• About
  • Books

memoirandremains

memoirandremains

Tag Archives: Adam

Shakespeare Sonnet 3 Images and Mirrors

06 Tuesday Aug 2019

Posted by memoirandremains in Shakespeare, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Adam, image, Mirror, Shakespeare, Sonnets

[1]       Look in thy glass and tell the face thou viewest

[2]       Now is the time that face should form another,

[3]       Whose fresh repair if now thou not renewest,

[4]       Thou dost beguile the world, unbless some mother.

[5]       For where is she so fair whose uneared womb

[6]       Disdains the tillage of thy husbandry?

[7]       Or who is he so fond will be the tomb

[8]       Of his self-love, to stop posterity?

[9]       Thou art thy mother’s glass, and she in thee

[10]     Calls back the lovely April of her prime;

[11]     So thou through windows of thine age shalt see,

[12]     Despite of wrinkles, this thy golden time.

[13]     But if thou live remembered not to be,

[14]     Die single, and thine image dies with thee.

 

This sonnet continues the theme of the first two: an encouragement to marry and have children.

The distinguishes mark lies with the concept of “image”.  The idea of mirror/image appears in the first & third stanzas as well as the couplet. It also brings in a new element: the subject of the poem is himself the image of another.

 

First Stanza

[1]       Look in thy glass and tell the face thou viewest

[2]       Now is the time that face should form another,

[3]       Whose fresh repair if now thou not renewest,

[4]       Thou dost beguile the world, unbless some mother.

 

 

The first line sets up the conceit for the rest of the poem. The image which he sees in the mirror becomes a separate-self, capable of replication. That face which he sees in the mirror itself should form another face of the same image.

 

This is a subtle and curious idea: Shakespeare is not saying, Make another “your”. Rather, make another in your image.  In this respect, Shakespeare is following in the language of  the Bible

 

Genesis 5:3 (Geneva)

Now Adám lived an hũdreth and thirtie yeres and begate a childe in his owne lickenes after his image, and called his name Sheth.

 

Adam and Eve were created in the image of God. Adam has a son is created in his own image.  And so it is not the man, but the man’s imagewhich is replicated. Thus, it is the face in the mirror which should replicate the image. The man himself will be no more; but the image which appears in the mirror will persist.

[3]       Whose fresh repair if now thou not renewest,

[4]       Thou dost beguile the world, unbless some mother.

This language also harkens back to Genesis. If the man will not renew the image (by having a child), he will “unbless” some potential mother by not sharing a child with her. In this, there seems to be a hint of Eve’s joy in getting a child (after the murder of Abel by Cain):

 

Genesis 4:1 (Geneva)

1 AFterwarde the man knewe Heuáh his wife, which cõceived & bare Káin, & said, I have obteined a man by yͤLord.

 

Second Stanza

 

[5]       For where is she so fair whose uneared womb

[6]       Disdains the tillage of thy husbandry?

[7]       Or who is he so fond will be the tomb

[8]       Of his self-love, to stop posterity?

 

This stanza fits neatly into two characters: the woman who will not have a child with him and the man who foolishly destroys himself.

 

So who is the woman so beautiful …

 

What is an “uneared womb”?  There is an obsolete use of the word “ear” which means to plow:

1 Samuel 8:12 (Geneva)

12 Also he wil make them his captaines over thousandes and captaines over fifties, and to eare his grounde, and to reape his harvest, & to make instruments of waire, and the things that serve for his charets.

The Merriam Webster dictionary offers this instance:

 

: to form ears in growing

the rye should be earing up

Or:

 

⌜SECOND⌝MESSENGER

(FTLN 0467)      [54]     Caesar, I bring thee word

(FTLN 0468)      [55]     Menecrates and Menas, famous pirates,

(FTLN 0469)      [56]     Makes the sea serve them, which they earand

(FTLN 0470)      [57]     wound

(FTLN 0471)      [58]     With keels of every kind. Many hot inroads

(FTLN 0472)      [59]     They make in Italy—the borders maritime

(FTLN 0473)      [60]     Lack blood to think on ’t—and flush youth revolt.

 

William Shakespeare, Antony and Cleopatra (Folger Shakespeare Library, n.d.), 39.

 

Therefore an “uneared womb” would be a woman who had not been “ploughed” – this matches the image of “tillage”.  The image of the field from the previous Sonnet is here returned and applied to the potential mother.

 

So what woman is there who is so beautiful that she would refuse to be the mother of your children? (She does not want to a farmer in her field. I don’t image this imagery would be very welcome in conversation with a woman today – and I have no idea that it would have pleased a woman four hundred years ago. But he also was not writing to the woman).

 

[7]       Or who is he so fond will be the tomb

[8]       Of his self-love, to stop posterity?

 

“Fond” is an old fashioned word for foolish. It was used as late as Wordsworth, “What fond and foolish thoughts”.

 

Who is someone so foolish that he will be his own tomb, but refusing to bear children?

 

Third Stanza

 

This stanza picks up the elements of image from the first stanza and mother from the second stanza:

 

[9]       Thou art thy mother’s glass, and she in thee

[10]     Calls back the lovely April of her prime;

[11]     So thou through windows of thine age shalt see,

[12]     Despite of wrinkles, this thy golden time.

 

He himself is the image of his own mother – and replicates her spring. He is a joy to his own mother by recalling to her, her own “April of her prime”.

 

The “mirror” is here replicated and transformed into a “window” – glass being the common medium of both.

 

At present, he looks into a mirror and sees his own image. But with a child, he sees through the glass as a window into the image replicated in another human being. There is an advancement in the image.

 

The language of mother is used to put him into relation. He has come from a mother (like Eve having a son), and he will be like Adam replicating his image.

 

The Couplet:

 

[13]     But if thou live remembered not to be,

[14]     Die single, and thine image dies with thee.

 

If he dies single – without taking a mother to him – he will not be remembered. And that image in the mirror will be nothing being that image in the mirror. He can replicate his image in a mirror only as long as he lives. But he if has a child, the image is replicated outside of the mirror – it becomes visible through a window (as he was visible to his mother).

Oswald Chambers, The Psychology of Redemption.1

27 Monday Jan 2014

Posted by memoirandremains in Anthropology, Biblical Counseling, Christology, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Adam, Anthropology, Biblical Counseling, christology, Oswald Chambers, Psychology, The Psychology of Redemption

Chambers begins his book The Psychology of Redemption with the interesting observation that biblical psychology must begin with Jesus, not ourselves.  In making this point he relies upon the disorienting observation that the Bible there are only two men, Adam and Jesus (the second Adam):

Christian Psychology is based on the knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ, not on the knowledge of ourselves. It is not the study of human nature analysed and expounded, but the study of the new life that is born in us through the Redemption of our Lord, and the only Standard of that new life is our Lord Himself; He is formed in us by regeneration (Galatians 1:15-16). We are apt to start with the way we are made naturally and to transfer our reasonings on that to Jesus Christ, inferring that to understand ourselves is to understand Him. In Christian Psychology we have not to introspect as we do in natural psychology; we have to accept the revelations given to us in and through our Lord Jesus Christ; that is, we must take all our bearings from the Son of God, not from our natural wits. We have not to study and understand ourselves; but to understand the manifestation in us of the life of the Son of God Who became Son of Man, the Lord Jesus Christ.

According to the Bible, there are only two Men: Adam and Jesus Christ, and God deals with them as the representatives of the human race, not as individuals. All the members of the human race are grouped round these two Men. The first Adam is called “the son of God”; the last Adam is the Son of God, and we are made sons of God by the last Adam. The Christian is neither Adam nor Jesus Christ, the Christian is a new man in Christ Jesus. The first Adam and the last Adam are the only two Men according to God’s norm, and they both came into this world direct from the hand of God.

Some Points of Comparison Between Ecclesiastes 6:10-7:2

02 Wednesday Jan 2013

Posted by memoirandremains in Ecclesiastes, Genesis, John

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Adam, created, Death, Ecclesiastes, Ecclesiastes 6:10, Ecclesiastes 6:12, Genesis, Genesis 2, Genesis 2:17, Genesis 3, Genesis 3:19, Genesis 3:4, Genesis 5:5, image, Isaiah 41:21–24, John, John 2:24–3:1, John 3:12, name, naming, Psalm 39:6, shadow, shadow-image

1. Whatever has come to be has already been named (Eccl. 6:10).

Cross References: Genesis 2:19–20 (ESV):  19 Now out of the ground the LORD God had formed every beast of the field and every bird of the heavens and brought them to the man to see what he would call them. And whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name. 20 The man gave names to all livestock and to the birds of the heavens and to every beast of the field….

Notes: (1) All that exists has come to be from God’s effort – it all pre-exists Adam. God created, then Adam named. Ironically, it is the second Adam who created the first Adam’s world (Luke 3:23 & 38; John 1:3).

(2) Naming: Adam named everything – we all live in that world. Whatever Adam names the thing “that was its name.”

 

2. …and it is known what man is (Eccl. 6:10).

Cross-references: then the Lord God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature. Genesis 2:7 (ESV)

By the sweat of your face you shall eat bread, till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; for you are dust, and to dust you shall return. Genesis 3:19 (ESV)

And: So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. Genesis 1:27 (ESV)

And: And when the Lord smelled the pleasing aroma, the Lord said in his heart, “I will never again curse the ground because of man, for the intention of man’s heart is evil from his youth. Neither will I ever again strike down every living creature as I have done” Genesis 8:21 (ESV). This point returns with Jesus: 24 But Jesus on his part did not entrust himself to them, because he knew all people 25 and needed no one to bear witness about man, for he himself knew what was in man. 1 Now there was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews. John 2:24–3:1 (ESV).

 

Notes: Bitter irony, Adam (male & female, Gen. 5:2) created in the image of God, raised from the dust by the breath of God return to the dust for their rebellion. Adam’s son Seth was born in Adam’s image (Gen. 5:3; there is some dispute concerning the full scope of the meaning here: the very least, we must recognize that Adam could convey nothing beyond what he possessed). The human being is corrupted – and God knows it.

 

3. And that he is not able to dispute with one stronger than he (Eccl. 6:10).

Cross-reference: But the Lord God called to the man and said to him, “Where are you?” Genesis 3:9 (ESV)

Notes: Adam could not dispute with God. Adam’s rebellion brought on Adam’s ruin. The serpent’s promise (Gen. 3:4-5) turned out to be utterly untrue.  Scripture repeats this them: Job 38:1-2; John 19:11).

 

4. The more words, the more vanity, and what is the advantage to man? Ecclesiastes 6:11 (ESV)

Cross-reference: Genesis 3:10, “And he [Adam] said ….”

Notes: We have never been able to talk our way out of our problem.

And when you pray, do not heap up empty phrases as the Gentiles do, for they think that they will be heard for their many words. Matthew 6:7 (ESV) Job 38:2. 21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Matthew 7:21 (ESV)

 

5. For who knows what is good for man while he lives the few days of his vain life, Ecclesiastes 6:12 (ESV)

Cross-references:

Genesis 2:10, “and God saw that it was good.” Etc.

Genesis 2:18, “It is not good that the man should be alone …..”

  Notes: We do not know what is good, despite our eating from the tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, Gen. 2:9, 27; 3:5 & 8. The irony that having sought to determine good – we can no longer determine good. Rom. 1:28. Why not relativism? How can claim a privileged place to actually understand the world? God knows  what is good – but we no longer do.

Ecclesiastes 7:1 et seq answer these questions. Things have become so topsy-turvy, that now death is better than life! Note that before sin, death was solely the evil promised (Gen. 2:17, 3:19).

6. which he passes like a shadow? Ecclesiastes 6:12

Cross-reference: So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. Genesis 1:27 (ESV)

Notes: shadow, sel, sounds like image, selem. The words also bear a relationship to one-another:

Sel, comes from the root verb s-l-l, to be shaded or dusky.[1] The words by sound and concept are related to the word for shadow[2] – hence either an image or something insubstantial.[3] Hence a pun on the nature of Adam: He was created the image of God (selem) but became a mere shadow (sel). Man created for eternity becomes insubstantial and false (selem, a mere image, an idol).[4]

 

7.  For who can tell man what will be after him under the sun? Ecclesiastes 6:10

Cross-reference: Genesis 2:17 (ESV)

17 but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.”

Genesis 3:4 (ESV)

4 But the serpent said to the woman, “You will not surely die.

Genesis 3:19 (ESV)

19 By the sweat of your face you shall eat bread, till you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken; for you are dust, and to dust you shall return.”

Genesis 5:5 (ESV)

5 Thus all the days that Adam lived were 930 years, and he died.

Notes: God knows what will happen – even if we do not.  God told us what would happen with sin – and we sinned nonetheless. God binds the future we death; we can know nothing  beyond what discloses (John 3:12). Our attempts to gain knowledge around God leave us with idols:

Isaiah 41:21–24 (ESV)

21 Set forth your case, says the LORD; bring your proofs, says the King of Jacob. 22 Let them bring them, and tell us what is to happen. Tell us the former things, what they are, that we may consider them, that we may know their outcome; or declare to us the things to come. 23 Tell us what is to come hereafter, that we may know that you are gods; do good, or do harm, that we may be dismayed and terrified. 24 Behold, you are nothing, and your work is less than nothing; an abomination is he who chooses you.

Concluding notes:

The human being has become bound in and bound with death, with vanity. The human being created to be a selem, an image of God, is now a selem-sel, a mere image or shadow. The ideas are brought together in Psalm 39:6 (Heb. 39:7):

Surely a man goes about as a shadow [selem, “image” in Gen. 1:27] Surely for nothing [Heb., hebel, “vanity” in Ecclesiastes] they are in turmoil; man heaps up wealth and does not know who will gather!

Indeed, Psalm 39 acts as a sort commentary on Ecclesiastes 6:10-7:14; or conversely, Ecclesiastes functions as a practical meditation on Psalm 39. Both are built around the rise and fall of Adam and our present status in this world. We cannot respond rightly to our circumstance until we take in starkly how painful we find our circumstance. Hence, the counsel which begins in Ecclesiastes7.


[1]

צֵל m. (f. Isa. 37:8, compare the form צִלָּה), with suff. צִלִּי (from the root צָלַל No. III) a shadow (Arab. ظِلُّ), Jud. 9:36; Ps. 80:11, etc. Metaph. Job 17:7, “all my members (are) like a shadow,” i.e. scarce a shadow of my body remains. Also—(a) used of anything fleeting and transient, Job 8:9; Psal. 102:12; Ecc. 8:13.—(b) of a roof which affords shade and protection (compare Lat. umbra); hence used for protection and defence; preserving sometimes however the image of a shadow, Psalm 17:8; 36:8; Isa. 16:3, “make thy shadow at noon as in the night,” i.e. afford a safe refuge in glowing heat. Isa. 23:4, “thou (O Jehovah) art a shadow in heat;” sometimes not retaining the image, Nu. 14:9; Ecc. 7:12. In plur. is used the form צְלָלִים.

 

Wilhelm Gesenius and Samuel Prideaux Tregelles, Gesenius’ Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament Scriptures (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2003), 709.

[2]

צֵל: probably a primary noun (Bauer-L. Heb. 454b), > III צלל; SamP. ṣål (Babylonian vocalisation צַל); MHeb., DSS (Kuhn Konkordanz 187); JArm. טֻלָּא, טוּלָּא, טְלָלָא; Sam. טל (Ben-H. Lit. Or. 2:578), טלל (see 3/2:240); טל and similarly in the comparable dialects of Aramaic, → BArm. parallel with טלל; Ug. ẓl (Gordon Textbook §19:1052; Aistleitner 2371; Fisher Parallels 1: p. 220 entry 270; on ẓlm (Dietrich-L.-S. Texte 1, 161:1) see Dietrich-Loretz UF 12 (1980) 382); Akk. ṣillu shade, covering, protection (AHw. 1101; CAD Ṣ: 189); cf. ṣillûlu cover (AHw. 1102; CAD Ṣ: 194) and ṣulūlu roof, canopy (AHw. 1111; CAD Ṣ: 242); Arb. ẓill; ? OSArb. ẓlt (Conti Chrest. 160b, uncertain) roof, roofing; Eth. ṣĕlālōt (Dillmann Lex. 1257); Tigr. ṣĕlāl (Littmann-H. Wb. 632a) shadow: shadow: sf. צִלִּי, צִלְּךָ, צִלֵּךְ, צִלּוֹ, צִלֲּלוֹ (Jb 4022, Bauer-L. Heb. 570t), צִלָּהּ, צִלָּם; pl. צְלָלִים (Bauer-L. Heb. 570t), cs. צִלְלֵי־; (Bauer-L. Heb. 570t), Is 388 and 2K 2011 (gloss) fem. :: 2K 209.10 masc. (THAT 2:223: 53 times); Bordreuil RHPhR 46 (1966) 372-387.

 

Ludwig Koehler, Walter Baumgartner, M. E. J. Richardson and Johann Jakob Stamm, The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, electronic ed. (Leiden; New York: E.J. Brill, 1999), 1024-25.

[3]

צָלַם an unused root, Æth. ጸልመ፡ TO BE SHADY, Arab. ظَِاَِم to be obscure, ظامةُ darkness. Hence—

 

צֶלֶם m. with suff. צַלְמוֹ—(1) a shadow, Psalm 39:7; metaph. used of any thing vain, Psal. 73:20. Hence—

(2) an image, likeness (so called from its shadowing forth; compare σκία, σκίασμα, σκιαγραφέω), Genesis 1:27; 5:3; 9:6; an image, idol, 2 Kings 11:18; Am. 5:26. (Syr. and Chald. ܨܠܰܡܐܳ, צַלְמָא id., Arab. صَنَمُ an image, the letters נ and ל being interchanged.)

 

צֶלֶם, צְלֵם Ch. emphat. state, צַלְמָא m. an image, idol, Dan. 2:31, seqq.; 3:1, seqq.

 

צַלְמוֹן (“shady”), [Zalmon, Salmon], pr.n.—(1) of a mountain in Samaria, near Shechem, Jud. 9:48; this apparently is the one spoken of as covered with snow, Ps. 68:15.

(2) of one of David’s captains, 2 Sa. 23:28.

 

צַלְמוֹנָה (“shady”), [Zalmonah], pr.n. of a station of the Israelites in the desert, Nu. 33:41.

 

צַלְמָוֶת f. pr. shadow of death (comp. of צֵל shadow, and מָוֶת death), poet. for very thick darkness, Job 3:5; 10:21; 28:3; 34:22; 38:17, שַׁעֲרֵיצַלְמָוֶת “the gates of darkness.”

 

צַלְמֻנָּע (perhaps for צֵלמְמֻנָּע “to whom shadow is denied”), [Zalmunna], pr.n. of a prince of the Midianites, Jud. 8:5; Ps. 83:12.

 

Wilhelm Gesenius and Samuel Prideaux Tregelles, Gesenius’ Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament Scriptures (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2003), 710-11.

[4]

  : I *צלם (Bauer-L. Heb. 458s; THAT 2:556f :: W.H. Schmidt WMANT 172 (1967) 1331: צֵל + מ‍); SamP. ṣā̊låm; MHeb. image, statue, idol; DSS (Kuhn Konkordanz 187; THAT 2:562); JArm. צַלְמָא; Sam.; Ph. (Jean-H. Dictionnaire 245; THAT 2:556); EmpArm. ṣlmʾ, ṣlmh the effigy, his effigy (Donner-R. Inschriften text 225:3, 6; text 226:2; Jean-H. Dictionnaire 245; Hoftijzer-Jongeling Dictionary 968: statue); Ug. ṣlm pny (Gordon Textbook text 1002:59 = Dietrich-L.-S. Texte 2, 31:61; Aistleitner 2319; cf. Gordon Textbook §19:2059); Akk. sbst. ṣalmu statue, figurine, image (AHw. 1078f; CAD Ṣ: 78): in particular: 1. the statue of a god; 2. the statue of a king; 3. a statue in general; 4. a figurine; 5. a relief, bas-relief; 6. metaphorical, a constellation, shape, likeness, representation; BArm. →צְלֵם; Syr. ṣalmā, ṣəlemtā; CPArm. ṣlm; Mnd. ṣilma (Drower-M. Dictionary 393b) image, idol, shape, form; Nab., Palm. Hatra ṣlm, ṣlmʾ and ṣlmtʾ statue (Jean-H. Dictionnaire 245; Hoftijzer-Jongeling Dictionary 968, ṣlm I; see also BArm. under צְלֵם); OSArb. ẓlm (Conti Chrest. 161a) and ṣlm (Conti Chrest. 224b) likeness, statue; Arb. ṣanam idol (Arm. loanword, see Fraenkel Fremdwörter 273): cs. צֶלֶם, sf. צַלְמוֹ, צַלְמֵנוּ, צַלְמָם; pl. cs. צַלְמֵי, sf. צְלָמָיו, צַלְמֵיכֶם: THAT 2:556-563.

  —1. statue, inscribed column 2K 1118/2C 2317.

  —2. idol Nu 3352 Ezk 720, Am 526 (text uncertain) צַלְמֵיכֶם probably meaning effigies of the Kēwān, Babylonian astral deities (see AHw. 420b kajjamānû; CAD Ṣ: 38a line 6ff kajamānu adj. b: “steady” as a name of Saturn) and sakkut (Sumerian dSAG.KUD, see E. Reiner Šurpu tablet 2 line 180; Rudolph KAT 13/2:207; Wolff BK 14/2:304; THAT 2:557).

  —3. pl.: —a. images, figures: צַלְמֵיזָכָר effigies of men Ezk 1617, צַלְמֵיכַשְׂדִּים pictures of the Chaldaeans carved into the wall Ezk 2314; —b. replicas, likenesses of the boils and mice 1S 65.11 (see THAT 2:557f).

  —4. a. transitory image Ps 397 (parallel with הֶבֶל), Ps 7320 text uncertain (parallel with חֲלוֹם) cj. for צַלְמָם prp. צַלְמוֹ (BHS) :: Würthwein Wort und Existenz 169: MT “their idol”; —b. the צֶלֶם of Ps 397 7320 belongs to II *צלם rather than to I, and so means silhouette, fleeting shadows, so e.g. Humbert Études sur le récit du paradis et de la chute 156; cf. Kopf VT 9 (1959) 272 and in general W.H. Schmidt WMANT 172 (1967) 1331.

  —5. likeness: —a. of a man as the צֶלֶם of God Gn 126f 96: for bibliography see Westermann BK 1/1:203-214; see further Barr BJRL 51 (1968) 11-26; Stamm “Zur Frage der Imago Dei im Alten Testament” (in Humanität und Glaube. Gedenkschrift für Kurt Guggisberg 243-253); Mettinger ZAW 86 (1974) 403-24; O.H. Steck FRLANT 115 (1975) 140567; O. Loretz Die Gottebenbildlichkeit des Menschen; THAT 2:558-562: man, God’s likeness, God’s image, i.e. he is God’s viceroy, representative or witness among the creatures; —b. the son as the צֶלֶם of his father Gn 53. †

 Ludwig Koehler, Walter Baumgartner, M. E. J. Richardson and Johann Jakob Stamm, The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, electronic ed. (Leiden; New York: E.J. Brill, 1999), 1028-29.

Mystical Bedlam.2

28 Friday Dec 2012

Posted by memoirandremains in Genesis, Luke, Preaching, Puritan, Thomas Adams

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

Adam, corruption, Genesis, Luke, Mystical Bedlam, Original Sin, Preaching, Puritan, Puritan Preaching, Thomas Adams

Mystical Bedlam.2

The first entry on this sermon can be found here: https://memoirandremains.wordpress.com/2012/12/26/mystical-bedlam-1/

Puritan sermons typically follow a logical structure. The most common logical mechanism was to state a proposition and then break the proposition down into component parts. Adams’ structure follows that basic scheme.

The first major proposition: Man’s heart is a vessel. This proposition is developed in four subpoints:

I.          Man’s Heart is a Vessel.

            A.  The possessor: the sons of men.

            B.  The vessel is a heart.

            C.  The heart holds evil.

            D.  The vessel is full.

 

IA: The possessor: the sons of men.

            1. General discussion re: “sons of men”         

            2. Note on corruptibility

                        a. Spiritual corruption

                        b. Natural corruption

IA1: General discussion re: “sons of men”. 

Adams takes the proposition from Ecclesiastes 9:3, “The heart of the sons of men” and proceeds to define the term, “sons of men” by referencing Luke 3:38, “the son of Enos, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God.”  The movement from “sons man” to son of Adam may not be immediately apparent. The warrant for the move lies in the use of the word “adam” for man in Ecclesiastes 9:3: all the sons of adam (sons of Adam) possess hearts full of evil.

In making the move from Adam, the individual to adam the generic man, Thomas Adams has good exegetical grounds: Ecclesiastes as a whole concerns itself with the effects of the Fall which resulted from Adam’s sin. Thus, even though he speaks generically about “man” with the word “adam”, he has in view the unity and catastrophe of humanity in the first Adam.

Thomas Adams does not explain all the basis for his reference to Luke 3:38. This is a good model for a preacher: not exegetical decision can or should be laid bare before a congregation. While showing the point from the text is necessary, it is not necessary to explain the basis of every cross-reference.

From the reference to Adam, Thomas Adams draws the following point: “All his posterity [Adam’s posterity] [being] the sons of men; we receiving from him both flesh and the corruption of flesh, yea, and of the soul too”( 255).

Thomas Adams draws out two elements of corruption: spiritual and physical.

IA1a: The Spiritual Corruption we Inherited From Our Parents [Adam and Eve].[1]

i. The problem:

A. Our corruption begins at the very first moment of conception: Psalm 51:5. “I was born a sinner, saith a saint” (255).

B. Gen. 5:3: Adam begat Seth in his own likeness. “Adam could not propagate that which he did not have in himself; virtues are not given by birth, nor doth grace follow generation but regeneration….[the image of Adam means] that corruption which descended to Adam’s posterity by natural propagation” (255.). Further proof, Rom. 5:12.

C. “This title, then, ‘the sons of men,’ puts us in mind of our original contamination, whereby we stand guilty before God, and liable to present and eternal judgments” (255).

ii. The solution: From this flow of thought, Adams runs straight to the Gospel: If this is so, if I have necessarily inherited corruption, then we must ask “Who can be saved?” Note that Adams does not force the movement to the Cross (as is done too often by lesser preachers). Rather, merely by telling the story inherent in the text (because it lies in the overarching stream of the Bible’s narrative), Adams presents the problem which compels the response. The Bible tells the story for which only Christ is the answer.

A. “I answer, we derive from the first Adam sin and death; but from the second Adam, grace and life” (256).

1. The question is then whether we live after the flesh or afte the Spirit? Adams works with both 1 Cor. 15:50 and Romans 8:1, 13-14: “if we are led by the Spirit … with love and delight, we are the sons of men made into the sons of God” (256). Note that Thomas Adams uses the original phrase “sons of men” in contrast to the new status, “sons of God”. By referring back to his original topic, “sons men”, Thomas Adams keeps the hearer oriented. The similarity of sound between the phrases makes it easy for hearer to understand and remember the movement from first to second birth.

B.  “It is our happiness, not to be born, but to be new-born, John 3:3. The first birth kills, the second gives life”( 256). Adams returns to the general theme of his answer, this time working it in a slightly different manner. The repetition helps to drive home the point. The variation makes it interesting and helps to expand the understanding. Note the clever balanced sentences he uses to make the point clear and memorable, “Generation lost us; it must be regeneration that recovers us” (256).

C. He then considers a possible objection: But certainly not everything about our first birth is worthless. To this he answers, “Merely to be a son of man is to be corrupt and polluted” (256).

D. “There is no ambition good in the sons of men, but to be adopted the sons of God: under which degree there is no happiness; above which, no cause of aspiring” (256).


[1] Incidentally, the question of whether “Adam” was a symbol or a man plainly played no part in Thomas Adams’ theology – nor the theology of those in church.

Of Communion With the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Digression 1ci (Shame)

04 Thursday Oct 2012

Posted by memoirandremains in Biblical Counseling, Fellowship, Genesis, John Owen, Puritan

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Adam, Biblical Counseling, Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology, Eve, Fellowship, Genesis, Genesis 2:25, Genesis 3:7–8, Isaiah 54:4–5, John Calvin, John Owen, Of Communion With the Father Son and Holy Spirit, Psalm 139:7–8, Puritan, shame, Walter A. Elwell

4 “Fear not, for you will not be ashamed; be not confounded, for you will not be disgraced; for you will forget the shame of your youth, and the reproach of your widowhood you will remember no more. 5 For your Maker is your husband, the LORD of hosts is his name; and the Holy One of Israel is your Redeemer, the God of the whole earth he is called. Isaiah 54:4–5 (ESV)

Having quoted this verse, Owen asks:

But how shall this be? So much sin and not ashamed! So much guilt and not confounded!

To consider this matter, we must consider two directions of shame: There is shame before God and shame before other human beings. The two aspects of shame have some correspondence and some divergence. The correspondence lies primary in the well of shame: Sin:

7 Then the eyes of both were opened, and they knew that they were naked. And they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loincloths. 8 And they heard the sound of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God among the trees of the garden. Genesis 3:7–8 (ESV)

To gather the full weight of the problem, we must note that Genesis 2:25, the last word before the Serpent proceeds with his temptation, explains:

And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed. Genesis 2:25 (ESV)

This is a peculiar fact to underscore. Of everything which we wish to know about the first couple, shame may not have been our first question. Yet, it is the fact placed in a major transition of the story. In a story so spare, the great emphasis laid upon shame must indicate the profound power shame has upon the human life. Moreover, shame plainly derives from the fact of sin:

Shame is a consequence of sin. Feelings of guilt and shame are subjective acknowledgments of an objective spiritual reality. Guilt is judicial in character; shame is relational. Though related to guilt, shame emphasizes sin’s effect on self-identity. Sinful human beings are traumatized before a holy God, exposed for failure to live up to God’s glorious moral purpose. The first response of Adam and Eve to their sinful condition was to hide from God, and consequently from one another (Gen. 3:7–8; cf. 2:25). Christ’s unhindered openness to the Father was both a model for life and the means of removing humanity’s shame. Christian self-identity is transformed “in him.”

 Walter A. Elwell, Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology, electronic ed., Baker reference library; Logos Library System (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1996).

When we look at the feeble attempts of Adam and Eve to hide their shame from God by dressing up in fig leaves, we may smile or smirk. But we show ourselves their children for we vainly believe the same things. We think our sin somehow unseen, yet we know it to be true that we cannot fly from God:

7 Where shall I go from your Spirit? Or where shall I flee from your presence? 8 If I ascend to heaven, you are there! If I make my bed in Sheol, you are there! Psalm 139:7–8 (ESV)

Calvin draws an interesting correspondence between sin, shame and the stupidity of their attempt to hide: Sin brought in shame; but it also brought in the stupidity to think that shame could be hidden from God:

And they sewed fig-leaves together. What I lately said, that they had not been brought either by true shame or by serious fear to repentance, is now more manifest. They sew together for themselves girdles of leaves. For what end? That they may keep God at a distance, as by an invincible barrier! Their sense of evil, therefore, was only confused, and combined with dulness, as is wont to be the case in unquiet sleep. There is none of us who does not smile at their folly, since, certainly, it was ridiculous to place such a covering before the eyes of God. In the meanwhile, we are all infected with the same disease; for, indeed, we tremble, and are covered with shame at the first compunctions of conscience; but self-indulgence soon steals in, and induces us to resort to vain trifles, as if it were an easy thing to delude God.

John Calvin and John King, Commentary on the First Book of Moses Called Genesis (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2010), Ge 3:7.

Counsel Before the Fall

21 Thursday Jun 2012

Posted by memoirandremains in Biblical Counseling, Genesis, Jay Adams

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Adam, Biblical Counseling, Counseling, Fall, Genesis, Jay Adams

Indeed, it is the very reason why remedial counseling exists (remember, man was made as a creature whose welfare was dependent—even before Adam’s sin—on God’s directive, guiding and preventive counsel. He received such counsel in the garden and benefited from it by the fellowship and communication that it established with God. Human life depends upon God’s Word). Counsel per se was always needed.

Jay Edward Adams, A Theology of Christian Counseling : More Than Redemption (Grand Rapids, MI: Ministry Resource Library, 1986), 139.

They Buried Themselves

21 Thursday Jun 2012

Posted by memoirandremains in Galatians

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Adam, consequences, Francis Close, Galatians, Genesis 3, Sin, The Fall

O what fatal ravages had sin already made in their hearts! That God, whose favour and presence they had hitherto enjoyed, now became an object of terror and alarm. They fled from Him! They buried themselves amidst the thick shades of the garden! They could not support His look! What a deadly thing is sin! How it separates from God, thrusts the sinner away from Him, and inflicts terror upon the conscience! Thus Peter trembled; “Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord!” And thus Isaiah exclaimed, when the glory of the Lord was revealed to him (Isaiah 6:5:) “Woe is me! for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and dwell among a people of unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the king, the Lord of Hosts!” From the fatal moment when man ate the forbidden fruit, all his sinful offspring have by nature instinctively dreaded a Holy God. See, my brethren, the immediate consequences of transgression! See our first parents hiding their guilty heads amidst the trees of the garden, and learn from that humbling sight the dreadful nature of sin!

 

Francis Close, The Book of Genesis Considered and Illustrated in a Series of Historical Discourses, Preached in the Church of the Holy Trinity, Cheltenham (London: Thomas Arnold, Paternoster-Row, 1841), 31-32.

Translation of Psalm 89:48-49

31 Saturday Mar 2012

Posted by memoirandremains in Psalms

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Adam, Death, Psalm 89, Psalm 89:48-49, Psalms, remember, Translation

Psalm 89:48–49 (BHS/WHM 4.2)

48זְכָר־אֲנִ֥י מֶה־חָ֑לֶד עַל־מַה־שָּׁ֝֗וְא בָּרָ֥אתָ כָל־בְּנֵי־אָדָֽם׃

 49מִ֤י גֶ֣בֶר יִֽ֭חְיֶה וְלֹ֣א יִרְאֶה־מָּ֑וֶת יְמַלֵּ֨ט נַפְשׁ֖וֹ מִיַּד־שְׁא֣וֹל סֶֽלָה׃

Remember, what is my lifespan —

                For what cheat did you create all the sons of Adam?

What man is strong enough to never see death,

                To rescue his soul from the hand of darkness?

Notes:

The clause “what is my lifespan” could either be a question or an assertion.

The purpose of the second clause of 48 could be translated in several different ways.  The word “translated” cheat means something which is false, worthless, vain.

The word for “man” in v. 49 is a word which connotes strength or youth, hence the translation of the noun as a clause “man is strong enough”. It is literally, what strong/young man will be and not see death?

The final clause translates “Sheol”, place of the dead, as darkness. I chose “darkness” to alliterate with “death” and to connote the fearfulness of the image. The Hebrew has “hand” for what in English is normally translated as “strength”, since “hand” is a Hebrew idiom for strength. However, in this instance, the image of the hand of darkness snatching a strong young man personifies death in a manner more consistent with the poem.  We tend to hear power or strength of Sheol as something more akin to gravity than an enemy with which one contends.

The Murder of Abel Discovered: The Books of Adam and Eve

16 Thursday Feb 2012

Posted by memoirandremains in Genesis

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Abel, Adam, Cain, Cain's Offering, Eve, Genesis, Genesis 4, Pseudepigraphia

3.1 And they both went and found Abel murdered by the hand of Cain his brother. 2 And God saith to Michael the archangel: ‘Say to Adam: “Reveal not the secret that thou knowest to Cain thy son, for he is a son of wrath. But grieve not, for I will give thee another son in his stead; he shall show (to thee) all that thou shalt do. Do thou tell him nothing.”’ 3 Thus spake the archangel to Adam. But he kept the word in his heart, and with him also Eve, though they grieved concerning Abel their son.

, vol. 2, Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament, ed. Robert Henry Charles (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 2004), 139.

Chiasmus In Genesis 4

14 Tuesday Feb 2012

Posted by memoirandremains in Genesis

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Abel, Adam, Cain, Cain's Offering, Chiasmus, Genesis, Genesis 4, Kenneth Matthews

Matthews notes the following chiasmus in Genesis 4:

F. I. Andersen has noted the alternation between the names “Abel” and “Cain” as well as their profession and acts of worship:

    A And became Abel a keeper of flocks

    A´ And Cain became a worker of soil

    B Cain brought some of the fruits of the soil as an offering to the LORD

    B´ But Abel brought, also he, some of the firstborn of his flocks and their fat portions

    C And looked with favor the LORD on Abel and on his offering

    C´ And on Cain and on his offering he did not look with favor.

The pairing of the lines and the alternation of the participants create the chiasmus: (1) Abel, Cain, Cain, Abel and (2) flocks, soil, soil, flocks.

 And:

In the Eden narrative 3:6–8 is the turning point, detailing the sin of Adam and Eve, and in the present narrative the centerpiece 4:8 records the murder of Abel:

 

    A 4:2b–5 Narrative: Cain, Abel actors, Lord passive

      B 4:6–7 Dialogue: Lord questions Cain

         C 4:8 (dialogue) Narrative: Cain murders Abel

      B´ 4:9–15a Dialogue: Lord and Cain

    A´ 4:15b–16 Narrative: Lord active, Cain passive

 K. A. Mathews, vol. 1A, Genesis 1-11:26, electronic ed., Logos Library System; The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2001), 262-63.

← Older posts

Categories

Archives

Recent Posts

  • Thomas Traherne, The Soul’s Communion with her Savior. 1.1.6
  • Thinking About Meaning While Weeding the Garden
  • Thomas Traherne, The Soul’s Communion With Her Savior 1.1.6
  • Addressing Loneliness
  • Brief in Chiles v Salazar

Categories

Archives

Recent Posts

  • Thomas Traherne, The Soul’s Communion with her Savior. 1.1.6
  • Thinking About Meaning While Weeding the Garden
  • Thomas Traherne, The Soul’s Communion With Her Savior 1.1.6
  • Addressing Loneliness
  • Brief in Chiles v Salazar

Blog at WordPress.com.

  • Follow Following
    • memoirandremains
    • Join 630 other followers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • memoirandremains
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar