We are here to consider, first the preparation that the Devil makes, by taking him up to a high hill, to make the offer ver. 8. Secondly, the temptation itself, vers. 9. Thirdly, our Savior’s answer, and the shield he opposes to it, verse 10. Fourthly, the issue of the conflict, the victory, vers. 11. In the first we are to consider, first the Devil’s method: secondly, the place and ground: thirdly, his policy, in not only telling what he would give; but in shewing thereof: fourthly, the things themselves which he offers, which are two; the kingdom of the earth, and the glory thereof.

I.  The Devil’s Method

First, of his method Eph. 4. 14[1]: we are warned not to be wavering, & caried about with every wind of doctrine, by the deceit and craftiness of men, whereby they lie in wait to deceive.

Craftiness and deception, be the instruments which the Devil uses; he brings Christ from the wilderness to the Temple, and from the Temple to the mountain, to destroy the Temple, which mountain is prosperity. So in adversity we vow to God, that we will serve him; but after help, we break it.

Notes

We are told to watch out for the craftiness and deceitfulness of men. (Eph. 4:14) If these are the methods of wicked men, then they are the methods of the Devil.

Notice how the Devil uses his craft in the attempt to trap Christ: He finds in the wilderness, but that does not work. He takes him to the Temple. And when that does not work, he takes him to a mountain and offers prosperity.

While these tricks do not work upon Christ, they do work upon us. He finds us in difficulty; and if we do not fall into sin there, we call out to God. But what then happens? We vow that we will reform, that we will follow as he has called us. But as soon the pressure is relieved and the danger is lifted, we forget our promise and return to our sin.

This is as the Devil tried Christ. Here: things are good. There is no need to worry. If you just compromise a little bit here, how much better everything else will seem.

---

[1] Ephesians 4:11–15 (ESV)

¹¹ And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers, ¹² to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, ¹³ until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ, ¹⁴ so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes. ¹⁵ Rather, speaking the truth in love, we are to grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ,

Noted Christian anthropologist and missiologist Paul Hiebert (1932–2007) identified a blind spot in much of Western Christianity, which he called the “flaw of the excluded middle.” So many Christians in the West live as though the story of creation involved in the main just two important characters, God and ourselves. The majority world, however, in contrast, has never forgotten that there is another order of intelligent created life playing its role in the story: namely, the angelic order. Hiebert himself, as a Western-trained theologian and as a social scientist—albeit a Christian one—had forgotten this creaturely order. He confesses,

The reasons for my uneasiness with the biblical and Indian worldviews should be clear. I had excluded the middle level of supernatural this-worldly beings and forces from my own worldview. As a scientist I had been trained to deal with the empirical world in naturalistic terms. As a theologian I was taught to answer ultimate questions in theistic terms. For me the middle zone did not really exist. Unlike Indian villagers, I had given little thought to spirits of this world, to local ancestors and ghosts, or to the souls of animals. For me these belonged to the realm of fairies, trolls, and other mythical beings.

In Hiebert’s view, Western Christianity needs to learn from the global south, where, incidentally, the center of gravity now resides as far as the Christian faith is concerned.

Against the Darkness The Doctrine of Angels, Satan, and Demons Graham A. Cole

Years ago I had dinner with a psychiatric professor at UCLA. He said we don’t know what antidepressants do or why they work or why they don’t. A recent study concludes its even worse than that

Although “the serotonin hypothesis of depression is still influential,” Moncrieff and coauthors noted, citing widely adopted textbooks published as recently as 2020 and surveys indicating that “85-90 percent of the public believes that depression is caused by low serotonin or a chemical imbalance,” the primary research indicates there is “no support for the hypothesis that depression is caused by lowered serotonin activity or concentrations.”

Read the whole thing

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/side-effects/202207/decisive-blow-the-serotonin-hypothesis-depression

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/side-effects/202207/decisive-blow-the-serotonin-hypothesis-depression

The Old Testament Impact on the Concept of Fair Trials Establish the need: Court’s legitimacy is being questioned in our time; but is the institution…

The Old Testament Influence on the Concept of Fair Trials

William Faulkner Doherty was born in 1937 and died in July 2010. He was married and had three children. He later married Roxanne, whom he met at work. He amassed a fortune of 30-50 million dollars. Shortly before his death, executed a will which left his property to his children and nothing to his second wife (she did have her own stock interest in his business). Following his death, Roxanne contested the will.

The immediate question in such cases is what would motivate a man to disinherit his wife? The following section from the case seems to shed some light on his motivation. I also commend the writing of this section. Very often, the factual recitation in cases can be clear to the point of boredom. There is also the matter of selection of the pertinent facts to prove the point: A written decision is a justification for the court’s action. It is the court’s defense and explanation: it is offered as proof that the court is fair and just.

The following excerpt from the decision works very well. First, it paints a clear picture without being tedious. Second, this particular event taken from the thousands of pages of testimony and exhibits (the trial was 25 days long, which is a long trial) provides justification for the William’s decision to disinherit the wife, and thus justification for the Court’s decision to uphold his will:

“On the evening of June 16, 2010, the siblings were dining together at Michael’s home. First Michael and then Debra received phone calls from Roxanne. They knew from past experience that she would likely be inebriated by this time of the day; her speech was slurred and she sounded agitated. She told the siblings that she wanted their father out of the house and had put his belongings outside. The siblings immediately drove over to their father’s house. Roxanne was outside, looking agitated. By the front door were a suitcase and a blanket, and William’s walker and wheelchair. Debra and Michael went inside to talk with their father, who told them that Roxanne had tried to drag him out of bed, although he had been able to hang on to the bed frame. Roxanne had told him she was going to leave him in the road. She then called an ambulance to remove him from the house (although he refused to leave when it arrived).

“When deputies eventually arrived, they arrested Roxanne (who declared as they led her to the patrol car that no one could prove anything because there had not been any witnesses).”

Doherty v. Doherty (2014) C073408

“You can’t prove nothing” is always an admission of guilt, btw.

The previous post on this poem is here.

Sixth Stanza

Oh! dear bought plea, dear Lord what buy’st so dear

What with thy blood purchase thy plea for me?

Take argument out of thy grave t’appear

And plead my case with, me from guilt to free.

These maul both sins and devils, and amaze

Both saints and angels: wreath their mouths with praise.

The grammar and phrasing are bit difficult in places here, because Taylor has left a great deal of the various ideas unstated.

Oh! dear bought plea, dear Lord what buy’st so dear

What with thy blood purchase thy plea for me?

The plea of the Advocate which will vindicate the poet has come at an extreme price is it is a “dear bought plea”.  Taylor repeats this idea in different phrasing “buy’st so dear.” In the next line the actual price is made plain, “with thy blood purchase thy plea.”  The repetition of sounds drives home this point: dear, bought, plea, dear, buy’st, dear, blood, purchase, plea.

The rhythm here is interesting. The movement is regular iambs until we come to purchase where we have two accented syllables in a row followed by a pause, which puts special emphasis on “purchase.”

The obtaining of this plea continues in the next lines:

Take argument out of thy grave t’appear

And plead my case with, me from guilt to free.

Go to your grave and there find the argument which you will produce at trial (t’appear) “and plead my case with.” Christ’s death is the basis of our salvation:

“For I delivered to you as first importance, which I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures.” 1 Cor. 15:3 The manner in which Christ’s death substitutes for the guilty party’s crime is not explained here. But the belief in the efficacy of the exchange is unquestioned by Taylor. It changes my status from “guilt” to a “free” (that is free from charge, innocent).

The effect upon third parties is plain. His sin and “devils” are injured by this death: they are “maul[ed]”. The injury to sin is that sin no longer can condemn. The devils are overcome. On the cross, Christ “disarmed the rules and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them.” Col. 2:15

These maul both sins and devils,

To “saints and angels” the response is one of praise. Peter writes that the mystery of Christ’s redemption is something  “into which angels long to look.” 1 Pet. 1:12

                        and amaze

Both saints and angels:

He ends the stanza with a prayer that will encourage and make possible praise for this rescue:

wreath their mouths with praise.

It is interesting that the last word of the stanza is “praise” which links to the plea/purchase earlier in the stanza, which plea in the court now become praise in the angels and saints.