Category Archives: Sin

Edward Taylor, Meditation 31, Begraced with Glory.4

10 Wednesday Feb 2021

Posted by in Edward Taylor, Sin, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

Stanza Four:

But that is not the worst: there’s worse than this.

My taste is lost; no bite tastes sweet to me

But what is dipped all over in this dish.

Of rank rank poison: this my sauce must be.

Hell heaven, heaven hell, yea bitter sweet:

Poison’s my food: food poison in’t doth keep.

Summary: I have come to love the Devil’s sauce sin that I cannot enjoy anything without this poison. I love the poison. I am so upside down that I must have sin mixed in with everything I do.

Notes:

This gets at something which was very important in much Puritans were quite interested, the way in which sin both twisted the human being and at the same time created the desire for sin itself:

“The example in Romans 7:8 of Paul, who by his own account, was one of the most morally degenerate men who ever lived (Phil. 3:6; 1 Tim. 1:13, 15), provides a gateway for Goodwin to understand how no man or woman in a carnal state is free from inclination to all sin. The struggling man in Romans 7 was viewed by the Puritans as a Christian,32 but verse 8 has reference to Paul in his unconverted state. The sin in Paul in this verse is original sin, and original sin produced in him “all manner of concupiscence,” that is, all kinds of covetous lust or desire for things forbidden.33 As Edward Reynolds put it, “It is as natural to the heart to lust, as it is to the eye to see.”34 Self-love, instead of love to God, results from original sin.” Beeke, Joel R.; Jones, Mark. A Puritan Theology: Doctrine for Life (pp. 279-280). Reformation Heritage Books. Kindle Edition.

Jonathan Edwards notes that even though there is such variety in the circumstances among human beings, there is one thing which invariably shows up, sin: 

THE proposition laid down being proved, the consequence of it remains to be made out, viz. that the mind of man has a natural tendency or propensity to that event, which has been shewn universally and infallibly to take place (if this ben’t sufficiently evident of itself, without proof), and that this is a corrupt or depraved propensity.

Jonathan Edwards, Original Sin, ed. John E. Smith and Clyde A. Holbrook, Corrected Edition., vol. 3, The Works of Jonathan Edwards (New Haven; London: Yale University Press, 1997), 120. And:

The general continued wickedness of mankind, against such means and motives, proves each of these things, viz. that the cause is fixed, and that the fixed cause is internal, in man’s nature, and also that it is very powerful. It proves the first, namely, that the cause is fixed, because the effect is so abiding, through so many changes. It proves the second, that is, that the fixed cause is internal, because the circumstances are so various: the variety of means and motives is one thing that is to be referred to the head of variety of circumstances: and they are that kind of circumstances, which above all others proves this; for they are such circumstances as can’t possibly cause the effect, being most opposite to the effect in their tendency.

193. As Edwards’ explains in his Treatise Freedom of the Will, it is desire that binds the will. And thus this universal tendency to sin is the result of a universal desire. 

What Taylor does so well in this stanza is to couple desire and poison into a single movement: We desire our destruction.  There is an image from Jeremiah which helps here:

Jeremiah 2:23–25 (AV) 

23 How canst thou say, I am not polluted, I have not gone after Baalim? see thy way in the valley, know what thou hast done: thou art a swift dromedary traversing her ways; 24 A wild ass used to the wilderness, that snuffeth up the wind at her pleasure; in her occasion who can turn her away? all they that seek her will not weary themselves; in her month they shall find her. 25 Withhold thy foot from being unshod, and thy throat from thirst: but thou saidst, There is no hope: no; for I have loved strangers, and after them will I go. 

Taylor does not copy the image, but he does rely upon the concept.

Thomas Brooks provides a closer parallel:

Sin is from the greatest deceiver, it is a child of his own begetting, it is the ground of all the deceit in the world, and it is in its own nature exceeding deceitful. Heb. 3:13, ‘But exhort one another daily, while it is called To-day, lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin.’ It will kiss the soul, and pretend fair to the soul, and yet betray the soul for ever. It will with Delilah smile upon us, that it may betray us into the hands of the devil, as she did Samson into the hands of the Philistines. Sin gives Satan a power over us, and an advantage to accuse us and to lay claim to us, as those that wear his badge; it is of a very bewitching nature, it bewitches the soul, where it is upon the throne, that the soul cannot leave it, though it perish eternally by it.4 Sin so bewitches the soul, that it makes the soul call evil good, and good evil; bitter sweet and sweet bitter, light darkness and darkness light; and a soul thus bewitched with sin will stand it out to the death, at the sword’s point with God; let God strike and wound, and cut to the very bone, yet the bewitched soul cares not, fears no but will still hold on in a course of wickedness, as you may see in Pharaoh, Balaam, and Judas. Tell the bewitched soul that sin is a viper that will certainly kill when it is not killed, that sin often kills secretly, insensibly, eternally, yet the bewitched soul cannot, nor will not, cease from sin.

When the physicians told Theotimus that except he did abstain from drunkenness and uncleanness, &c., he would lose his eyes, his heart was so bewitched to his sins, that he answers, ‘Then farewell sweet light;’1 he had rather lose his eyes than leave his sin. So a man bewitched with sin had rather lose God, Christ, heaven, and his own soul than part with his sin. Oh, therefore, for ever take heed of playing or nibbling at Satan’s golden baits

Thomas Brooks, The Complete Works of Thomas Brooks, ed. Alexander Balloch Grosart, vol. 1 (Edinburgh; London; Dublin: James Nichol; James Nisbet and Co.; G. Herbert, 1866), 15–16.

And this:

Many long to be meddling with the murdering morsels of sin, which nourish not, but rent and consume the belly, the soul, that receives them. Many eat that on earth that they digest in hell. Sin’s murdering morsels will deceive those that devour them. Adam’s apple was a bitter sweet; Esau’s mess was a bitter sweet; the Israelites’ quails a bitter sweet; Jonathan’s honey a bitter sweet; and Adonijah’s dainties a bitter sweet. After the meal is ended, then comes the reckoning. Men must not think to dance and dine with the devil, and then to sup with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven; to feed upon the poison of asps, and yet that the viper’s tongue should not slay them

Thomas Brooks, The Complete Works of Thomas Brooks, ed. Alexander Balloch Grosart, vol. 1 (Edinburgh; London; Dublin: James Nichol; James Nisbet and Co.; G. Herbert, 1866), 14.

Musical

But that is not the worst: there’s worse than this.

My taste is lost; no bite tastes sweet to me (20)

But what is dipped all over in this dish.

Of rank rank poison: this my sauce must be.

Hell heaven, heaven hell, yea bitter sweet:

Poison’s my food: food poison in’t doth keep.

The r’s and s’s work well together especially in the first line. 
“Worse than this” by itself is not a very promising “poetic” line. But the repetition of “worst/worse” “the worst there’s worse” also works. The next line picks up on these sound but now we the repetition of taste/tastes, and the sounds of “tastes sweet”, where the s’s and t’s: t-s-t-s-t. Line 21 again works on a alliteration: dipped-dish. 

This alliteration within the individual line gives a feel of Anglo-Saxon poetry where alliteration is a primary means to hold a line together

Oft Scyld Scefing sceaþena þreatum, 

monegum mægþum, meodosetla ofteah, 

(Beowulf)

He uses the very same technique in the remainder of the stanza, but in the last two lines he uses the alliteration to underscore the reversals:

Of rank rank poison: this my sauce must be.

Hell heaven, heaven hell, yea bitter sweet:

Poison’s my food: food poison in’t doth keep.

Hl – hn / hn – hl

P-f/f-p

The word “poison” ties these lines together. 

He marks the transition into this section by means of the repetition of “rank-rank” which slows the movement of the stanza. It is then offset by a colon and the sad, “This my sauce must be.” Note again the m-s/m-s repetition. 

The line, “This my sauce must be” is a rather sad resignation. It reminds me of the tone of Hosea, “Ephraim is joined to idols;/Leave him alone.”

Final note: What is most devasting about the poet’s situation is that there is no rescue from this place. Even though he is destroying himself, he wants to be here. It is like finding someone in a prison and they refuse to leave.

Edward Taylor, Meditation 31, Begraced With Glory.3

06 Saturday Feb 2021

Posted by in Edward Taylor, Literature, Sin

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Seen at 107 South Street, NY, NY; https://www.instagram.com/dirtcobain/

Oh! Sad-sad thing! Satan is now turned cook:

Sin is the sauce he gets for every dish.

I cannot bite a bit of bread or root (15)

But what is sopped therein and venomish.

Right’s lost in what’s my right. Hence I do take

Only what’s poisoned by the th’infernal snake.

Summary: Now every experience, everything which the poet experiences has been imbued with sin, which he refers to as “poison” or “venom.”

Notes: That Satan is referred to as a serpent is undisputed. In Genesis 3, the Tempter – although not explicitly referred to as Satan – is referred to as the Serpent, the most crafty of subtle beasts of the field (the field was the world outside the Garden). In Revelation 20:2, Satan is explicitly referred to as “that ancient serpent.”

The imagery of Satan as a cook is interesting and unusual. I cannot find any references to Satan as a cook. But, the image is on point because the original sin was brought about through eating. He did provide a dish for Adam and Eve. 

Use of this image then makes for a fascinating overlay with original sin. That fruit from the Garden has now become an overlay for all subsequent human action. 

All life must be lived in a manner which entails loving God with all heart, soul, mind, and strength. And no action of a human being ever approximates such a level of devotion. It is impossible for post-fall human conduct to ever be perfect. 

This actually makes for a fascinating contrast with the current social mobs which attack any deviancy from orthodox thought and conduct. These mobs allow for zero tolerance, zero grace. But in contrast: Paul persecuted the Church; Peter denied Christ; David committed adultery and murder; et cetera. These are our saints. Taylor will get to the inexplicable grace of God – which so contrasts with the judgment of human beings.

Note also that this is not merely sinful but is poisonous: it is filled with venom. Thus, while it is food and desirable; it is also poisonous and spells my death.

Of special note must be the word “sopped”:

Oh! Sad-sad thing! Satan is now turned cook:

Sin is the sauce he gets for every dish.

I cannot bite a bit of bread or root

But what is sopped therein and venomish.

What is so perfect about the word is not merely the sound, but the meaning. Sin as a sauce has been poured over all of his food. He is not merely content to the sauce as it happens to be on his meat: he next uses bread to sop up all the remainders. What a vicious and brilliant vision of sin. 

Musical: I rather like this stanza.

Look at all the alliteration on “s”: 

Sad, sad, satan, sin, sause, diSh, sopped, venomISH, rightS, lost, 

 The phrase, “Sin is the Sause” is wonderfully balanced in concept, rhythm, and sound

SIN is the SAUCE

The first line SAD SAD THING SATan: the slow beat, the repetition of not merely S, but SA. “Sad thing” is a near rhyme to “Satan”

The third line of the santza switches to B and R and makes for a wonderful contrast to the sibilant S

I cannot bite a bit of bread or root

But

The alliteration draws the words together. The near rhyme of bite-bit, the movement from B to R in Bite, Bit, BRead, Root is brilliant.

Here it is again:

Oh! Sad-sad thing! Satan is now turned cook:

Sin is the sauce he gets for every dish.

I cannot bite a bit of bread or root

But what is sopped therein and venomish.

Right’s lost in what’s my right. Hence I do take

Only what’s poisoned by the th’infernal snake.

A Brief Observation on Herod: Irrationality, Sin, Suppression and God

07 Tuesday Jan 2020

Posted by in Matthew, Sin, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

Anonymous-Artist_The-Magi-Before-Herod-from-the-altar-frontal-of-The-Virgin-with-Roses-c.1350

Something which I had not sufficiently considered about Herod is that he believes. He is not merely responding to a political threat; he is a panic over God. At some point, I may wish to develop this idea: there are two interesting themes here: (1) the irrationality of sin and suppression; (2) the effect of God intruding into human conscious such knowledge has been previously suppressed.

A good parallel here would be Judas & Peter. Anyway, to Herod:

Matthew 2:1–2 (ESV)

 2 Now after Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king, behold, wise men from the east came to Jerusalem, 2 saying, “Where is he who has been born king of the Jews? For we saw his star when it rose and have come to worship him.”

The Magi approach Herod and speak of the one born the King of Israel.  Herod knows about this child. He has heard about the Messiah & he believes this to be true:

Matthew 2:3–6 (ESV)

3 When Herod the king heard this, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him; 4 and assembling all the chief priests and scribes of the people, he inquired of them where the Christ was to be born. 5 They told him, “In Bethlehem of Judea, for so it is written by the prophet:

            6           “ ‘And you, O Bethlehem, in the land of Judah,

are by no means least among the rulers of Judah;

                        for from you shall come a ruler

who will shepherd my people Israel.’ ”

Despite this knowledge, Herod has apparently put the thought out of his head. Herod is not a decedent of David. To the extent he has taken thought concerning the Messiah, he has realized that the Messiah will replace him.

He goes to the religious authorities and asks them for more information on this child: specifically where will this child be born.

Consider this for a moment: Herod has successfully kept God at a distance from his conscious thought. He knows these things are true, but they are not Herod’s concern.

When God does intrude into Herod’s thought, Herod becomes “troubled.” He has been successfully suppressing the knowledge of God. But when God forces his way into Herod’s conscious life, Herod can only be troubled.

He seeks to figure out how to manage God, by managing the situation. Thus, he needs some information upon which to act: Where is this Messiah. The religious leaders can give him a city, but not a house. For that information, he turns to the Magi:

Matthew 2:7–8 (ESV)

7 Then Herod summoned the wise men secretly and ascertained from them what time the star had appeared. 8 And he sent them to Bethlehem, saying, “Go and search diligently for the child, and when you have found him, bring me word, that I too may come and worship him.”

Before we go on, consider the irrationality of Herod. Yes, he was a famously dangerous and vicious man. But this even portrays a peculiar kind of irrationality. He knows God is doing something right here, right now. God has intruded into his world. God has so controlled history that a child is being born at a particular moment in history and this known even by Magi from the Parthian Empire.

But he thinks he has a play. If he gets to the right house, he will be to kill the child.

This is the bizarre calculation of sin: Paul begins his argument in Romans with the proposition that God in fact knows, and we humans know that God knows and yet delude ourselves into thinking that God won’t know this time.

More consciously this stunt is attempted, the more bizarre it becomes in practice. Herod knowingly wants to kill the promised Messiah. Why does he believe that he’ll be able to outsmart God? How does he think God will let him get away with this?

How Far May Sin Be In A Blessed Man, A Child of God? (Thomas Manton)

08 Thursday Jun 2017

Posted by in Biblical Counseling, Sin, Theology of Biblical Counseling, Thomas Manton, Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , ,

In sermon IV from his sermons on the 119th Psalm, Manton, “How far may sin be in a blessed man, a child of God?” The verse under consideration reads, “They do no iniquity: they walk in his ways.” Having discussed the blessing which comes from avoiding sin (for instance, “In them true happiness has begun.” — for all our sorrow comes from sin, thus avoidance of sin is the beginning of true happiness), he comes to this question.

This shows Manton to be a careful pastor and to have an accurate understanding of the human beings in his congregation. A poor pastor would lash his hearers. Manson has seriously exhorted them to holiness and has noted that sin has to rightful place in the heart of a believer. But he now he comes to this question, what of remaining sin.

First, all believers continue with a “corrupt nature, they have sin in the as well as others.” He then compares the remains of sin ivy on a wall. You cut down the branch and new vines grow up in its place: “Such an indwelling sin is in us, though we pray, strive, and cut off the excrescences, the buddings out of it here and there, yet till it be plucked asunder by death, it continueth with us.”

Second, we have “infirmities”; our service is not perfect — it cannot reach the measure which God requires. “There are unavoidable infirmities which are pardoned of course.”

Third,

They may be guilty of some sins which by watchfulness might be prevented, as vain thoughts, idle, passionate speeches, and many carnal actions. It is possible that these may be prevented by the ordinary assistances of grace, and if we will keep a strict guard over our own hearts. But in this case God’s children may be overtaken and overborne; overtaken by the suddenness, or overborne by the violence of temptation.

Fourth, “they may fall foul.”  — But this is no license to make a trade of sin.

Fifth: a peculiar sin. I will quote this at length, because it is very easy to be smug in this issue and to think that another’s peculiar weakness is especially evil — because it is not sin to me! We need gentleness in judging such things:

A child of God may have some particular evils, which may be called predominant sins (not with respect to grace, that is impossible, that a man should be renewed and have such sins that sin should carry the mastery over grace); but they may be said to have a predominancy in comparison of other sins; he may have some particular inclination to some evil above others. David had his iniquity, Ps. 18:23. Look, as the saints have particular graces; Abraham was eminent for faith, Timothy for sobriety, Moses for meekness, &c.; so they have their particular corruptions which are more suitable to their temper and course of life. Peter seems to be inclined to tergiversation, and to shrinking in a time of trouble. We find him often tripping in that kind; in the denial of his master; again, Gal. 2:12, it is said he dissembled and complied with the Jews, therefore Paul ‘withstood him to his face, for he was to be blamed.’ It is evident by experience there are particular corruptions to which the children of God are more inclinable: this appears by the great power and sway they bear in commanding other evils to be committed, by their falling into them out of inward propensity when outward temptations are few or weak, or none at all; and when resistance is made, yet they are more pestered and haunted with them than with other temptations, which is a constant matter of exercise and humiliation to them

Thomas Manton, The Complete Works of Thomas Manton, vol. 6 (London: James Nisbet & Co., 1872), 33.

 

 

 

 

The loss of God and the terrors of life

14 Tuesday Feb 2017

Posted by in Original Sin, Richard Sibbes, Sin, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

The loss of God results in all the terrors and troubles of this life. Therefore, it is a restored relationship to God that our “happiness” consists:

GOD having framed man an understanding creature, hath made him fit to have communion and intercourse with himself; because he can by his understanding discern that there is a better good out of himself, in communion and fellowship with which, happiness consists. Other creatures—wanting understanding to discern a better good out of than in themselves, their life being their good—desire only the continuance of their own being, without society and fellowship with others. But man, having the knowledge of God, the Creator of heaven and earth, but especially of God the Redeemer, providing for him a second being better than his first, understandeth that his best and chiefest good dependeth more in him than in himself; and because his happiness standeth in acquaintance and fellowship with this God, which is the chief good, he desireth a communion with him, that he may partake of his good.

Richard Sibbes, “The Faithful Covenanter”, The Complete Works of Richard Sibbes, ed. Alexander Balloch Grosart, vol. 6 (Edinburgh; London; Dublin: James Nichol; James Nisbet and Co.; W. Robertson, 1863), 3.

Imagine it this way: a small child wanders into the forrest alone is not injured by the loss of his father, but his father’s absence is the ultimate cause of his loss. Conversely, the child finding his father does not directly make the forrest less dark, the wolves less dangerous, the night less cold. But return of the father makes it possible to be rescued from all these things.

Orthodox Paradoxes, Concerning Sin

06 Sunday Mar 2016

Posted by in Sin, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

Ralph Venning, 1650:

XI Concerning Sin

81. He knows that he was not when Adam was; and yet he believes that he sinned when Adam did.
82. He believes that sin had no being; and yet he believes that God knows it.
83. He knows not, nor can hardly perceive how he becomes a sinner by generation, and yet believes and confesses that he was born in sin.

John Newton on the Practical Effects of Faith

15 Monday Feb 2016

Posted by in Biblical Counseling, Faith, John Newton, Preaching, Sanctifictation, Sin, Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

Letter VI

Sir,

INTRODUCTION

In the introduction, Newton raises three issues:

1. Faith is more than the means of justification: faith effects a changed life.

The use and importance of faith, as it respects a sinner’s justification before God, has been largely insisted on; but it is likewise of great use and importance in the daily concerns of life. It gives evidence and subsistence to things not seen, and realizes the great truths of the Gospel, so as that they become abiding and living principles of support and direction while we are passing through this wilderness. Thus, it is as the eye and the hand, without which we cannot take one step with certainty, or attempt any service with success.

2A. We should wish that all believers saw the importance of faith transforming their life in practice:

It is to be wished, that this practical exercise of faith were duly attended to by all professors. We should not then meet with so many cases that put us to a stand, and leave us at a great difficulty to reconcile what we see in some of whom we would willingly hope well, with what we read in Scripture of the inseparable concomitants of a true and lively faith.

2B. It should shock us of little those who claim to be Christians differ from others:

For how can we but be staggered, when we hear persons speaking the language of assurance,—that they know their acceptance with God through Christ, and have not the least doubt of their interest in all the promises,—while at the same time we see them under the influence of unsanctified tempers, of a proud, passionate, positive, worldly, selfish, or churlish carriage?

FIRST SECTION: WHAT SHOULD BE THE EVIDENCES OF A TRUE FAITH?

1. True faith would demonstrate itself in a changed life. Too often, Christians are willing to have a change in something drug addictions or profligate sexual immorality: But the Scripture envisions a change “smaller” personal sins, such as pride, material discontentment, harsh speech.

It is not only plain, from the general tenor of Scripture, that a covetous, a proud, or a censorious spirit, are no more consistent with the spirit of the Gospel, than drunkenness or whoredom; but there are many express texts directly pointed against the evils which too often are found amongst professors.

He proves this point from Scripture:

Thus the Apostle James assures us, “That if any man seemeth to be religious, and bridleth not his tongue, his religion is vain;” [James 1:26]

and the Apostle John, “That if any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him;” and he seems to apply this character to any man, whatever his profession or pretences may be, “who having this world’s goods, and seeing his brother have need, shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him.” [1 John 3:17]

Surely these texts more than intimate, that the faith which justifies the soul does likewise receive from Jesus grace for grace, whereby the heart is purified, and the conversation regulated as becomes the Gospel of Christ.

Objection: Isn’t looking for a changed life “legalism”?

There are too many who would have the ministry of the Gospel restrained to the privileges of believers; and when the fruits of faith, and the tempers of the mind, which should be manifest in those who have “tasted that the Lord is gracious,” are inculcated, think they sufficiently evade all that is said, by calling it legal preaching.

Continue reading →

What is Worship?

10 Wednesday Feb 2016

Posted by in Culture, Sin, Soteriology, Thesis, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

I have been trying to find a definition which captures the concept of worship when it expands out into “normal” activities. Without question, our relationship to various “idols” — sports idols, music idols, the famous, the beautiful, the powerful can constitute  worship. A college football looks like worship.

But there is also the worship of the mall (James K.A. Smith’s first chapter in Desiring the Kingdom is brilliant on this point). How do we capture work as worship? And how do we distinguish appropriate human action is appropriate and not as sinful worship? How do I go to a football game or a concert and not “worship” the performer?

This is still tentative:

Every worldview — even if it is inarticulate — grapples with the “wrong” in the world, the way it is not supposed to be. The most thoughtless person still struggles against something wrong. There is some Fall, some Sin which haunts us all — even if we don’t think of it in “religious” terms.

There is a solution to that something wrong: If you will, there is  Sin and there is Salvation.

The object of worship is that thing, person, whatever, which the human worshiper believes will resolve the “what is wrong with the world” problem. It might be the outcome of political election or new shoes.

The act of worship is that set of actions and affections which seek to obtain the benefit of the object hoped in.

There may be more than one object of worship necessary to resolve the problem as understood by the human worshipper.

Seen in this way, not all worship will entail distinctly “religious” means. The act of worship is fit to the object of worship.

“Religious” acts of worship take place where the object of worship is principally spiritual.

However, where the objet of worship is a material object the practice of worship will not appear to be “religious”. If it is an objection and action which is common to a particular culture, it will appear “normal” and be largely invisible.

 

 

1 Peter 1:17, The Fear of the Lord, cont’d

07 Monday Sep 2015

Posted by in 1 Peter, Eschatology, Fear of the Lord, Sin

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

3485985187_30fc4dee13_o

1 Peter 1:13–21 (ESV)

13 Therefore, preparing your minds for action, and being sober-minded, set your hope fully on the grace that will be brought to you at the revelation of Jesus Christ. 14 As obedient children, do not be conformed to the passions of your former ignorance, 15 but as he who called you is holy, you also be holy in all your conduct, 16 since it is written, “You shall be holy, for I am holy.” 17 And if you call on him as Father who judges impartially according to each one’s deeds, conduct yourselves with fear throughout the time of your exile, 18 knowing that you were ransomed from the futile ways inherited from your forefathers, not with perishable things such as silver or gold, 19 but with the precious blood of Christ, like that of a lamb without blemish or spot. 20 He was foreknown before the foundation of the world but was made manifest in the last times for the sake of you 21 who through him are believers in God, who raised him from the dead and gave him glory, so that your faith and hope are in God.