom of page 109, Burroughs lists the greatest sign of God’s wrath: What is it?
  24. Middle of page 110, how does God “convey the plague of his curse”?
  25. Do you believe Burroughs on this point? Are you tempted to think he got it wrong?
  26. On the bottom of page 110, Burroughs sets out worst sort of judgments. What is the worst form of judgment from God? Why do we tend to think that material prosperity is the greatest sort of good? Romans 1:21-25.
  27. What is the ninth and last lesson of contentment?
  28. Question 11 of the Westminster Shorter Catechism (which would express Burroughs’ position) reads as follows: “Q. 11. What are God’s works of providence A. God’s works of providence are his most holy, wise and powerful preserving and governing all his creatures, and all their actions.” In short, God is sovereign over everything that happens. You also must know that this does not mean that human beings have no ability to make decisions. We do exactly what we want to do, and it is always what God has determined. That is very confusing, but Burroughs who have believed both to be true.
  29. On the top of page 112, Burroughs explains the scope of providence. How does knowing the scope of providence affect contentment? If it helps, look back at the definition on page 40?
  30. If God is completely sovereign and you are discontent, then you must believe what about God?
  31. In the middle of page 112, Burroughs explains the foolishness of raging against providence: what does he say?
  32. Page 113, what don’t we understand about providence when we are angry at what God has done?
  33. An example of providence is included at the end.
  34. What is the foolishness of discontentment when viewed in light of God’s Providence?
  35. On page 114, Burroughs identifies a reason that Christians often have difficulty taking comfort in God’s providence: what is it?
  36. What is the usual way that God deals with His people in this world? Page 115.
  37. If God doesn’t deal with you in this way, what might it mean? Hebrews 12:8.
  38. To whom does God give His greatest mercies?
  39. What is the way of God working? Page 117.
  40. Take a matter in which you are discontent. Then quickly run over the nine lessons for contentment given by Burroughs. After you examine your discontentment in light of these lessons, explain why you are right in continuing to be discontent.

 

A recent example of providence:

Crisis of War Turned to Gospel Opportunity in Ukraine

 We pass along this recent experience of Dr. Bob Provost, President of SGA and TMS Board Member as told by Bruce Alvord (M.Div.’92, Th.M.’98):

“Traveling through Kiev, Dr. Robert Provost told us what he had seen in another city of Ukraine. There is a people group in Crimea called the Tartars, who are Russian-speaking Muslims and were persecuted by Stalin.  As a result of the recent Russian invasion of Crimea, some of these Tartars have fled north to other parts of Ukraine.  In the city that Dr. Provost was in, the director of a Baptist bible college asked the students if they would vacate their dorm rooms for the refugee families and sleep on mats on the classroom floors.  They did.

Sixty Muslim refugees came – twenty adults (including an Imam – a Muslim mosque leader) and forty children.  When the realized they were being taken for refuge to a Christian place, they were afraid. They feared there would be icons on the walls (which they would have to cover, believing them to be evil) and that they would have to hide their women from drunken, adulterous ‘priests.’ However, having no other option, they stayed. To their surprise, they found themselves and their children being treated kindly and sleeping in their hosts’ beds.  They were shocked. They told the students, ‘If our places were switched, we would never do this for you. Why are you helping us?!’ After hearing the explanation, the Imam became interested in reading the Bible, but only under two conditions: the Bible couldn’t have a cross on it, and it had to have study notes explaining the text! Dr. Provost said, “Well, we happen to have just such a Bible here.” The Russian translation of the MacArthur Study Bible had been completed and didn’t have a cross on the cover!”

 

 

 

 

Plutarch’s Marriage Advice, Section 25: Make An Ugly Woman You’re Wife

25 Tuesday Mar 2014

Posted by memoirandremains in 1 Timothy, Greek, Plutarch, Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

1 Timothy 5:14, Chaucer, conjugalia praecepta, Greek Translation, If you want to be happy for the rest of your life, Jimmy Soul, marriage, Plutarch, Plutarch's Marriage Advice, The Canterbury Tales, The Wife of Bath, What Women Want

The previous post in this series will be found here: https://memoirandremains.wordpress.com/2014/02/27/plutarchs-marriage-advice-section-24-marriage-without-thought/

Socrates used to instruct the mirror-gazing young men: if ugly, fix your looks with virtue; if handsome, don’t mar your face with shame.

In the same way, it is beautiful for the woman of the house, when she takes her mirror in hand to speak with herself, thus: If she is plain, “What if I were not prudent?” And for the pretty, “What if I were also prudent?” For the plain wife is better loved for her character than her face.

 

The Wife of Bath’s Tale

This section reminds me of the end of the Wife of Bath’s Tale in Chaucer.

The man in the story [read it to find out how] ends up with a magical wife who can be either old, ugly and honest (she will not cheat) or young, beautiful and unchaste. The young man says, “You choose” – which turns out to be what women actually want:

“Choose now,” she said, “one of these two: that I

Be old and ugly till the day I die, 1220

And be to you a true and humble wife,

One never to displease you all your life;

Or if you’d rather, have me young and fair,

And take your chance on those who will repair

To your house now and then because of me 1225

(Or to some other place, it may well be).

Choose for yourself the one you’d rather try.”

The knight gave it some thought, then gave a sigh,

And finally answered as you are to hear:

“My lady and my love and wife so dear, 1230

I leave to your wise governance the measure;

You choose which one would give the fullest pleasure

And honor to you, and to me as well.

I don’t care which you do, you best can tell.

What you desire is good enough for me.” 1235

“You’ve given me,” she said, “the mastery?

The choice is mine and all’s at my behest?”

“Yes, surely, wife,” said he, “I think it best.”

“Then kiss me, we’ll no longer fight,” she said,

“For you’ve my oath that I’ll be both instead– 1240

That is to say, I’ll be both good and fair.

I pray to God I die in mad despair

Unless I am to you as good and true

As any wife since this old world was new.

Come dawn, if I’m not as fair to be seen 1245

As any lady, empress, any queen

Who ever lived between the east and west,

Then take my life or do whatever’s best.

Lift up the curtains now, see how it is.”

And when the knight had truly seen all this, 1250

How she was young and fair in all her charms,

In utter joy he took her in his arms;

His heart was bathing in a bath of bliss,

A thousand kisses he began to kiss,

And she obeyed in each and every way, 1255

Whatever was his pleasure or his play.

And so they lived, till their lives’ very end,

In perfect joy. And may Christ Jesus send

Us husbands meek and young and fresh abed,

And then the grace to outlive those we wed; 1260

I also pray that Jesus shorten lives

Of those who won’t be governed by their wives;

As for old niggards angered by expense,

God send them soon a mighty pestilence!

And also this song:

 

Greek Text and Notes:

ὁ Σωκράτης ἐκέλευε τῶν ἐσοπτριζομένων νεανίσκων τοὺς μὲν αἰσχροὺς ἐπανορθοῦσθαι τῇ ἀρετῇ, τοὺς δὲ καλοὺς μὴ καταισχύνειν τῇ κακίᾳ τὸ εἶδος. καλὸν οὖν καὶ τὴν οἰκοδέσποιναν, ὅταν ἐν ταῖς χερσὶν ἔχῃ τὸ ἔσοπτρον, αὐτὴν ἐν ἑαυτῇ διαλαλεῖν, τὴν μὲν αἰσχρὰν τί οὖν, ἂν μὴ σώφρων γένωμαι; ‘’ τὴν δὲ καλὴν τί ‘οὖν, ἂν καὶ σώφρων γένωμαι;ʼ’ τῇ γὰρ αἰσχρᾷ σεμνότερον ειʼ φιλεῖται διὰ τὸ ἦθος ἢ τὸ κάλλος.

ὁ Σωκράτης ἐκέλευε

Socrates instructed

The so-called “celebrity” article. Wallace, 225.

Ekeleue: an imperfect of keleuein. The verb generally means “command” but can be used in less emphatic ways depending upon the context.

τῶν ἐσοπτριζομένων νεανίσκων

of the mirror-gazing young men

This is not the direct object, but rather a genitive construction which modifies the direct object found in the accusative plural (the shameful).

Note on “mirror”. LSJ has “mirror” under

εἴσοπτρον (so CPR21.20 (iii A.D.)), mostly in the form ἔσοπτρον , τό, (ὄψομαι)

Which more clearly shows the derivation of the word: from the verb “eisorao: to look into.” As noted by the LSJ, the “ei” is shortened to “e” in the most common usage.

τοὺς μὲν αἰσχροὺς

the ugly

The men points forward and sets up the expected contrast.

Here, the adjective is used as a substantive. Aischros usually refers to a moral not a physical deformity, which may be part of the wordplay here.

ἐπανορθοῦσθαι τῇ ἀρετῇ

to be amended by virtue

An aorist passive infinitive. The use is indirect discourse: he is summarizing Socrates’ statement. The dative is instrumental.

τοὺς δὲ καλοὺς

while the beautiful

Here is the de to match the men.

μὴ καταισχύνειν τῇ κακίᾳ τὸ εἶδος.

Note to put to shame/disgrace by evil their appearance.

The infinitive is indirect discourse. The dative (by evil) is instrumental. The article in “the appearance” functions as a possessive: “their appearance”.

καλὸν οὖν καὶ τὴν οἰκοδέσποιναν

Therefore, also, [is] beautiful the household mistress/ruler

The exact scope of the word oikodespotein is occasionally a matter of some dispute when it is used in 1 Timothy 5:14, “So I would have younger widows marry, bear children, manage their households, and give the adversary no occasion for slander. “ (ESV).14 βούλομαι οὖν νεωτέρας γαμεῖν, τεκνογονεῖν, οἰκοδεσποτεῖν, μηδεμίαν ἀφορμὴν διδόναι τῷ ἀντικειμένῳ λοιδορίας χάριν· 1 Timothy 5:14 (SBLGNT). Plutarch’s use here is instructive.

ὅταν ἐν ταῖς χερσὶν ἔχῃ τὸ ἔσοπτρον

when in the hands [she] has [holds] the mirror

When she holds her mirror in her hands. The articles are possessives. The verb is subjunctive.

αὐτὴν ἐν ἑαυτῇ διαλαλεῖν

she to herself to dialogue

τὴν μὲν αἰσχρὰν τί οὖν

on one hand the ugly thus

ἂν μὴ σώφρων γένωμαι

suppose I am not wise? Virtuous, sober minded.

τὴν δὲ καλὴν τί ‘οὖν

or the beautiful one thus

ἂν καὶ σώφρων γένωμαι

Suppose I am wise/level headed

τῇ γὰρ αἰσχρᾷ

for the ugly one

σεμνότερον ειʼ φιλεῖται

is more noble/virtuous if she is loved

διὰ τὸ ἦθος ἢ τὸ κάλλος.

Because of her character rather than her beauty.

Other translations: It is interesting that both of these translations take some of the bite of the punchline of Plutarch’s work. The tone seems much more like, Well, at least the ugly girl is loved for not being a tramp.

Socrates used to urge the ill-favoured among the mirror-gazing youth to make good their defect by virtue, and the handsome not to disgrace their face and figure by vice. So too it is an admirable thing for the mistress of the household, whenever she holds her mirror in her hands, to talk with herself—for the ill-favoured woman to say to herself, ‘What if I am not virtuous ?’ and the beautiful one, ‘What if I am virtuous as well ?’ For if the ill-favoured woman is loved for her character, that is something of which she can be very proud, far more than if she were loved for her beauty.

Plutarch, Moralia, ed. Frank Cole Babbitt, vol. 2 (Medford, MA: Harvard University Press, 1928), 317.

Socrates was wont to give this advice to young men that accustomed themselves to their mirrors:—if ill-favored, to correct their deformity by the practice of virtue; if handsome, not to blemish their outward form with inward vice. In like manner, it would not be amiss for a mistress of a family, when she holds her mirror in her hands, to discourse her own thoughts:—if deformed, thus, Should I prove lewd and wicked too ?—on the other side, thus the fair one, What if chaste beside ? For it adds a kind of veneration to a woman not so handsome, that she is more beloved for the perfections of her mind than the outside graces of her body.

Plutarch, Plutarch’s Morals., ed. Goodwin, vol. 2 (Medford, MA: Little, Brown, and Company, 1874), 495.

The Wife of Bath:

wife

Theophilus of Antioch: Providence as Evidence of God’s Existence

20 Friday Dec 2013

Posted by memoirandremains in 1 Timothy, Ante-Nicene, Apologetics, Romans

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

1 Timothy 6:13–16, Ante-Nicean, Ante-Nicean Fathers, Apologetics, Augustine, providence, Romans 1:19-20, Theophilus of Antioch

The previous post in this series may be found here: https://memoirandremains.wordpress.com/2013/11/20/theophilus-on-the-nature-of-god/

In chapter 5, Theophilus argues that God is understood by means of his actions. In chapter 4 he remarked that God is the self-existent sovereign creator. Here Theophilius continues with the proposition that God also maintains providential control over the creation.

This argument is line with the argument of Paul in Romans 1

19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. Romans 1:19–20 (ESV)

Theophilus writes:

For as the soul in man is not seen, being invisible to men, but is perceived through the motion of the body, so God cannot indeed be seen by human eyes, but is beheld and perceived through His providence and works. For, in like manner, as any person, when he sees a ship on the sea rigged and in sail, and making for the harbour, will no doubtinfer that there is a pilot in her who is steering her; so we must perceive that God is the governor [pilot] of the whole universe,

Theophilus then continues with the argument, fully supported by Christian Scripture, that God cannot be observed:

though He be not visible to the eyes of the flesh, since He is incomprehensible. For if a man cannot look upon the sun, though it be a very small heavenly body, on account of its exceeding heat and power, how shall not a mortal man be much more unable to face the glory of God, which is unutterable?

John 1:18 reads, “No one has ever seen God”. Theophilus’ imagery may have been inspired by Paul’s words in 1Timothy 6 that God dwells in unapproachable light and thus cannot be seen:

13 I charge you in the presence of God, who gives life to all things, and of Christ Jesus, who in his testimony before Pontius Pilate made the good confession, 14 to keep the commandment unstained and free from reproach until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ, 15 which he will display at the proper time—he who is the blessed and only Sovereign, the King of kings and Lord of lords, 16 who alone has immortality, who dwells in unapproachable light, whom no one has ever seen or can see. To him be honor and eternal dominion. Amen. 1 Timothy 6:13–16 (ESV)

Theophilus next picks up an argument which Augustine will ponder in the Confessions:

For as the pomegranate, with the rind containing it, has within it many cells and compartments which are separated by tissues, and has also many seeds dwelling in it, so the whole creation is contained by the spirit of God, and the containing spirit is along with the creation contained by the hand of God. As, therefore, the seed of the pomegranate, dwelling inside, cannot see what is outside the rind, itself being within; so neither can man, who along with the whole creation is enclosed by the hand of God, behold God.

Augustine raises this as a question: What is God’s relationship to the Creation:

Since, then, thou dost fill the heaven and earth, do they contain thee? Or, dost thou fill and overflow them, because they cannot contain thee? And where dost thou pour out what remains of thee after heaven and earth are full? Or, indeed, is there no need that thou, who dost contain all things, shouldst be contained by any, since those things which thou dost fill thou fillest by containing them? For the vessels which thou dost fill do not confine thee, since even if they were broken, thou wouldst not be poured out. And, when thou art poured out on us, thou art not thereby brought down; rather, we are uplifted. Thou art not scattered; rather, thou dost gather us together. But when thou dost fill all things, dost thou fill them with thy whole being? Or, since not even all things together could contain thee altogether, does any one thing contain a single part, and do all things contain that same part at the same time? Do singulars contain thee singly? Do greater things contain more of thee, and smaller things less? Or, is it not rather that thou art wholly present everywhere, yet in such a way that nothing contains thee wholly?

Book I, Chapter 3.

Theophilus then returns to his original proposition and seeks to bring the point to bear: If you can recognize a king by his secondary actions, why cannot you not recognize God by the same means?

 

Then again, an earthly king is believed to exist, even though he be not seen by all, for he is recognised by his laws and ordinances, and authorities, and forces, and statues; and are you unwilling that God should be recognised by His works and mighty deeds?

Translation and Notes Ecclesiastes 7:7-14

30 Wednesday Jan 2013

Posted by memoirandremains in 1 Peter, 1 Timothy, Biblical Counseling, Discipleship, Ecclesiastes, Hebrew, Obedience, Submission

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

1 Peter, 1 Timothy, Affliction, anger, Biblical Counseling, bribery, corruption, Discipleship, Ecclesiastes, Ecclesiastes 7, Hebrew, Hebrew Translation, nostalgia, Obedience, Oppression, patience, Resignation, Self-denial, Submission, Thankfulness, vexation

Ecclesiastes 7:7–14 (BHS/WHM 4.2)

7כִּ֥י הָעֹ֖שֶׁק יְהוֹלֵ֣ל חָכָ֑ם וִֽיאַבֵּ֥ד אֶת־לֵ֖ב מַתָּנָֽה׃8ט֛וֹב אַחֲרִ֥ית דָּבָ֖ר מֵֽרֵאשִׁית֑וֹ ט֥וֹב אֶֽרֶךְ־ר֖וּחַ מִגְּבַהּ־רֽוּחַ׃9אַל־תְּבַהֵ֥ל בְּרֽוּחֲךָ֖ לִכְע֑וֹס כִּ֣י כַ֔עַס בְּחֵ֥יק כְּסִילִ֖ים יָנֽוּחַ׃10אַל־תֹּאמַר֙ מֶ֣ה הָיָ֔ה שֶׁ֤הַיָּמִים֙ הָרִ֣אשֹׁנִ֔ים הָי֥וּ טוֹבִ֖ים מֵאֵ֑לֶּה כִּ֛י לֹ֥א מֵחָכְמָ֖ה שָׁאַ֥לְתָּ עַל־זֶֽה׃11טוֹבָ֥ה חָכְמָ֖ה עִֽם־נַחֲלָ֑ה וְיֹתֵ֖ר לְרֹאֵ֥י הַשָּֽׁמֶשׁ׃12כִּ֛י בְּצֵ֥ל הַֽחָכְמָ֖ה בְּצֵ֣ל הַכָּ֑סֶף וְיִתְר֣וֹן דַּ֔עַת הַֽחָכְמָ֖ה תְּחַיֶּ֥ה בְעָלֶֽיהָ׃13רְאֵ֖ה אֶת־מַעֲשֵׂ֣ה הָאֱלֹהִ֑ים כִּ֣י מִ֤י יוּכַל֙ לְתַקֵּ֔ן אֵ֖ת אֲשֶׁ֥ר עִוְּתֽוֹ׃14בְּי֤וֹם טוֹבָה֙ הֱיֵ֣ה בְט֔וֹב וּבְי֥וֹם רָעָ֖ה רְאֵ֑ה גַּ֣ם אֶת־זֶ֤ה לְעֻמַּת־זֶה֙ עָשָׂ֣ה הָֽאֱלֹהִ֔ים עַל־דִּבְרַ֗ת שֶׁלֹּ֨א יִמְצָ֧א הָֽאָדָ֛ם אַחֲרָ֖יו מְאֽוּמָה׃

 

One great source of unhappiness in the world, a copious and perennial spring of bitter waters, is discontent,—dissatisfaction with the situation, as to time, place, and circumstances, in which Divine providence has placed us.

Ralph Wardlaw, Lectures on the Book of Ecclesiastes, Volume 1 (London; Glasgow: Longman, Hurst, Rees, Orme, and Brown; Wardlaw and Cunninghame, 1821), 344.

This entire section seems to tie together by examining one’s response to the brokenness of the world in light of the sovereignty of God. In effect,   Qoheleth turns the argument from harm on its head. While the skeptic argues how can God permit evil? Qoheleth presumes harm because we are on this side of the Fall – which brought on death. We are always unhappy where God has placed us, because God has placed us on this side of the Fall.

The overarching move of the book is to force out of any false comfort, any belief that the creature can make us happy or that death can be avoided. Thus, having told us to solemnly acknowledge our status, Qoheleth next rules out any complaint or avoidance of the implications. We may and should enjoy kindness which God has provided to alleviate our sorrow; but, we must not think God can be avoided. We must humbly receive what he has given:

6 But godliness with contentment is great gain, 7 for we brought nothing into the world, and we cannot take anything out of the world. 8 But if we have food and clothing, with these we will be content. 9 But those who desire to be rich fall into temptation, into a snare, into many senseless and harmful desires that plunge people into ruin and destruction. 10 For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evils. It is through this craving that some have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many pangs. 1 Timothy 6:6–10 (ESV)

 

 

VERSE 7:

 

7כִּ֥י הָעֹ֖שֶׁק יְהוֹלֵ֣ל חָכָ֑ם וִֽיאַבֵּ֥ד אֶת־לֵ֖ב מַתָּנָֽה׃

For oppression/brutality/extortion makes foolish a wise man,

And it destroys his heart, a gift/bribe.

134. כִּי Surely (Eng. Vers.), or But (M. Stuart). הָעשֶׁק, see 5:7: Gesenius and Lee say it is here put by meton. for unjust gain, conf. Levit. 5:23; Ps. 62:11: the Eng. Vers. oppression may mean either that practised by the wise man, or of which he is the object, and sees others to suffer. יְהוֹלֵל makes foolish, or mad,a Poel Imperf. (§ 55, Rem. 1), conf. 1:17, LXX., περιφέρει. Desvœux and Holden render it, “gives lustre to,” and suppose allusion to be made to the beneficial effects of affliction when rightly borne, and that these are contrasted in the next clause with the injurious effect of prosperity, the gift of fortune: but rather the term refers here to the injurious effect of power on a wise man, who is tempted to its abuse;b see, e.g., the contrast between the character of Tiberius before, and after, his accession to power, Tacit. Annal. vi. 51. וִיאַבֵּד contrac. for וִיְאַבֵּד conf. ver. 3, Piel Imperf. “destroys,” i.e., corrupts (Gesen. Lex.), lit., causes to go astray, from אָבַד to be lost, to wander, 3:6; though mas. it has here a fem. subj., as is often the case when the verb precedes (§ 147, a). מַתָּנָה a gift, here a bribe, i.q., שֹׁחַד, Ex. 23:8. M. Stuart remarks that in Arabic Hakem (= חָכָם) means magistrate, and that not improbably it does so in this passage, for it is the corruption of a judge to which the gift (bribery) refers. Bribery was expressly forbidden by the Mosaic Law, Ex. 23:8; Deut. 16:19.c

J. Lloyd, An Analysis of the Book of Ecclesiastes: With Reference to the Hebrew Grammar of Gesenius, and With Notes Critical and Explanatory (London: Samuel Bagster and Sons, 1874), 89.

This is an interesting but confusing proverb – how does abusing a wiseman make him foolish? Fredricks writes:

I surmise that the wise is not the victim here but instead is the one guilty of extortion. Even the wise can sin (7:20) and stoop to intimidating another person physically, emotionally, legally or even ecclesiastically. This could include requesting or implying that a bribe be made by another to receive a favorable action, as well as offering a bribe oneself to derail someone else from justice. But the result is the shattered heart of the wise person whose conscience is still not calloused enough to remain unaffected by the abuse of any leverage.

Fredricks, Ecclesiastes, 169. The mere act of sin has a destructive effect upon the one who engages in it – this makes much more sense both theologically and psychologically. Similarly:

The reason is here assigned why the happiness of fools is so short. They work their own ruin. Sin deprives them of their understanding, and when that has vanished destruction cannot be far off. First the mens sana is lost, and then follows ruin. First the soul dies out, and afterwards the body is cast on the flaying ground. Parallel is Proverbs 15:27, “he that is greedy of gain destroyeth his own house, and he that hateth gifts shall live.” For oppression maketh the wise man mad. עשק, “oppression,” as exercised by the Persian tyrants (Psalm 62:10). Oppression befools, makes mad: every tyranny has a demoralizing influence on him who wields it; it deadens all higher intelligence, and takes away consequently the preservative against destruction. “The wise man” here is not one who is still such, but who ought to be, and might be, and has in part been such. “The wise man”—so might the Persian still be designated at the time of Cyrus. And a gift destroyeth the heart. Under oriental tyrannies everything was to be had for presents. According to the parallel, “befools, makes mad,” the heart is brought under consideration as the seat of the understanding: compare Jeremiah 4:9, “and it shall come to pass at that day that the heart of the king shall perish and the heart of the princes,” that is, they shall lose their prudence, their power of reflection.

 

E. W. Hengstenberg, Commentary on Ecclesiastes, trans. D. W. Simon (Philadelphia; New York; Boston: Smith, English, & Co.; Sheldon and Company; Gould and Lincoln, 1860), 164-65.

 

Favors and gifts blind the eyes of the wise; like a muzzle on the mouth they stop reproofs. Sirach 20:29 (NRSV)

 

Whoever is greedy for unjust gain troubles his own household, but he who hates bribes will live. Prov 15:27

 

A bribe is like a magic stone in the eyes of the one who gives it; wherever he turns he prospers. Prov 17:8

 

The wicked accepts a bribe in secret to pervert the ways of justice. Prov 17:23

 

A gift in secret averts anger, and a concealed bribe, strong wrath. Prov 21:14

 

15 He who walks righteously and speaks uprightly, who despises the gain of oppressions, who shakes his hands, lest they hold a bribe, who stops his ears from hearing of bloodshed and shuts his eyes from looking on evil, 16 he will dwell on the heights; his place of defense will be the fortresses of rocks; his bread will be given him; his water will be sure. Isaiah 33:15–16 (ESV)

And you shall take no bribe, for a bribe blinds the clear-sighted and subverts the cause of those who are in the right. Exodus 23:8 (ESV)

 

But the evil falls back upon the oppressor himself. One selfish principle naturally begets another. The act of oppression is often traced to the gift tendered as the price of the oppression—destroying his heart—blotting out every principle of moral integrity, rendering him callous to suffering, and deaf to the claims of justice. (Prov. 17:23.) Good reason was there for the Mosaic veto, restraining the influence of gifts. (Exod. 23:8; Deut. 16:19.) There is indeed peril on both sides. Tyranny forces to irrational conduct; bribery to lack of feeling. The standard of the Bible is the only security. “He that ruleth over men must be just—ruling in the fear of God.” (2 Sam. 23:3.) When the Bible is reverenced as the Book of God—the sole rule of faith and practice, “a man’s wisdom will make his face to shine” (Chap. 8:1); and godliness will enrich the land with the precious fruit of “whatsoever things are honest, just, pure, lovely, and of good report.” (Philip. 4:8.)

Charles Bridges, An Exposition of the Book of Ecclesiastes (New York: Robert Carter & Brothers, 1860), 182.

IT is evident, that what is said, in the first of these verses, of the tendency of oppression to “make a wise man mad,” may be understood either of the suffering or of the exercise of oppression.—The former, it is needless to prove, serves to fret, and harass, and exasperate the spirit; so that there are not wanting instances, in which men, even eminent in reputation for wisdom, have, by its long continuance, by their being the constant victims of injustice, privation, insult, and violence, been worked up to a pitch of absolute phrenzy; have given way, after long and difficult restraint, to the burst of ungovernable indignation, and have acted the part of madness, rather than of considerate sobriety.—Moses, describing the unrighteous oppression which, amongst other curses, should befall the Israelites under the Divine visitation for their sins, concludes in these words:—“Thy sons and thy daughters (shall be) given unto another people, and thine eyes shall look and fail for them all the day long; and (there shall be) no might in thy hand. The fruit of thy land, and all thy labours, shall a nation which thou knowest not eat up; and thou shalt be only oppressed and crushed alway: so that thou shalt be mad for the sight of thine eyes which thou shalt see.”*

I am disposed, however, to understand the expression in the passage before us, as relating to the oppressor, rather than to the oppressed. The possession of power carries in it a strong temptation to its abuse; a temptation before which even men who had borne a previous character for wisdom, have not seldom fallen. And when a man, even a wise man, exalted to power, once gives way before the tempting inducements to its corrupt employment, the very exercise of oppression tends to infatuate and bewilder him. It blinds his judgment, it perverts his principles, it hardens his heart, it changes his character. A contention arises in his bosom between the love of power, with the profit of its abuse, on the one hand, and the remonstrances and upbraidings of conscience, on the other. The reluctance too, so mighty in human nature, to own an error, produces a passionate impatience of reproof and counsel, which is proportionally the more vehement, as he is inwardly sensible he is wrong. This state of mind drives him forward to measures of new violence; the very opposition of conscience, reacting, as an irritating stimulus, in the contrary direction, the anger at its torturing remonstrances producing a desperate effort to silence and to banish them; as when a man, to show his indignant scorn of rebuke, repeats his fault more offensively than before. One step leads on to another; till his conduct, losing all the characteristics of wisdom, becomes like that of a man bereft of reason, and swayed by the derangement of passion.

One of the reasons for preferring this interpretation of the former part of the verse, is its affording so clear a connection with the latter:—“and a gift destroyeth the heart.”—“A gift” is a bribe to oppression. The taking of gifts was prohibited by the law of Moses, on account of the same corrupting tendency that is here ascribed to them. The man, indeed, who consents to receive a gift, known to be bestowed with such an intention, is already corrupted. “Judges and officers shalt thou make thee in all thy gates, which the Lord thy God giveth thee, throughout thy tribes: and they shall judge the people with just judgment. Thou shalt not wrest judgment: thou shalt not respect persons, neither take a gift: for a gift doth blind the eyes of the wise, and pervert the words of the righteous. That which is altogether just shalt thou follow, that thou mayest live, and inherit the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee.”*—“A gift destroyeth the heart.” It operates as a temptation. It undermines the principles of impartial equity, and deadens the feelings of humanity and mercy. It perverts the moral sentiments, and leads to the wo denounced on the man who “calls evil good, and good evil, who puts darkness for light, and light for darkness.”

 

Ralph Wardlaw, Lectures on the Book of Ecclesiastes, Volume 1 (London; Glasgow: Longman, Hurst, Rees, Orme, and Brown; Wardlaw and Cunninghame, 1821), 335-38.

 

 

VERSE 8a:

ט֛וֹב אַחֲרִ֥ית דָּבָ֖ר מֵֽרֵאשִׁית֑וֹ

Better is the end of a thing, than its beginning[1]

The construction is a standard better than construction (tob +mem + noun).

Interestingly, the words “end” and “beginning” are both plural, which the word “thing” (dabar, word, thing, matter) & the personal pronoun “its” are singular. Seow writes that it is possible that the original reading was a plural “matters” (the m which would mark matters as plural was dropped by the proximity to m which begins the next word). However, he rejects that possibility on two grounds: (1) the pronominal suffix at the end of “beginning” is singular (its); and (2) the LXX also has a singular pronoun, autou. Since the possessive pronoun refers back to “thing/matter”, the noun must have been singular also.

Dabar, thing may mean “word”. The LXX has logos (word) at the translation.  Lloyd

135. This verse is connected with the foregoing, and recommends to wait patiently, and see how oppression turns out in the end, rather than haughtily to resent it. דָּבָר a business, or a thing (Eng. Vers.), i.e., the oppression just spoken of. This rendering suits the context better than the λόγων of the LXX., orationis, Vulg., which Le Clerc, Grotius, and Gousset explain of strife and contention. As a general truth the saying is applicable to every affliction which is sanctified to us; see Heb. 12:11; 1 Pet. 1:6, 7, and conf. Job 1. with Job 42:12.

 

J. Lloyd, An Analysis of the Book of Ecclesiastes: With Reference to the Hebrew Grammar of Gesenius, and With Notes Critical and Explanatory (London: Samuel Bagster and Sons, 1874), 90. Similarly, Stuart:

What he means is, that the end of this matter of oppressing will show at last the true state of the thing; and that it is better to wait—to exercise forbearance of mind, than haughtily to resent the injuries received. We might expect קֹצְררוּחַ, hastiness of spirit, in contrast with אֶרֶךְרוּחַ. But haughtiness is the passion which most and quickest of all resents oppression, being very sensitive to indignity. The caution is, not to move too hastily in such a matter, but to wait, and see how it will turn out in the sequel.

 

Moses Stuart, A Commentary on Ecclesiastes (New York: George P. Putnam, 1851), 211.

 

 

VERSE 8b:

ט֥וֹב אֶֽרֶךְ־ר֖וּחַ מִגְּבַהּ־רֽוּחַ׃

Better is (one) long in spirit than one high (proud) of spirit.

Long of spirit is an idiom which means patient. Compare Exodus 9:6, “shortness of spirit” means impatience. Longmen suggests, “Better long patience than soaring pride” (187).

Discussing the connection the two halves of the verse, Longmen writes, “R.N. Whybray has suggested a plausible connection between the two parts of the verse: ‘self-control is needed to carry though any project.’ I would go on tot add that on one can know the outcome of anything until it is completed, patience not pride is called for, the latter presuming to control the future or outcome. Crenshaw quoted the proverb in 2 Kings 20:11: ‘Let not the person putting on armor brag like the one taking it off.”” (188).

To wait calmly for the result of an action, not to be hasty in arraigning Providence, is the part of a patient man; while the proud, inflated, conceited man, who thinks all must be arranged according to his notions, is never resigned or content, but rebels against the ordained course of events. “In your patience ye shall win your souls,” said Christ (Luke 21:19);

Ecclesiastes, ed. H. D. M. Spence-Jones, The Pulpit Commentary (London; New York: Funk & Wagnalls Company, 1909), 158.

1 The plans of the heart belong to man, but the answer of the tongue is from the LORD. 2 All the ways of a man are pure in his own eyes, but the LORD weighs the spirit. 3 Commit your work to the LORD, and your plans will be established. 4 The LORD has made everything for its purpose, even the wicked for the day of trouble. Proverbs 16:1–4 (ESV)

6 Humble yourselves, therefore, under the mighty hand of God so that at the proper time he may exalt you, 7 casting all your anxieties on him, because he cares for you. 1 Peter 5:6–7 (ESV)

 

 

VERSE 9a:

אַל־תְּבַהֵ֥ל בְּרֽוּחֲךָ֖ לִכְע֑וֹס

Do not be quick/terrified in your spirit to be vexed

 

VERSE 9b:

כִּ֣י כַ֔עַס בְּחֵ֥יק כְּסִילִ֖ים יָנֽוּחַ׃

For  vexation in the fold of fools it rests/settles down.

On the subject of anger St. Gregory writes, “As often as we restrain the turbulent motions of the mind under the virtue of mildness, we are essaying to return to the likeness of our Creator. For when the peace of mind is lashed with anger, torn and rent, as it were, it is thrown into confusion, so that it is not in harmony with itself, and loses the force of the inward likeness. By anger wisdom is parted with, so that we are left wholly in ignorance what to do; as it is written, ‘Anger resteth in the bosom of a fool,’ in this way, that it withdraws the light of understanding, while by agitating it troubles the mind” (‘Moral.,’ v. 78).

Ecclesiastes, ed. H. D. M. Spence-Jones, The Pulpit Commentary (London; New York: Funk & Wagnalls Company, 1909), 158.

As noted in the previous section’s notes, כַ֔עַס   denotes the response to foolishness or vexation. The fool responds too quickly, too easily:

8 Above all, keep loving one another earnestly, since love covers a multitude of sins. 1 Peter 4:8 (ESV)

Fredricks:

These two (vs. 8-9) ‘better than’ phrase interpret each other and imply that if one patiently waits until the end of certain matters, withholding judgment, one’s patience will prove wiser than jumping to self-centered conclusions at the start. Thus the verse supports the earlier contention that there is a season for everything ….. (170).

Ver. 9. Be not hasty in thy spirit to be angry. The anger or wrath is to be conceived as directed against God and the evil doers favoured by Him, that is, in this present case, against the heathen; compare Psalm 37:1, 2, 8. For anger resteth in the bosom of fools, who only look at the present and at once fall into error with regard to God and his providence if things go otherwise than in their view they ought to do. It is folly to fix the attention only on that which lies directly before our eyes, to speak wisdom in presence of the good fortune of the wicked: “as grass shall they be cut down, and as the green herb shall they wither,” and, “evil doers shall be rooted out, but they that wait on the Lord shall possess the land.” If we only do not make haste to be angry, the Lord will in his own good time remove all occasions to wrath out of the way. As the Berleburger Bible says: “blessed, on the contrary, is he who in all the events of life maintains a calm patience, equips himself with a spirit of humble submissiveness and magnanimous contentment, accommodates himself to good and evil times alike, and ever derives strength and quickening from the petition,—“thy will be done.”

E. W. Hengstenberg, Commentary on Ecclesiastes, trans. D. W. Simon (Philadelphia; New York; Boston: Smith, English, & Co.; Sheldon and Company; Gould and Lincoln, 1860), 166.

 

VERSE 10:

אַל־תֹּאמַר֙ מֶ֣ה הָיָ֔ה שֶׁ֤הַיָּמִים֙ הָרִ֣אשֹׁנִ֔ים הָי֥וּ טוֹבִ֖ים מֵאֵ֑לֶּה

 Do not say why were the days, the first ones, they were best (better than) these

כִּ֛י לֹ֥א מֵחָכְמָ֖ה שָׁאַ֥לְתָּ עַל־זֶֽה׃

For (it is) not from wisdom that you ask unto this.

שָׁאַלְתָּ has here a subjunctive signification, thou wouldst not ask, as is evident from the context, which alone must decide it, since the indicative form of the verb is used to express the different moods. The construction of שָׁאַל with עַל־ only occurs once more in later Hebrew (Nehem. 1:2), in the earlier stages of the language it is construed with לְ (Gen. 43:7). זֶה, these, refers to הַיָּמִיםהָרִאשֹׁנִים, as is evident from the preposition עַל, concerning, after. The paraphrastic rendering of the Vulgate, (STULTA ENIM EST HUJUSCEMODI INTERROGATION), which is followed by Luther (denn du fragst solches nicht weislich), Coverdale and the Bishops’ Bible (“for that were no wise question”), the Geneva Version and the Authorised Version (“for thou doest not enquire wisely of this thing or concerning this”), and most commentators, refers שָׁאַלְתָּעַל־זֶה to the question מֶההָיָח, and thereby confounds it with שָׁאַלְתָּ־זֶה.

Christian D. Ginsburg, Coheleth, Commonly Called the Book of Ecclesiastes: Translated from the Original Hebrew, With a Commentary, Historical and Critical (London: Longman, Green, Longman, and Roberts, 1861), 375.

 

 

The same impatience leads a man to disparage the present in comparison with a past age.

Ecclesiastes, ed. H. D. M. Spence-Jones, The Pulpit Commentary (London; New York: Funk & Wagnalls Company, 1909), 158.

 

מֵחָכְמָ֖ה

“With verbs of speaking and looking, min often means ‘out of’” (Seow, 239).

 

VERSE 11:

11טוֹבָ֥ה חָכְמָ֖ה עִֽם־נַחֲלָ֑ה וְיֹתֵ֖ר לְרֹאֵ֥י הַשָּֽׁמֶשׁ׃

Good is wisdom with an inheritance, and an advantage to those who see the sun.

The difficulty here is the word ‘im’ which may mean either “with” or “as” (Wisdom is as good as an inheritance).  The “im” is translated “as” in Ecclesiastes 2:16 (For of the wise as of the fool). Seow cites Job 9:26 & 1 Chronicles 25:8  as examples of ki/im parallel mean like/the same as.  The ESV/NASB95/KJV take the ‘im’ as “with”. The NIV/NRSV/NET take is as a comparative.

Verse 11a should be translated, “Wisdom, with an inheritance, is good.”165 Even the wise prefer prosperity to poverty. Those who possess both money and wisdom are under the protection of both.166 The superiority of wisdom, however, is that it guides one through difficult times and thus preserves life. Money, to the contrary, often vanishes in hard times.

Duane A. Garrett, vol. 14, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1993), 321.

 

 

VERSE 12:

12כִּ֛י בְּצֵ֥ל הַֽחָכְמָ֖ה בְּצֵ֣ל הַכָּ֑סֶף

For in a shade/shadow of wisdom, in a shade/shadow of silver

Gordis suggests reading the בּ  as  כִּ  “the protection of wisdom is like the protection of silver” (Gordis, 274); or as wisdom & wealth are a “double” protection (ibid).

literally, in the shade is wisdom, in the shade is money; Septuagint, Ὅτι ἐν σκιᾷ αὐτῆς ἡ σοφία ὡς σκιὰ ἀργυρίου, “For in its shadow wisdom is as the shadow of money.” Symmachus has, Σκέπει σοφία ὡς σκέπει τὸ ἀργύριον, “Wisdom shelters as money shelters.” The Vulgate explains the obscure text by paraphrasing, Sicut enim protegit sapientia, sic protegit pecunia. Shadow, in Oriental phrase, is equivalent to protection (see Numb. 14:9; Ps. 17:8; Lam. 4:20). Wisdom as well as money is a shield and defence to men. As it is said in one passage (Prov. 13:8) that riches are the ransom of a man’s life, so in another (Ch. 9:15) we are told how wisdom delivered a city from destruction. The literal translation given above implies that he who has wisdom and he who has money rest under a safe protection, are secure from material evil. In this respect they are alike, and have analogous claims to man’s regard. But the excellency—profit, or advantage—of knowledge is, that wisdom giveth life to them that have it. “Knowledge” (daath) and “wisdom” (chokmah) are practically here identical, the terms being varied for the sake of poetic parallelism.

Ecclesiastes, ed. H. D. M. Spence-Jones, The Pulpit Commentary (London; New York: Funk & Wagnalls Company, 1909), 159.

Fredricks takes the beths as “beth essentia” and translate the line, “wisdom is a shadow – money is a shadow.” Similarly Lloyd:

The sentence is regarded as proverbial, and is expressed, like most proverbs, briefly. Others, as Hitzig and M. Stuart, consider בְּ before צֵל to be בְּ essentiœ, or pleonastic, and not translateable, which serves to introduce the predicate, see Gesen. Lex. (D) p. 99, and Gram. § 154, 3, 2nd par. γ, conf. ver. 14; thus Symm., σκέπει σοφία ὡς σκέπει τὸ ἀργύριον, so the Syr. and Luther; Vulg., “sicut enim protegit sapientia, sic protegit pecunia;” Eng. Vers., “For wisdom (is) a defence, (and) money (is) a defence.”

 

J. Lloyd, An Analysis of the Book of Ecclesiastes: With Reference to the Hebrew Grammar of Gesenius, and With Notes Critical and Explanatory (London: Samuel Bagster and Sons, 1874), 92. Ginsburg rejects that reading:

Symmachus (σκέπεἷ σοφία ὡς σκέπει τὸ ἀργύριον, wisdom protects just as money protects), and the Vulgate (SICUT ENIM PROTEGIT SAPIENTIA, SIC PROTEGIT PECUNIA), who are followed by Luther (benn die Weisheit befchirmet, fo befchirmet Geld auch), Coverdale and the Bishops’ Bible (“for wisdom defendeth as well as money”), and the Authorised Version (“for wisdom is a defence and money is a defence”), ignoring the בְּ, have made some modern commentators to to regard it here as the so-called בְּ essentiæ. But this, to say the least, is an unnecessary deviation from the natural signification of this preposition, and necessitates us to supply the בְּ comparison. The explanation of Rashi (כלמישישנובצלהחכמהישנובצלהכסףשהחכמהגורמתלעשרשיבא, whoso is under the protection of wisdom is under the protection of money, because it is wisdom that brings riches), and Ibn Ezra (אזיהיההחכםחוסהבצלהחכמהובצלהכסף, then—i.e., when he has riches with wisdom, according to Ibn Ezra’s view of the preceding verse—will the wise man be protected both by the shelter of wisdom and the shelter of money), are as far-fetched as they are at variance with the scope of the passage. וְיִתְרוֹןדַּעַת, and, moreover, an advantage of wisdom is, takes up וְיוֹתֵר of the preceding verse, and hence shews that the latter is a noun, and that דּעַת is the same as חָכְמָה, wisdom, of which וְיוֹתֵר, and there is an advantage, is the predicate. The Septuagint’s rendering of וְיִתְרוֹןדַּעַתהַחָכְמָהוְנוֹ״ by καὶ περίσσεια γνώσεως τὴς σοφίας, and the advantage of the knowledge of wisdom, &c, which is that of the Chaldee וּמוֹתַרמַנְדְּעָאחוּמְתָאדְאוֹרַיְיתָא, taking דַּעַת as the construct with חָכְמָה, is contrary to the accents, and, if admitted, would yield the same sense which we have given to the passage.

 

Christian D. Ginsburg, Coheleth, Commonly Called the Book of Ecclesiastes: Translated from the Original Hebrew, With a Commentary, Historical and Critical (London: Longman, Green, Longman, and Roberts, 1861), 376-77.

וְיִתְר֣וֹן דַּ֔עַת הַֽחָכְמָ֖ה תְּחַיֶּ֥ה בְעָלֶֽיהָ׃

And a profit/advantage (is) knowledge; wisdom preserves the owner/master of it.

בְעָלֶֽיהָ

The noun is plural. Longmen writes, “Here, the plural is honorific” (181).

תְּחַיֶּ֥ה

Wisdom giveth life to them that have it; lit., “it animates him” (תְּחַיֶה). חִיָה is not “to keep in life” (HITZIG), but “to grant life,” i.e., to bestow a genuine happy life. Comp. Job 36:6; Ps. 16:11; 38:9; Prov. 3:18; especially the last passage, which may be quoted as most decisive for our meaning. HENGSTENBERG lays too much stress on תְּחַיֶה in claiming for it the sense of reanimating, of the resurrection of that which was spiritually dead (according to Hosea 6:2; Luke 15:32, etc.); and KNOBEL too little, when he declares: “wisdom affords a calm and contented spirit.”

 

John Peter Lange, Philip Schaff, Otto Zöckler et al., A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures: Ecclesiastes (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2008), 107.

Preserves the life of him who has it is in Hebrew “it gives life to the one who masters it.” The causative form of the Hebrew verb for “live” describes giving life to something, bringing it to life; it is a dynamic action whereby life is given, restored, or “preserved.” Thus TEV “keeps you safe” seems rather weak by comparison. The translation can be “gives life,” “makes alive,” or possibly (as FRCL) “prolongs the life.” The person who is revived or given life is expressed as him who has it, literally “its masters” or “those who master it.” The Hebrew term denotes mastery or lordship and has been used in this manner in 5:11, 13 (“owner”).

 

Graham S. Ogden and Lynell Zogbo, A Handbook on Ecclesiastes, UBS Handbook Series (New York: United Bible Societies, 1998), 239.

 

VERSE 13:

13רְאֵ֖ה אֶת־מַעֲשֵׂ֣ה הָאֱלֹהִ֑ים

Look unto the works of God

It is not the work of creation, but the work of Providence which we are commanded to consider. God is over all; we can not, by our wishes and strivings, alter the course of things which be ordains. The man who is under the influence of this doctrine of religion has a better protection against disappointment and misery, than if he had an inheritance alone, or had to contend with the ills of life, by the aid which can be derived from a cold and speculative philosophy.

 

James M. MacDonald, The Book of Ecclesiastes Explained (New York: M. W. Dodd, 1856), 347.

 

VERSE 13b:

כִּ֣י מִ֤י יוּכַל֙ לְתַקֵּ֔ן אֵ֖ת אֲשֶׁ֥ר עִוְּתֽוֹ

For who is able to make straight that which he bent.

13. If the depravity of the times be so great, and injuries and corruptions so prevalent, that neither wealth nor wisdom can prove a defence against them; we are here directed to another act of wisdom, to look above the creatures, and all second causes, to the righteous hand and irresistible providence of God in them all; and where wisdom cannot improve our condition, nor render the times, or our neighbours, or our own affairs, so perfect as we could wish them, let us endeavour to manifest contentment, silence, and a humble acquiescence in the good pleasure of the Lord. There are many things which no human wisdom can rectify. In a public famine or pestilence, no ability of man can purge the air, or open the windows of heaven to supply us. In a shipwreck no wisdom of man can rebuke the winds and seas, and command a calm. But in all such cases wisdom must teach us to submit to God, and to wait upon him.—“See,” i. e. diligently view and take notice in the course of the world of God’s overruling providence. The Scripture commonly uses words applicable to the external senses to express the inward actions of the soul, ch. 2:24. and 3:10.—“The work of God;” namely, his righteous government of the world: when thou art apt to complain of the times, and the oppressions of the wicked, then remember, that how crooked soever things may appear, God orders and appoints all events; and it is vain to suppose thou canst rectify every evil of which thou art tempted to complain: for the divine decrees are unalterable, like mountains of brass, which cannot be moved, Zech. 6:1; ch. 1:15; therefore in patience possess thy soul.—“For who can make that straight which he hath made crooked?” This shews the unalterableness of God’s order, in which by his providence be has placed all things. It may be understood, first, in reference to the course of nature. Be not angry nor fretful against the Almighty in unreasonableness of winds or weather, in losses by sea or land, in sickness, infirmities, or deformities, which he suffers to befal thee or thy relatives; nor murmur at the unsuccessfulness of any means, or weakness of any endeavours, thou mayest adopt to rectify these casualties. This was the sin of Israel in the wilderness, Exod. 17:2, 3; Numb. 11:4, 5, 6; 2 Kings 6:33; Jon. 4:8, 9. Secondly, as to civil policy and the management of human societies. If thou seest great concussions of states, depopulation of countries, translation of kingdoms, plucking down, and rooting up, the sword devouring as it pleaseth; neither wonder nor murmur, but seriously consider, that an overruling providence regulates all these changes, which calls for silence and contentment under his administrations, Job 9:5–13. and 12:14–24; Ps. 75:6, 7; Isai. 2:10–19; Dan. 2:11; Jer. 18:6, 10. and 47:6, 7; Ezek. 14:17. Thirdly, in relation to the sins and miscarriages of mankind. When thou seest men incorrigible in wickedness, and so perverse that no means will reclaim or reform them, consider the work of God’s most righteous judgment in hardening whom he will; and remember, that God is so holy, that he would not suffer sin to prevail, if he were not also equally wise and powerful to order it so as to secure his own glory: hence no wickedness shall proceed further than to execute his predeterminate counsel; and the remainder of it he will restrain, Rom. 9:18; 1 Sam. 2:25; Gen. 50:20; Exod. 7:3, 4; 2 Thes. 2:11, 12; Acts 4:28; Rom. 11:8; Ps. 76:10.

Edward Reynolds, A Commentary on the Book of Ecclesiastes, ed. Daniel Washbourn (London: Mathews and Leigh, 1811), 223-25.

Another reason for obeying the injunction given in verse 10. Complaining is vain; God has ordained it so, and, however crooked it may appear to us, no man can rectify it. רְאֵה, see, consider, bear in mind, remember. The expression moreover, which is often omitted in Hebrew, must be supplied in the translation, מַעֲשֶׂה, work, i.e., of providence, appointment, ordaining; so also לְתַקֵּן, to rectify, and עִוֵּת, to make crooked, are used in a spiritual sense. The interrogative, in which the last clause is expressed, is tantamount to an emphatic denial, i.e., no one can, &c. (vide supra, 1:3). For the pleonastic suffix in עִוְּתוֹ, see 2:12. The Septuagint’s rendering of כִּימִייוּכַללְתַקֵּןאֵתאֲשֶׁרעִוְּתוֹ by ὅτι τίς δυνήσεται τοῦ κοσμῆσαι ὅν ἄν ὁ φεὸς διαστρέψη αὐτόν; for who is able to make him straight, if God has distorted him? which is followed by the Vulgate, QUOD NEMO POSSIT CORRIGERE, QUEM ILLE DESPEXERIT, that no man can correct him whom He has despised, has evidently originated from the traditional explanation,

Christian D. Ginsburg, Coheleth, Commonly Called the Book of Ecclesiastes: Translated from the Original Hebrew, With a Commentary, Historical and Critical (London: Longman, Green, Longman, and Roberts, 1861), 377.

VERSE 14a:

4בְּי֤וֹם טוֹבָה֙ הֱיֵ֣ה בְט֔וֹב וּבְי֥וֹם רָעָ֖ה רְאֵ֑ה

In the good day let it be in good, but in an evil day see/consider

VERSE 14b:

גַּ֣ם אֶת־זֶ֤ה לְעֻמַּת־זֶה֙ עָשָׂ֣ה הָֽאֱלֹהִ֔ים

Also this, corresponding to that God made

VERSE 14c:

עַל־דִּבְרַ֗ת שֶׁלֹּ֨א יִמְצָ֧א הָֽאָדָ֛ם אַחֲרָ֖יו מְאֽוּמָה

On/onto the word/matter this not to search/find the Adam after him from something/nothing. 

For לְעֻמַּת, in connection with, like, see 5:15, and for עַלדִּבְרַת giving the motive or occasion of the action, see 3:18.

Christian D. Ginsburg, Coheleth, Commonly Called the Book of Ecclesiastes: Translated from the Original Hebrew, With a Commentary, Historical and Critical (London: Longman, Green, Longman, and Roberts, 1861), 378. Thus, the thing not to search out is the dbrth.

 

With the sentiment conf. 8:15; 9:7–9, and mark the reason given, Deut. 28:47, for the curses which should come upon Israel, “Because thou servedst not the Lord thy God with joyfulness and with gladness of heart for the abundance of all things.” The next clause is rendered by the Arab. Vers. “look upon the day of adversity,” i.e., keep it in view, be prepared for it; malam diem prœcave, Vulg.; but this rendering does not preserve the evident sameness of construction between בְּיוֹםטוֹבָה and בְּיוֹםרָעָה, hence rightly the Eng. Vers., “in the day of adversity consider.” What we should consider is, that affliction comes from God, and therefore calls for submission (Micah 6:9), that it is sent for our good, to show us the vanity of the world, to bring us to repentance for sin, and to earnest preparation for a better life. “Let no man flatter himself that any thing external will make him wise or virtuous, without his taking pains to learn wisdom or virtue from it.” (Archbp. Whately’s Notes on Essay V. of Lord Bacon, p. 59.) Observe the paronomasia or alliteration between טוֹבָה and טוֹב; רָעָה and רְאֵה. לְעֻמַּת over against, Eng. Vers., or equally with, even as, Gesen. Lex., see עֻמַּת, 5:15. עָשָׂה hath ordered, or hath arranged. עַל־דִּבִרַתשֶ to the end that, Gesen. Lex., conf. 3:18. אַחֲרָיו after him; if the suff. is used as a reflex pron. (§ 124, 1, b), referring to הָאָדָם, as in 3:22, 6:12, the meaning is that God has so ordered the vicissitudes of good and evil that man may never find out what shall be after himself, i.e., be able to foresee with certainty the future; but if the suff. refers to Elohim, that man may not after God find out any thing, i.e., any thing wiser or more suitable than the arrangements of God’s Providence, nor be able to follow in God’s track, and trace His footsteps, God’s ways being inscrutable, conf. 8:17; Rom. 11:33.

J. Lloyd, An Analysis of the Book of Ecclesiastes: With Reference to the Hebrew Grammar of Gesenius, and With Notes Critical and Explanatory (London: Samuel Bagster and Sons, 1874), 93-94.

Doct. Whatsoever the estate of times be, it is our part to consider the work of God as so disposing the times, and in setting good and evil times one against another; and accordingly in good times to be in goodness, and in ill times to look at God’s hand as only able to amend therein. As who should say, Look not at the creature as the chief agent in the estate of the times, but consider his hand in all estates, and make use of them, as his hand leadeth unto, Job 1:21.

1 It is God’s work, first, To send. 1. Good times, 2 Chron. 2:11; 2. Evil times, Prov. 28:2. Secondly, To set good and evil times in a vicissitude or interchange, one contrary over against another, Jer. 18:7, 9. In good times, first, God maketh men’s, or at least some chief men’s, hearts and ways right before him, 1 Sam. 13:14; secondly, God giveth them a right course, and good success in their proceedings, Jer. 22:15, 16; 2 Chron. 17:3–5. In evil times, first, God giveth men up to the crookedness of their own hearts and ways, Ps. 125:5, and 81:11, 12; 2 Chron. 28:1; secondly, God sendeth them cross and crooked issues of their ways, 2 Chron. 28:1–6, 16–20; Jer. 22:17–19; Ps. 18:26.

2. God setteth these good and evil times interchangeably one against another. Saul’s times were, bad; the times of David and Solomon good. Reho—boam and Abijam bad; Asa and Jehoshaphat good.Joram and Joash bad; Uzziah and Jotham good. Ahaz bad; Hezekiah good. Manasseh and Amonbad; Josias good; his successors, to the captivity bad, after the captivity good.

Reason 1. From God’s people’s abuse of prosperity into self—confidence. Ps. 30:6, 7, and luxury, Deut. 32:15; hence followeth calamity and adversity.

Reason 2. From the humiliation and reformation of God’s people in adversity. Hosea 5:15, with 6:1, 2.

Reason 3. To the end we should find nothing after God. as in the text—to wit, first. No stability in the creature, but unsettled vicissitudes; secondly, No fault in God and his administrations. So the phrase and word is taken, John 14:30 Job 31:7.

John Cotton, A Brief Exposition With Practical Observations Upon the Whole Book of Ecclesiastes, Nichol’s Series of Commentaries (Edinburgh; London; Dublin: James Nichol; James Nisbet & Co.; G. Herbert, 1868), 67-68.

God has set prosperity and adversity over against each other in men’s history. Why? “To the end that man should find (find out) nothing after him.” The meanings somewhat obscure at the first glance. But the sentiment corresponds with 9:1, where it says, “No man knoweth either love or hatred (whether God loves or hates him) by all that is before them.” God’s outward dealings furnish no clue as to God’s love to us. They are various, that we may not know what is to be our future lot. “Man can find out nothing after him;” i. e., no satisfactory explanation after all his inquiries, if this life is man’s entire existence. And the next verse corroborates this view.

Loyal Young, A Commentary on the Book of Ecclesiastes (Philadelphia: Presbyterian Board of Publication, 1865), 168.


[1] Ironically, it is the end of sin which reveals its nature:

1 My son, be attentive to my wisdom; incline your ear to my understanding, 2 that you may keep discretion, and your lips may guard knowledge. 3 For the lips of a forbidden woman drip honey, and her speech is smoother than oil, 4 but in the end she is bitter as wormwood, sharp as a two-edged sword. 5 Her feet go down to death; her steps follow the path to Sheol; Proverbs 5:1–5 (ESV)

29 Who has woe? Who has sorrow? Who has strife? Who has complaining? Who has wounds without cause? Who has redness of eyes? 30 Those who tarry long over wine; those who go to try mixed wine. 31 Do not look at wine when it is red, when it sparkles in the cup and goes down smoothly. 32 In the end it bites like a serpent and stings like an adder. Proverbs 23:29–32 (ESV)

Herman Bavinck on Human Nature

23 Sunday Dec 2012

Posted by memoirandremains in 1 Timothy, Herman Bavinck, John, Thomas Watson

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

1 Timothy, Anthropology, Christmas, Herman Bavinck, Herman Bavinck, image of God, Imago Dei, incarnation, Jesus, John, John 16:21, Kurt Vonnegut, love, Love Enemies, love one another, Mystical Bedlam, Thomas Adams, Thomas Watson

The Christian celebrating the incarnation of God in Jesus of Nazareth, does well to contemplate the wonder of the human being (see Thomas Watson, http://www.fivesolas.com/watson/humilia.htm ).

 

The Christian concern for human beings as human beings, whether of human beings unborn or human beings at advanced age and weakness seems striking strange to other people who don’t hold the same premise. Once a student in one of my classes let the States to go to Pakistan to bring supplies to people, most of whom were Muslim, suffering from the earthquake of 2005 (Kashmir earthquake).  He reported that many of the international supplies were pillaged before they could make to victims. While most of the help actually being delivered was delivered by Christians — which is strikingly odd considering the difficulty that Christians routinely face in Pakistan.

 

The atheist Matthew Parish famously stated that Africa needs Christianity (for an interesting take on this by an atheist, see, http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2008/12/27/does-africa-need-god/)

 

Now, I am not so silly as to say as that everyone who claims Christianity acts remotely like a Christian. Nor do I do deny the decency and good that some atheists have done. Kurt Vonnegut the atheist novelist who penned many lines which made me think and shirk and laugh had a character quip in God Bless You Mr. Rosewater, There’s only one rule I know of babies, …you’ve got to be kind!

 

What I am stating is that Christianity rightly understood thinks the human being to be the pinnacle of God’s creation — the very image of God himself. And thus, the Christian must honor human beings as valuable because the human being exists.

 

In John 16:21, Jesus of the movement from pain to joy when a woman gives birth:

 

When a woman is giving birth, she has sorrow because her hour has come, but when she has delivered the baby, she no longer remembers the anguish, for joy that a human being has been born into the world.

 

Note that, she rejoices because a “human being has been born in the world.”  The nature of this valuation of human beings often places Christians at marked disagreement with other human beings when it comes to political decisions.  And surely any number of inconsistencies between practice and theology could be waved as hypocrisy.

 

But only a Christian would be a hypocrite when it comes to matters of oppression or slavery or other misuse of human beings. Unless there is a greater moral context to make a judgment, a condemnation of slavery (say) is a matter of taste, not a matter of evil. Hatred of oppression may be a real subjective motive, but the subjective distaste does not make it “evil”.

 

One may argue that the Christian valuation of human is delusional (because it is a mere “preference” – as are all valuations), but it is the basis upon Christians base their understanding of ethics, morality and salvation.

 

The Christian must love another because they are human — such love is required to supersede even personal considerations and the response of the other:

 

44 But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you,

45 so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust.

 

Matthew 5:44-45. Christian love is grounded in the nature of God and the nature of humanity. It is not bound in the nature of a particular immediate personal relationship.

 

Indeed, Christians would do go further in their practical love to other human beings were we to more fully consider our doctrine.  The Dutch theologian Bavinck writes (vol. 3 of his systematic theology) put this well:

 

Man is a rational animal, a thinking reed, a being existing between angels and animals, related to but distinct from both. He unites and reconciles within himself both heaven and earth, things both invisible and visible. And precisely as such he is the image and likeness of God. God is most certainly “spirit,” and in this respect also the angels are related to him. But sometimes there is reference also to his soul, and throughout Scripture all the peculiar psychic feelings and activities that are essentially human are also attributed to God. In Christ, God assumed the nature of humanity, not that of angels. And precisely on that account man, rather than the angels, is the image, son, and offspring of God. The spirituality, invisibility, unity, simplicity, and immortality of the human soul are all features of the image of God.

 

Thomas Adams put it thus, “Man as God’s creation left him was a goodly creature, an abridgement of heaven and earth, an epitome of God and the world; resembling God, who is spirit, in his soul; and the world, which is his body, in the composition of his. Deus maximus invisibilum, mundus maximus visibilium — God the greatest of invisible natures, the world the greatest of visible creatures; both brought into the little compass of man” (Mystical Bedlam, Collected Works, vol. 1, p. 255).

The human being, the human, body and soul, is the great cross-roads of Creation. Jesus Christ as the human being is the point of intersection between God and human beings. It is for this reason he said, “I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father but through me” (John 14:6).

 

For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all, which is the testimony given at the proper time.

           

(1 Timothy 2:5-6 ESV).

Discontentment is a desire to

24 Friday Aug 2012

Posted by memoirandremains in 1 Timothy, Biblical Counseling, Genesis, Robert Candlish

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

1 Timothy, 1 Timothy 6, 1 Timothy 6:6-10, Biblical Counseling, Discontement, Genesis, Robert Candlish

In 1 Timothy 6:6-10 Paul writes:

6 But godliness with contentment is great gain, 7 for we brought nothing into the world, and we cannot take anything out of the world. 8 But if we have food and clothing, with these we will be content. 9 But those who desire to be rich fall into temptation, into a snare, into many senseless and harmful desires that plunge people into ruin and destruction. 10 For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evils. It is through this craving that some have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many pangs.

We can have everything we could ever use and still be discontent, because discontentment is not based upon what we possess but rather that we are prevented from possessing some other thing – even if we can’t use or don’t need it. Discontentment begins where the great Idol Self cannot compel another to be or do or give in subservience to Self. Discontentment, in its very heart of hearts, is a desire to displace God and set up the Self in God’s place. It is the desire to be a creature without a Creator.

As Robert Candlish notes, this is an evil with very deep roots:

I. Thus, first, he insinuates doubts regarding the equity and goodness of God:—“Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?” (ver. 1). Can it be? Has he really subjected you to so unreasonable a restraint? And the insinuation takes effect. Suspicion begins to rankle in the woman’s breast. In her very manner of citing the terms of the covenant, she shows that she is dwelling more on the single restriction, than on all the munificence of the general grant. In the Lord’s first announcement of it, the main stress is laid upon the grant. It is expressed with a studied prodigality of emphasis; “of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat.” And the single limitation is but slightly, though solemnly, noted; “but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it.” The woman, however, drinking in the miserable poison of suspicion which the serpent has instilled, reverses this mode of speaking. How disparagingly does she notice the fulness and freeness of the gift;—“we may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden!” That is all the acknowledgment she makes; and there is no cordiality in it. It is not “every tree,” nor, “we may freely eat;” but, “we may eat of the fruit of the trees;”—as if the permission were grudgingly given;—and as if it were altogether a matter of course, and even less almost than her right. On the other hand, she dwells upon the prohibition, amplifying it and magnifying it as an intolerable hardship;—“but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it” (2:16, 17; 3:2, 3).

Is not this the very spirit of Jonah, to whom it was nothing that Nineveh was given him as the reward of his faithful preaching, if the gourd that refreshed him was removed? Is it not the temper of Haman, who, amid all the riches and splendour of court favour, cried out in bitterness of soul;—“All this availeth me nothing, so long as I see Mordecai the Jew sitting at the king’s gate?”

Robert S. Candlish, The Book of Genesis, Vol. 1 (Edinburgh: Adam and Charles Black, 1868), 62-63.

Biblical Counseling Takes Place Within the Family

26 Thursday Jul 2012

Posted by memoirandremains in 1 Timothy, Accountability, Biblical Counseling, Discipleship

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

1 Timothy, 1 Timothy 5, Accountability, Biblical Counseling, Church Discipline, confrontation, Discipleship, Family, love, Love, MacArthur, Matthew 18, Sin

1 Do not rebuke an older man but encourage him as you would a father, younger men as brothers, 2 older women as mothers, younger women as sisters, in all purity. 1 Timothy 5:1–2 (ESV)

Counseling and confrontation are not encounters between professionals and clients; it is an act of mutual love and concern between members of the same family.  Indeed, John MacArthur labels this section of his commentary on 1 Timothy, “Confronting Sin in the Spiritual Family.”

First, the overview:

But before going into specific areas, Paul sets out guidelines indicating how Timothy should relate to four different types of people.

• AN OLDER MAN SHOULD NOT BE REBUKED BUT ENCOURAGED ‘as you would a father’. This does not mean that he cannot be corrected. The ‘rebuke’ Paul speaks of is an expression of strong disapproval. The New International Version expresses well the force of what Paul says by translating it as ‘rebuke … harshly’. If an older man needs correction, Timothy should not be disrespectful or condescending towards him. Instead, he should come alongside him and treat him with the kind of respect he would show to his own father.

• YOUNGER MEN ARE TO BE TREATED LIKE BROTHERS. He should help, support and encourage them.

• OLDER WOMEN SHOULD BE TREATED LIKE MOTHERS, with respect and care.

• YOUNGER WOMEN MUST BE TREATED LIKE SISTERS, ‘in all purity’. Timothy must not play games with their affections, flirt with them or look at them lustfully. He should treat them with the same kind of innocence that he would show to his sister.

These are timeless principles which will help us to keep good relationships with people in our own church family. Let us make sure that we treat those older than we are with the same respect we should show to our parents, that we come alongside and encourage people who are the same age as we are, and that we treat members of the opposite sex with purity.

Simon J. Robinson, Opening Up 1 Timothy, Opening Up Commentary (Leominster: Day One Publications, 2004), 85-86.

In giving these instructions, Paul was training Timothy in such a manner to present a model of godliness. First, Timothy was required to present a model of Christian love, which would declare that those in the church were indeed disciples of Jesus (John 13:34-35). Second, he was to act in demonstrative love toward those in the congregation. Paul himself described love remarkable forbearance and kindness (1 Cor. 13:4-7). Here, Paul lays out the elements of that love in a particular context. Third, Paul taught Timothy how to act in such a way that those in congregation would have a pattern to imitate themselves. The pastor, the elder, the counselor, the more mature sister or brother are to live in such a way that others can see and imitate their conduct (1 Cor. 11:1):

Paul wanted the action of Timothy and the church toward these various groups to win the esteem of the largely heathen population in Ephesus. Proper behavior toward all of these groups demanded respect, compassion, and the giving of financial help where needed. Christians who did this would demonstrate a life-style the pagan population could understand and admire.

Paul and his readers were aware of the spiritual sense in which Christians were related to one another as brothers and sisters (Mark 3:31–35). Paul requested treatment that recognized these family relationships. In giving these directions, Paul was aware of Timothy’s youthfulness; and he wanted Timothy to avoid disrespect, insecurity, or temptation to immorality.

5:1 In dealing with the older men116 Paul urged Timothy to avoid a harsh, insensitive treatment which would not appreciate their age. The term “rebuke,” mentioned here only in the New Testament, describes a severe verbal pounding. Such treatment would show no appreciation for age. The youthful Timothy faced a ticklish situation in appealing to older men, but differences of age did not make admonition to these men any less necessary.

Timothy was not to talk down to younger men, but he was to treat them as equals. The term “exhort” demands a kindlier, more considerate approach than the previously denounced “rebuking.” Those who err would need to receive some rebuke for their behavior, but Timothy was to avoid a pompous approach in relating to them.

…5:2 Paul directed Timothy to treat the older women respectfully as mothers (cf. Rom 16:13). A church leader would find it virtually impossible to heap verbal abuse on an older woman if he showed personal respect for her.

Younger women posed a special problem for Timothy. He was to treat them as sisters and maintain a purity which would banish all evil in thought and deed. The lack of purity among the younger women may have caused special problems for the entire Ephesian church (see 2 Tim 3:6–7; 1 Tim 5:11). The word “purity” calls for modesty and chastity in all relationships.

Paul intended to mold Timothy into a wise leader who could deal individually with his flock. He did not want Timothy only to give admonitions. He wanted him to provide an example which other Ephesian Christians could imitate.

Thomas D. Lea and Hayne P. Griffin, vol. 34, 1, 2 Timothy, Titus, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1992), 144-45.

 

 

← Older posts

Categories

Archives

Recent Posts

  • Richard Sibbes, The Backsliding Sinner 2.2
  • Dylan Thomas, To Be Encompassed by the Brilliant Earth
  • Richard Sibbes, The Returning Backslider 2.1
  • Edward Taylor, Meditation 32, Seventh Stanza
  • George Swinnock, The Christian Man’s Calling, 1.7

Blog at WordPress.com.

Cancel

 
Loading Comments...
Comment
    ×