Tag Archives: Charles Spurgeon

Spurgeon’s Preaching (Argumentation)

14 Tuesday Aug 2018

Posted by in Charles Spurgeon, Preaching, Stephen Charnock, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , ,

Argumentation

In the Immutability of God, Spurgeon first speaks in great praise about the immutability of God. Rather than merely saying that this is something which should excite you, he speaks in such a way, using a combination of concrete imagery and a variety of rhetorical forms of repetition (for an excellent discussion of rhetoric, and these figures see http://rhetoric.byu.edu), “Repetition is a major rhetorical strategy for producing emphasis, clarity, amplification, or emotional effect.” (You will notice such repetition on occasion, but it is usually quite stilted in the mouth of preacher — you get the sort of feeling that he is wearing someone else’s clothes and he’s terribly afraid he’ll be found out.)

But having concluded with his praise of God’s immutability, Spurgeon now raises the implicit question — is this true:

 Thus having taken a great deal too much time, perhaps, in simply expanding the thought of an unchanging God, I will now try to prove that he is unchangeable, I am not much of an argumentative preacher, but one argument that I will mention is this: the very existence, and being of a God, seem to me to imply immutability. 

Here is his proposition: if there is a God, then such a God must be immutable. His argument here seems to derive from Charnock’s The Existence and Attributes of God, in the chapter “On the Immutability of God” (To be fair, his first section roughly tracks Charnock’s discussion of the subject. There is certainly nothing approaching copying between Spurgeon and Charnock — but rather Spurgeon makes good use of Charnock’s masterwork and turns into propositions which could be understood from a pulpit.)

His first argument is really no more complicated that it doesn’t even make sense to say one could be God and one could change — anymore than one could be a married bachelor. 

Or here is the second argument raised by Spurgeon:

Well, I think that one argument will be enough, but another good argument may be found in the fact of God’s perfection. I believe God to be a perfect being. Now, if he is a perfect being, he cannot change. Do you not see this? Suppose I am perfect to-day. If it were possible for me to change, should I be perfect tomorrow after the alteration? If I changed, I must either change from a good state to a better — and then if I could get better, I could not be perfect now-or else from a better state to a worse-and if I were worse, I should not be perfect then. If I am perfect, I cannot be altered without being imperfect. If I am perfect to-day, I must keep the same to-morrow if I am to be perfect then. So, if God is perfect, he must be the same- for change would imply imperfection now, or imperfection then.

He takes a very narrow idea: if something is perfect, it cannot be more perfect. If it could be more perfect then it wouldn’t be perfect now. This is the second argument raised by Charnock for the proof of God’s immutability, “If God were changeable, he could not be the most perfect Being.”  And lest anyone think that Spurgeon was merely cribbing from Charnock it is only fair to compare Spuregon’s summary with Charnock’s original

If God were changeable, he could not be the most perfect Being. God is the most perfect Being, and possesses in himself infinite and essential goodness (Matt, v, 48): “Your heavenly Father is perfect.” If he could change from that perfection, he were not the highest exemplar and copy for us to write after. If God doth change, it must be either to a greater perfection than he had before, or to a less, mutatio ‘perfectiva vel amissiva; if he changes to acquire a perfection he had not, then he was not before the most excellent Being; necessarily, he was not what he might be; there was a defect in him, and a privation of that which is better than what he had and was; and then he was not alway the best, and so was not alway God; and being not alway God, could never be God; for to begin to be God is against the notion of God; not to a less perfection than he had; that were to change to imperfection, and to lose a perfection which he possessed before, and cease to be the best Being; for he would lose some good which he had, and acquire some evil which he was free from before. so that the sovereign perfection of God is an invincible bar to any change in him; for which way soever you cast it for a change, his supreme excellency is impaired and nulled by it: for in all change there is something from which a thing is changed, and something to which it is changed; so that on the one part there is a loss of what it had, and on the other part there is an acquisition of what it had not. If to the better, he was not perfect, and so was not God; if to the worse, he will not be perfect, and so be no longer God after that change. If God be changed, his change must be voluntary or necessary; if voluntary, he then intends the change for the better, and chose it to acquire a perfection by it; the will must be carried out to anything under the notion of some goodness in that which it desires. Since good is the object of the desire and will of the creature, evil cannot be the object of the desire and will of the Creator. And if he should be changed for the worse, when he did really intend the better, it would speak a defect of wisdom, and a mistake of that for good which was evil and imperfect in itself; and if it be for the better, it must be a motion or change for something without himself; that which he desireth is not possessed by himself, but by some other. there is, then, some good without him and above him, which is the end in this change; for nothing acts but for some end, and that end is within itself or without itself; if the end for which God changes be without himself, then there is something better than himself: besides, if he were voluntarily changed for the better, why did he not change before? If it were for want of power, he had the imperfection of weakness; if for want of knowledge of what was the best good, he had the imperfection of wisdom, he was ignorant of his own happiness; if he had both wisdom to know it, and power to effect it, it must be for want of will; he then wanted that love to himself and his own glory, which is necessary in the Supreme Being. Voluntarily he could not be changed for the worse, he could not be such an enemy to his own glory; there is nothing but would hinder its own imperfection and becoming worse. Necessarily he could not be changed, for that necessity must arise from himself, and then the difficulties spoken of before will recur, or it must arise from another; he cannot be bettered by another, because nothing hath any good but what it hath received from the hands of his bounty, and that without loss to himself, nor made worse; if anything made him worse, it would be sin, but that cannot touch his essence or obscure his glory, but in the design and nature of the sin itself (Job xxxv. 6, 7): “If thou sinnest, what dost thou against him? or if thy transgressions be multiplied, what dost thou unto him? if thou be righteous, what givest thou him; or what receives he at thy hand?” He hath no addition by the service of man, no more than the sun hath of light by a multitude of torches kindled on the earth; nor any more impair by the sins of men, than the light of the sun hath by men’s shooting arrows against it.

Spurgeon’s summary and reworking of Charnock on this point demonstrates that Spurgeon had ingested Charnock, and understood the argument well enough to teach it. He didn’t merely read Charnock, he taught Charnock.

I am going to compare this simplicity in argumentation with the rigor and logic of Manton’s preaching.

Surgeon: The Immutability of God (Sermon 1.1)

10 Tuesday Jan 2017

Posted by in Charles Spurgeon, Preaching, Sermons, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

The sermon’s content is in the title: the immutability of God. It breaks down into three sections: some ways in which God is unchangeable; proof of the point and application. His text is,

“I am the Lord, I charge not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.”-Malachi 3:6.

The Introduction. He begins with a contrast, the proper study of mankind is not man, but rather God. He discusses how the contemplation of God is the highest task a human can undertake — and the best for the human being:

Oh, there is, in contemplating Christ, a balm for every wound, in musing on the Father, there is a quietus for every grief- and in the influence of the Holy Ghost, there is a balsam for every sore. Would you lose your sorrows? Would you drown your cares? Then go plunge yourself in the Godhead’s deepest sea; be lost in his immensity; and you shall come forth as from a couch of rest, refreshed and invigorated. I know nothing which can so comfort the soul, so calm the swelling billows of grief and sorrow; so speak peace to the winds of trial, as a devout musing upon the subject of the Godhead.

I. A general statement of the doctrine.

God is unchangeable in his essence.

God is unchangeable in his attributes.

God is unchangeable in his plans.

God is unchangeable in his promises.

God is unchangeable in his threatenings.

God is unchangeable in the objects of his love.

II. Proof of the point.

It is implied in the very idea of God.

His perfection implies he is unchangeable.

His infinity implies he is not changeable.

His actions imply he is unchangeable.

III. Those who benefit from this fact.

He asks who are these “sons of Jacob”. In short, the elect. But in it also refers to particular people, those who are in most need of an unchangeable God.

IV. What is the benefit of this truth?

A strong arm hath saved me. I have started back and cried, O God! could I have gone so near sin, and yet come back again? Could I have walked right up to the furnace and not fallen down, like Nebuchadnezzar’s strong men, devoured by the very heat? Oh! is it possible I should be here this morning, when I think of the sins I have committed, and the crimes which have crossed my wicked imagination? Yes, I am here, unconsumed, because the Lord changes not. Oh! if he had changed, we should have been consumed in a dozen ways; if the Lord had changed, you and I should have been consumed by ourselves; for after all Mr. Self is the worst enemy a Christian has. We should have proved suicides to our own souls; we should have mixed the cup of poison for our own spirits, if the Lord had not been an unchanging God, and dashed the cup out of our hands when we were about to drink it. Then we should have been consumed by God himself if he had not been a changeless God. We call God a Father- but there is not a father in this world who would not have killed all his children long ago, so provoked would he have been with them, if he had been half as much troubled as God has been with his family. He has the most troublesome family in the whole world-unbelieving, ungrateful, disobedient, forgetful, rebellious, wandering, murmuring, and stiffnecked. Well it is that he is longsuffering, or else he would have taken not only the rod, but the sword to some of us long ago. But there was nothing in us to love at first, so there cannot be less now. John Newton used to tell a whimsical story, and laugh at it too, of a good woman who said, in order to prove the doctrine of Election, “Ah! sir, the Lord must have loved me before I was born, or else he would not have seen anything in me to love afterwards.” I am sure it is true in my case, and true in respect most of God’s people; for there is little to love in them after they are born, that if he had not loved them before then, he would have seen no reason to choose them after- but since he loved them without works, he loves them without works still; since their good works did not win his affection, bad works cannot sever that affection- since their righteousness did not bind his love to them, so their wickedness cannot snap the golden links. He loved them out of pure sovereign grace, and he will love them still. But we should have been consumed by the devil and by our enemies-consumed by the world, consumed by our sins, by our trials and in a hundred other ways, if God had ever changed.

 

 

 

 

 

Should we pray to the Holy Spirit?

09 Saturday Jul 2016

Posted by in Abraham Kuyper, Charles Hodge, Charles Spurgeon, Prayer, Trinity, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

In Daniel Block’s “For the Glory of God”, he asks the question as to whether we should address worship specifically and personally to the Spirit.  His analysis begins with three observations:

  1.  “No one addresses the Holy Spirit in prayer, or bows to the Holy Spirit, or serves him in a liturgical gesture. Put simply, in the Bible the Spirit is never the object of worship.”
  2. “The Spirit drives the worship of believers yet does not receive worship.”
  3. “In true worship, the person of the Trinity may not be interchanged without changing the significance of the work.”

He notes two historical developments in the church. First, is the development of the Doxology,

Praise God from whom all blessings flow,

Praise him all creatures here below;

Praise him above you heavenly host;

Praise Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Amen.

He noted that it derives from Gloria Patri per Filium in Spiritu Sancto, Glory to God the Father, through the Son, in the Spirit. This was changed in response to the Arians, which sought to ontologically subordinate Jesus. To avoid that movement, the connections where changed to “and” from “through” and “in”.

The second development was the Charismatic movement to single out the Spirit for particular adoration in prayer and song.

Block is reticent to make the Spirit the unique object of worship

When we read Scripture, the focus will on God the Father or Jesus Christ the Son. However, it seems that the Holy Spirit is most honored when we accept his conviction of sin, his transforming and sanctifying work within us, and his guidance in life and ministry, and when in response to his leading we prostrate ourselves before Jesus.

This emphasis on the Spirit’s work in is matched by an interesting comment from Kuyper

It appears from Scripture, more than has been emphasized, that in the holy act of prayer there is a manifestation of the Holy Spirit working both in us and with us.

Kuyper, Holy Spirit (1946), trans. de Vries, p. 618.

James Hastings has a discussion on prayer directed to the Spirit. The conclusion comes in his last paragraph:

Continue reading →

Steve Lawson on the Puritan Era

26 Monday Oct 2015

Posted by in Church History, Puritan

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , ,

Here are my rough draft notes on Steve Lawson’s two-part lecture, on the puritan era:

 

fetchimage

Steve Lawson, Puritan Era

Overview of the Puritan Era.
Samuel Rutherford, John Owen, John Bunyan, Matthew Henry (in Crossroads).

Context for these men.

Who were the Puritans?
The Redwoods, the giants in Christianity. — J.I. Packer
Technically inside the Church of England and sought to purify the Church of England.

The Puritans were distinguished by their unwavering loyalty to the authority

All that is good in Evangelicalism has its roots in the Puritans. MLJ, “The very greatness of the men themselves as men of God demands our attention.”

After the initial reformation: 16-17th Centuries.

Begin with Henry VIII (starts the Church of England).
1521: Leo X made Henry, “The Defender of the Faith” for his anti-Lutheran treatise and his defensive of Rome’s seven sacraments.

1527, Henry appealed for annulment and was denied. This provoked separation from Roman Catholic. This separation was not over doctrine; Henry wants to get married again. Therefore, the Roman Catholic doctrine is brought over to the new institution.

Thomas Cramner becomes Archbishop of Canterbury. (1532-1556).

1534: Church of England starts.

1547: Henry dies. Succeeded by Edward VI 1547-1553 (son of Jane Seymour).

Continue reading →

On the Death of an Infant: “She is not lost to you who is found to Christ.”

27 Monday Jul 2015

Posted by in Biblical Counseling, Charles Hodge, Charles Spurgeon, Galatians, John MacArthur, Ministry, Samuel Rutherford

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , 

This is from a short address I gave on what happens when babies die?

4309795734_40af277513_b

What happens when an infant dies? That child stands before the Lord with glory and honor as a joint heir of Christ. How can I say this? Because God is good and Christ died for sinners. The 19th Century Princeton theologian, Charles Hodge explained in his Systematic Theology: “[A]ccording to the common doctrine of evangelical Protestants [] all who die in infancy are saved.”
Hodge explains that the death of Christ, according to Romans 5:18-19, undoes the work of death wrought by Adam:
We have no right to put any limit on these general terms, except what the Bible itself places on them. The Scriptures nowhere exclude any class of infants, baptized or unbaptized, born in Christian or in heathen lands, from the benefits of the redemption of Christ.
In short, Jesus saves infants.
This doctrine is quite dear to me. At nine months of age, my first son died. He had a seizure late at night, then his heart stopped and his breathing stopped. He died while his mother held him. The paramedics came, and despite their best efforts, his heart would not start again. A few hours later, as the sun came-up, a man came to our house and laid a sheet on the floor of my son’s bedroom. He took the body of myson, laid him in the middle of the cloth and wrapped him like a package and then carried him away.

Continue reading →

What you think and what you say

07 Tuesday Jul 2015

Posted by in Psalms

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , ,

It is well that the overflow of the mouth should indicate the good matter which fills the heart. Meditation makes rich talking; it is to be lamented that so much of the conversation of professors is utterly barren, because they take no time for contemplation. A meditative man should be a talker, otherwise he is a mental miser, a mill which grinds corn only for the miller. The subject of our meditation should be choice, and then our talk will be edifying; if we meditate on folly and affect to speak wisdom, our double-mindedness will soon he known unto all men. Holy talk following upon meditation has a consoling power in it for ourselves as well as for those who listen.

Charles Spurgeon, Treasury of David, Psalm 77

On the Death of an Infant

10 Monday Mar 2014

Posted by in Apologetics, Biblical Counseling, Charles Hodge, Charles Spurgeon, Ministry, Samuel Rutherford

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

I was asked to write a short article for a church news letter on the death of infants. Here it is:

On the Death of an Infant: “She is not lost to you who is found to Christ.”

What happens when an infant dies? That child stands before the Lord with glory and honor as a joint heir of Christ. How can I say this? Because God is good and Christ died for sinners. The 19th Century Princeton theologian, Charles Hodge explained in his Systematic Theology: “[A]ccording to the common doctrine of evangelical Protestants [] all who die in infancy are saved.”

Hodge explains that the death of Christ, according to Romans 5:18-19, undoes the work of death wrought by Adam:

We have no right to put any limit on these general terms, except what the Bible itself places on them. The Scriptures nowhere exclude any class of infants, baptized or unbaptized, born in Christian or in heathen lands, from the benefits of the redemption of Christ.

In short, Jesus saves infants.

This doctrine is quite dear to me. At nine months of age, my first son died. He had a seizure late at night, then his heart stopped and his breathing stopped. He died while his mother held him. The paramedics came, and despite their best efforts, his heart would not start again. A few hours later, as the sun came-up, a man came to our house and laid a sheet on the floor of my son’s bedroom. He took the body of my son, laid him in the middle of the cloth and wrapped him like a package and then carried him away.

I have never felt so hollow, so sad, so alone. The pain of death has a quality unlike any other. The death of a child strikes so hard, you can reach out your hand and touch it. I felt as if my heart had turned to stone. The sorrow is such that words fail.

Sometime later, I realized how my Lord and my son had much in common. When Jesus was born, his mother wrapped him tight; she swaddled him and loved him.  And then, when my Lord came to die Joseph of Arimathea came for Jesus. “This man went to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus. Then he took it down and wrapped it in a linen shroud and laid him in a tomb cut in stone, where no one had every yet been laid” Luke 23:52-53. My son and my Lord were both wrapped in cloths at death –O the infinite love of the Lord! That He would willingly give Himself in the humiliation of death to rescue my son from death! How can I speak to such a thing?

And what of the Father’s love? I recall thinking that I would give the world to save the life of my son. And yet, I know, that God gave His Son to save the world (John 3:16). I cannot understand such a thing. The Father gave His Son for the sin of my son. My son, as dear as he was and is to me (for my son has died and yet is not dead – such is the paradox of God’s grace), was a son of the first Adam. My son was born under a curse. And so, God

Sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons. And because you are sons, God has sent the Spirit of His Son into our hearts crying, “Abba! Father!” So you are no longer a slave, but a son, and if a son, then an heir through God. Galatians 4:4b-7.

My son was saved from the curse of sin by God’s Son bearing the curse of the law. Galatians 3:13.

How then can I say my son was saved? My son never prayed aloud – indeed, he could not make any sounds for much of life (because a feeding tube was kept down his throat). My son never understood the Gospel. My son knew little beyond needle pricks and hospital rooms – how could he be saved?

The reason I know my son is safe with God is because God sent His Son for my son. This is a doctrine so lovely and deep that I cannot lay out all the details in this small space – and so I encourage you to study further so that you can rejoice at the surpassing goodness of God.

First, read Spurgeon’s sermon on “Infant Salvation”:

Now, let every mother and father here present know assuredly that it is well with the child, if God hath taken it away from you in its infant days. You never heard its declaration of faith—it was not capable of such a thing—it was not baptized into the Lord Jesus Christ, not buried with him in baptism; it was not capable of giving that “answer of a good conscience towards God;” nevertheless, you may rest assured that it is well with the child, well in a higher and a better sense than it is well with yourselves; well without limitation, well without exception, well infinitely, “well” eternally.

You will find the rest here: http://www.spurgeon.org/sermons/0411.htm. Here are two books for you to read: John MacArthur, Save in the Arms of God; and James W. Bruce III, From Grief to Glory.

Let me leave you with a letter written by the Scottish Puritan Samuel Rutherford to a dear friend on the death of her infant daughter. That letter reads in part:

Ye have lost a child: nay she is not lost to you who is found to Christ. She is not sent away, but only sent before, like unto a star, which going out of our sight doth not die and vanish, but shineth in another hemisphere. We see her not, yet she doth shine in another country. If her glass was but a short hour, what she wanteth of time that she hath gotten of eternity; and ye have to rejoice that ye have now some plenishing up in heaven. Build your nest upon no tree here; for ye see God hath sold the forest to death; and every tree whereupon we would rest is ready to be cut down, to the end we may fly and mount up, and build upon the Rock, and dwell in the holes of the Rock.

January 15, 1629; letter to Lady Kenmure.

Pride and Repose (Psalm 131)

19 Tuesday Feb 2013

Posted by in Biblical Counseling, Charles Spurgeon, George Herbert, Hebrew, Hope, Psalms, Romans

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Pride and Repose

A SONG OF ASCENTS. OF DAVID. 1 O LORD, my heart is not lifted up; my eyes are not raised too high; I do not occupy myself with things too great and too marvelous for me. 2 But I have calmed and quieted my soul, like a weaned child with its mother; like a weaned child is my soul within me. 3 O Israel, hope in the LORD from this time forth and forevermore. Psalm 131 (ESV)

 

Translation and Notes on Psalm 131

Introduction:

Our desires disquiet the heart. Resignation to God’s will makes the soul still.—Pride separates men from fellowship with God. Humility strengthens that bond. The one makes the heart restless; the other imparts quietness and peace.—A childlike disposition, humble, patient and satisfied in God, as the fruit of severe conflict.[1]

Spurgeon, “The Weaned Child” (vol. 121, page 2):

I was once conversing with a very excellent aged minister, and while we were talking about our frames and feelings, he made the following confession: he said, “When I read that passage in the psalm, ‘My soul is even as a weaned child,’ I wish it were true of me, but I think I should have to make an alteration of one syllable, and then it would exactly describe me at times, ‘My soul is even as a weaning rather than a weaned child,’ for,” said he, “with the infirmities of old age, I fear I get fretful and peevish, and anxious, and when the day is over I do not feel that I have been in so calm, resigned, and trustful a frame of mind as I could desire.” I suppose, dear brethren, that frequently we have to make the same confession. We wish we were like a weaned child, but we find ourselves neglecting to walk by faith, and getting into the way of walking by the sight of our eyes, and then we get like the weaning child which is fretting and worrying, and unrestful, and who causes trouble to those round about it, and most of all, trouble to itself. Weaning was one of the first real troubles that we met with after we came into this world, and it was at the time a very terrible one to our little hearts. We got over it somehow or other. We do not remember now what a trial it was to us, but we may take it as a type of all troubles; for if we have faith in him who was our God from our mother’s breasts, as we got over the weaning, and do not even recollect it, so we shall get over all the troubles that are to come, and shall scarcely remember them for the joy that will follow. If, indeed, Dr. Watts be correct in saying that when we get to heaven we shall “recount the labors of our feet,” then, I am quite sure that we shall only do it, as he says, “with transporting joy.” There, at least, we shall each one be as a weaned child.

 

That there is a fundamental opposition between pride & humility surprises no one. Yet, a deeper correspondence lies than mere opposition. Pride, as shown in this psalm, comes with anxiety and trouble. Thus, a peaceful rest upon God gives rise to humility.

The movement from pride to humility comes through peace. One would think that pride would abate by thinking mean thoughts of oneself – such a course is nonsense.  To think bad about oneself is still to think about oneself. That is why up and down on self-esteem does little good. Two species of the same vermin are both vermin.

The Biblical model of humility is not self-debasement as much as it is repose upon God the work of God:

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)[2]

Here humbling oneself and casting one’s troubles upon God stand in parallel – by giving God’s one’s anxiety, one comes to humility[3].

That is why trials may directly lead to humility. Bunyan has this in Pilgrim’s Progress:  Christian descends into the Valley of Humiliation, only to be met by the archfiend.  Apollyon asks Christian if he thinks that he will actually be admitted when he comes to the Celestial City: for, Christian has failed along the way.  The temptation is a temptation to pride: can Christian be admitted on his merits? Christian answers:

Chr. All this is true, and much more which thou hast left out; but the Prince whom I serve and honour is merciful, and ready to forgive; but, besides these infirmities possessed me in thy country: for there I sucked them in, and I have groaned under them, been sorry for them, and have obtained pardon of my Prince.

Then Apollyon broke out into a grievous rage, saying, I am an enemy to this Prince! I hate his person, laws, and people, and am come out on purpose to withstand thee

The rest and repose flows out of a profound understanding of grace. The trials of this life force us to seek rest in this world. George Herbert’s poem, The Pulley, illustrates this well:

         When GOD at first made man

      Having a glass of blessings standing by;*

      Let Us, said He, pour on him all We can:

      Let the world’s riches, which dispersed lie,

         Contract into a span.

 

         So strength first made a way:

      Then beauty flowed, then wisdom, honour, pleasure:

      When almost all was out, GOD made a stay,

      Perceiving that alone, of all His treasure,

         Rest in the bottom lay.

 

         For if I should, said He,

      Bestow this jewel also on My creature,

      He would adore My gifts instead of Me,

      And rest in Nature, not the GOD of Nature,

         So both should losers be.

 

         Yet let him keep the rest,

      But keep them with repining restlessness:

      Let him be rich and weary, that at least,

      If goodness lead him not, then weariness

         May toss him to My breast.

 

The Christian may repose without fear and without pride (which is merely self-defense, seen in this light), for God is the one who justifies:

And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness, Romans 4:5 (ESV)

In Romans 5:1-5, Paul ties together the access given to the justified believer with repose – even joy in trials – because the trial can merely make one more fit for the Lord’s service and company – it is the love of God poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit, the very gift of the risen Lord, which makes room for rejoicing in the time of loss.

Then, in Romans 8, Paul ties the surety of God’s love for his redeemed to the fearless repose of the believer in God’s will:

31 What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us? 32 He who did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all, how will he not also with him graciously give us all things? 33 Who shall bring any charge against God’s elect? It is God who justifies. 34 Who is to condemn? Christ Jesus is the one who died—more than that, who was raised—who is at the right hand of God, who indeed is interceding for us. 35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or danger, or sword? 36 As it is written, “For your sake we are being killed all the day long; we are regarded as sheep to be slaughtered.” 37 No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. 38 For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, 39 nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord. Romans 8:31–39 (ESV)

 

 

 

1שִׁ֥יר הַֽמַּֽעֲל֗וֹת לְדָ֫וִ֥ד

Title: a song of assents, of David.

Psalms 120–134 all have a title in the Hebrew text which is translated by RSV as A Song of Ascents (TEV does not include this title). The collection is also called “The Book of Pilgrim Songs.” The Hebrew word translated Ascents comes from the verb “to go up,” but other than this there is no agreement as to what the phrase means. Some take it to indicate the return of the Hebrew exiles from Babylonia; others take it to refer to a stylistic feature found in some of the psalms, in which the order of the statement progresses in a step-like fashion from one verse to the other; others take it to refer to the steps in the Temple precincts which led from one court to the other; the majority take it to refer to the ascent up the mountain on which the Temple was built (Mount Moriah, known as Mount Zion). Thus understood, these psalms are songs which the pilgrims sang as they came to Jerusalem for one of the three major annual festivals (see GECL).

 

Robert G. Bratcher and William David Reyburn, A Translator’s Handbook on the Book of Psalms, UBS Handbook Series (New York: United Bible Societies, 1991), 1047.

לֹא־גָבַ֣הּ לִ֭בִּי וְלֹא־רָמ֣וּ עֵינַ֑י

Not high my heart

And they are not high, my eyes.

 

Delitzsch, vol. III

It is in the heart that haughtiness has its seats; it is specially in the eyes that it finds its expression, and great things are the sphere in which it purposefully moves. (302)

 

Ver. 1. LORD, my heart is not haughty. The Psalm deals with the Lord, and is a solitary colloquy with him, not a discourse before men. We have a sufficient audience when we speak with the Lord, and we may say to him many things which were not proper for the ears of men. The holy man makes his appeal to Jehovah, who alone knows the heart: a man should be slow to do this upon any matter, for the Lord is not to be trifled with; and when anyone ventures on such an appeal he should be sure of his case. He begins with his heart, for that is the centre of our nature, and if pride be there it defiles everything; just as mire in the spring causes mud in all the streams. It is a grand thing for a man to know his own heart so as to be able to speak before the Lord about it. It is beyond all things deceitful and  desperately wicked, who can know it? Who can know it unless taught by the Spirit of God? It is a still greater thing if, upon searching himself thoroughly, a man can solemnly protest unto the Omniscient One that his heart is not haughty: that is to say, neither proud in his opinion of himself, contemptuous to others, nor self righteous before the Lord; neither boastful of the past, proud of the present, nor ambitious for the future.

Nor mine eyes lofty. What the heart desires the eyes look for. Where the desires run the glances usually follow. This holy man felt that he did not seek after  elevated places where he might gratify his self esteem, neither did he look down upon others as being his inferiors. A proud look the Lord hates; and in this all men are agreed with him; yea, even the proud themselves hate haughtiness in the gestures of others. Lofty eyes are so generally hateful that haughty men have been known to avoid the manners natural to the proud in order to escape the ill will of their fellows. The pride which apes humility always takes care to east its eyes downward, since every man’s consciousness tells him that contemptuous glances are the sure ensigns of a boastful spirit. In Psalm 121 David lifted up his eyes to the hills; but here he declares that they were not lifted up in any other sense. When the heart is right, and the eyes are right, the whole man is on the road to a healthy and happy condition. Let us take care that we do not use the language of this Psalm unless, indeed, it be true as to ourselves; for there is no worse pride than that which claims humility when it does not possess it.

Spurgeon, The Treasury of David.

 

וְלֹֽא־הִלַּ֓כְתִּי׀ בִּגְדֹל֖וֹת

Not will  I go in great ways

 

וּבְנִפְלָא֣וֹת מִמֶּֽנִּי

And [not] in ways too difficult, too wonderful, for me.

 

Delitzsch, vol. 3:

The opposite of [great] (Jer. 33.3, 45:5) is not that which is mean and platry, but that which is small, and the opposite of [too wonderful for me] (Gen. 18:14) is not that which is trivial but that which is attainable (302)

 

Ver. 1-2. Our Father is our superior; it is fit therefore that we be resigned to his will. “Honour thy father and thy mother” (Exodus 20:12); how much more our heavenly Father! (Hebrews 12:9). See David’s spirit in the case: “LORD, my heart is not haughty”, etc.: Psalm 131:1-2. As if he had said, “I will keep within my own sphere; I will not stretch beyond my line, in prescribing to God; but submit to his will, `as a weaned child’, taken from its dear breasts”: intimating that he would wean himself from whatever God removed from him. How patiently did Isaac permit himself to be bound and sacrificed by Abraham! Genesis 22:9. And yet he was of age and strength sufficient to have struggled for his life, being twenty-five years old; but that holy young man abhorred the thought of striving with his father. And shall not we resign ourselves to our God and Father in Christ Jesus? —John Singleton (—1706), in “The Morning Exercises.”

 

Ver. 1-2. It has always been my aim, and it is my prayer, to have no plan as regards myself; well assured as I am that the place where the Saviour sees meet to place me must ever be the best place for mo. —Robert Murray  M’Cheyne, 1813-1843.

 

אִם־לֹ֤א שִׁוִּ֨יתִי׀ וְדוֹמַ֗מְתִּי נַ֫פְשִׁ֥י

Surely I have made and I have caused to be calm my soul

 

Whereas the first verse mentioned resulted achieved, this one shows how they were attained. It wa not without an inner struggle. The writer had to take himself in hand: he ‘stilled and quieted’ his soul. There may have been a time when great plans and mighty projects surged though his thoughts and drove him onward along the road of ambition. In some way he came to see that it is wrong for a man to seek great things for himself and to aim at that type of fame. Leupold, 908-909.

 

As usually in life, so here, too, humility is the prerequisite of genuine trust. The poet humbly confesses that he has learned to forgo his own lofty projects and proud thoughts; not as if he wanted acquiescently to abandon his claims upon living a full life, but he has found the balance of min that enables him to be satisfied with what has been granted to him. And this balance of mind arises from the fact that his soul is at peace with God.  This is all the happiness he needs. Weiser, The Psalms, 777.

אִם־לֹ֤א

Does not open a conditioning protasis; for where is there any indication of an apodosis? Nor does it signify “but,” a signification which it does not have even in Genesis 24:38, Ezekiel 33:;6 – in these passages, as well as the one befor us, it is derived from the well-known formula used in swearing, and is asservating: verily I have …. Delitzsch, vol. III, 302.

 

 

וְדוֹמַ֗מְתִּי נַ֫פְשִׁ֥י

It goes back upon the primary notion, to flatten, to make smooth, equal. He has leveled and stilled his soul, so that humility is its uniform and constant condition; he has quited it, so that it is silent and rests and lets God speak and work in it: it like a level plain, a calm expanse of water. Delitzsch, vol. III, 303.

 

 

 

 

כְּ֭גָמֻל עֲלֵ֣י אִמּ֑וֹ
Like a weaned (child) before his mother

The figure is beautifully expressive of the humility of a soul chastened by disappointment. As the weaned child no longer cries, and frets, and longs for the breast, but lies still and is content, because it is with its mother; so my soul is weaned from all discontented thoughts, from all fretful desires for earthly good, waiting ins still upon God, finding its satisfaction in His presence, resting peacefully in His arms.

“The weaned child,” writes a mother, with reference to this passage, “has for the first time become conscious of grief. The piteous longing for the sweet nourishment of his life, the broken sob of disappointment, mark the trouble of his innocent heart; it is not from the bodily suffering; he has felt that before, and cried while it lasted; but now his joy and comfort are taken away and he knows not why. When his head is once more laid on his mother’s bosom, then he trusts and loves and rests, but he has learned the first lesson of humlility, he is cast down, and clings with fond helplessness to his one friend” Perowne, The Book of Psalms, A New Translation, with Explanatory Notes for English Readers 1898, 627-628.

 

He follows the three denials with an emphatic assertion (But here indicates emphasis).1 Like the calm surface of a lake, he has stilled and quieted his soul.2 He compares himself to a weaned child with its mother (131:2). Because this child is no longer breast feeding, it can lie contentedly in its mother’s arms, desiring less what the mother can give than the mother herself. An end to self-centered demands means the child can enjoy the mother’s comfort.3 To approach God, not for what He can do for me but because He is my God and Father, is to enjoy a deeper, more satisfying level of contentment.

Stephen J. Lennox, Psalms: A Bible Commentary in the Wesleyan Tradition (Indianapolis, IN: Wesleyan Publishing House, 1999), 391.

Fostering a quiet faith (131:2). This state of spirituality has been attained only by struggling with his headstrong self. Many an outburst of self-will has had to be quelled. Here the psalm draws on motifs found in laments and psalms of confidence (cf. Pss 42:6 [5]; 62:6 [5]; Beyerlin, Wider die Hybris, 73–75). Eventually the speaker has learned the lesson of dependence on God. His metaphor for such dependence, that of the parent carrying a child, is well attested in the OT to describe the supportive care that Yahweh had ever given the covenant people since the wilderness period (Deut 1:31; Isa 46:3–4; Hos 11:3, as generally emended).

Leslie C. Allen, vol. 21, Psalms 101–150 (Revised), Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2002), 260.

1. It was not self-produced. No child ever weaned itself. 2. It has been the Lord’s work. By his Holy Spirit and his providence he has wrought this wondrous change. Hence we have come to find that what once delighted us so much fails to do so now. The world has become embittered to our taste. Our God has separated us from what we loved and clung to; there was no chance of our voluntarily giving it up, and so God took it away. And he has given us what is better far than that which we have lost (cf. Ps. 63). Higher, purer joys are ours. Also he has blessed our own endeavours after self-denial and renunciation; he has “worked in us to will and to do,” etc. 3. And the result is most blessed. The calm quiet and stillness of the soul; its freedom from fret; its heavenly peace.

IV. WHAT THIS EXPERIENCE LEADS TO. A delight in God, and a conviction of his love and faithfulness, which make him call upon all his countrymen to hope in the Lord. When the soul has this experience, it cannot but commend the Lord to others. It must bear its testimony.—S. C.

 

Psalms Vol. III, ed. H. D. M. Spence-Jones, The Pulpit Commentary (London; New York: Funk & Wagnalls Company, 1909), 255.

 

כַּגָּמֻ֖ל עָלַ֣י נַפְשִֽׁי

Like a child unto me is my soul

For דוממתי, domamtee, is formed from דום, dum, and has the active sense of reducing to silence. The quiet of soul he alludes to is opposed to those tumultuous desires by which many cause disquietude to themselves, and are the means of throwing the world into agitation. The figure of childhood is elsewhere used in another sense, to convey reprehension. (Is. 28:9.) “Whom shall I teach knowledge? them that are weaned from the milk? and drawn from the breasts?” where the Prophet censures the people for their slowness of apprehension, and being as incapable of profiting by instruction as infants. In the passage now before us, what is recommended is that simplicity of which Christ spake, (Matt. 18:3,) “Unless ye become like this little child, ye shall in no wise enter into the kingdom of God.”2 The vain desires with which men are carried away, originate in their seeking to be wise and careful above what is necessary. David adds accordingly, my soul over me is quieted, not as expressing the language of self-confidence, but speaking as if his soul lay sweetly and peacefully on his bosom, undisturbed by inordinate desires. He contrasts the wayward and tumultuous agitation which prevails in those of a discontented spirit, with the peace which reigns in the man who abides in the calling of the Lord. From the verse with which the Psalm closes, we see the reason why David asserted his having undertaken nothing in the spirit of a carnal ambition. He calls upon Israel to hope in the Lord, words which must have been abrupt had it not deeply concerned the common safety of the Church, to know that he sat upon, the throne of the kingdom by Divine appointment, in which case the faithful would be certain of the bestowment of the promised blessing. Our hope is of the right kind when we cherish humble and sober views of ourselves, and neither wish nor attempt anything without the leading and approbation of God.

 

John Calvin and James Anderson, vol. 5, Commentary on the Book of Psalms (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2010), 141-42.

 

 

יַחֵ֣ל יִ֝שְׂרָאֵל אֶל־יְהוָ֑ה

Hope Israel unto/in the LORD

 

מֵֽ֝עַתָּ֗ה וְעַד־עוֹלָֽם׃

From this time until forever.

 

Rosscup on Zephaniah 3:12:

God’s restoring of a remnant (12). When God does this work, He will leave intact those receptive to Him to enjoy blessing (cf. Isa. 4:2; Matt. 13:43; 24:40–41). These will be humble and lowly, poor in spirit in having their values in God, not in worldly pride touting self-sufficiency. Their submission to the Lord stands out in their taking refuge in His name, i.e. His power, honor, and will. Fleeing to God as a haven of the soul takes the shape of prayerful, trusting dependence on Him (Ps. 18:2), and this will be the spirit in that final time.

God’s restfulness for a remnant (13). A godly life of victory over deceit (cf. 9) frees the blessed of many burdens guilt can bring. At peace with God and people, they shall feed to their content and enjoy rest without having to deal with unjust exploiters present to make them shake with fear (cf. 3:3, 4). At the same time, they will be free of terror felt in an invasion by enemies (15).

James E. Rosscup, An Exposition on Prayer in the Bible: Igniting the Fuel to Flame Our Communication With God (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2008), 1401-02.

 

COLLECTS

 

Almighty FATHER, suffer us not to be lifted up with worldly pride; but Thou Who art meek and lowly of heart, teach us to agree in that holy conduct which is pleasing unto Thee, Who livest.

Grant, O LORD, that we, stayed up by the power of Thy holy Majesty, may not be haughty of heart, nor proud of eyes, nor walk in things too great and wonderful for us, but alway be lowly in thought, that we may please Thee throughout the ages evermore. Through Jesus Christ our Lord, Who liveth and reigneth with Thee and the Holy Ghost, One God, world without end. Amen.

J. M. Neale and R. F. Littledale, A Commentary on the Psalms from Primitive and Mediæval Writers, Volume 4: Psalm 119 to Psalm 150 (London: Joseph Masters, 1874), 238-39.

 

 

 

[1] John Peter Lange, Philip Schaff, Carl Bernhard Moll et al., A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures: Psalms (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2008), 626.

[2]

STARKE:—Humility, the most lowly virtue, is the highest in value, for it brings grace; rain moistens the deep valleys; lowly violets are fragrant. Pride, the portrait of Satan, and an abomination to God; a poison which mars and corrupts whatever is good. Flee, soul, from this serpent, which has bitten many saints, and, as it were, cast them out of heaven.—Art thou high, God is higher; strong, God is stronger; mighty, God is more mighty; eminent, God is majestic. Thou art under (less than) God, humble thyself under Him. Sir. 3:20.—We must suffer before we can come to honour, and God tests our humility by suffering, to see whether it be worthy of honour, Prov. 15:33.—Humility is not a meritorious cause of exaltation, but a way to it, Col. 3:3, 4.—We must cast our care upon God not only in things temporal but also in things spiritual, especially in what belongs to the state of grace. Then we may feel assured that in God’s might, through faith, we shall be preserved unto salvation, ch. 1:5.—Man is like a pilgrim passing through a forest inhabited by bears and lions, and lodging at a place which is the home of robbers and murderers. Satan, holding unbelievers already in his power and in his claws, directs his most earnest endeavours against the godly.—

John Peter Lange, Philip Schaff, G. F. C. Fronmüller and J. Isidor Mombert, A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures: 1 Peter (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2008), 92.

[3]

He more fully sets forth here the providence of God. For whence are these proverbial sayings, “We shall have to howl among wolves,” and, “They are foolish who are like sheep, exposing themselves to wolves to be devoured,” except that we think that by our humility we set loose the reins to the audacity of the ungodly, so that they insult us more wantonly? But this fear arises from our ignorance of divine providence. Now, on the other hand, as soon as we are convinced that God cares for us, our minds are easily led to patience and humility. Lest, then, the wickedness of men should tempt us to a fierceness of mind, the Apostle prescribes to us a remedy, and also David does in the thirty-seventh Psalm, so that having cast our care on God, we may calmly rest. For all those who recumb not on God’s providence must necessarily be in constant turmoil and violently assail others. We ought the more to dwell on this thought, that God cares for us, in order, first, that we may have peace within; and, secondly, that we may be humble and meek towards men.

But we are not thus bidden to cast all our care on God, as though God wished us to have strong hearts, and to be void of all feeling; but lest fear or anxiety should drive us to impatience. In like manner, the knowledge of divine providence does not free men from every care, that they may securely indulge themselves; for it ought not to encourage the torpidity of the flesh, but to bring rest to faith.

John Calvin, 1 Peter: Commentaries on the Catholic Epistles, electronic ed., Calvin’s Commentaries (Albany, OR: Ages Software, 1998), 1 Pe 5:7.

Note That Well

27 Saturday Oct 2012

Posted by in Charles Spurgeon, Matthew, Preaching, Service

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

Spurgeon on January 8, 1871 (collected sermons, volume 17), preached the sermon, “Rest, Rest” on Matthew 11:28, “Come unto me, all ye that labor and are heavily laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.”

In that sermon, he explains that the rest promised by Christ is not the rest of laziness, of being a sluggard. In some very important ways, the life of the Christian is supernaturally difficult. It is a rest from one’s sin and shame, but it is a bearing of the cross:

Further observe that the rest in this second part of our text is a rest in service. It is coupled with a yoke, for activity — ”Take my yoke;” it is connected with a burden, for endurance — ”My burden is light.” He who is a Christian will not find rest in being idle. There is no unrest greater than that of the sluggard. If you would rest take Christ’s yoke, be actively engaged in his service. As the bullock has the yoke put upon its neck and then begins to draw, so have the yoke of Christ put on your neck and commence to obey him. The rest of heaven is not the rest of sleep; they serve him day and night in his temple. They are always resting, and yet, in another sense, they rest not day nor night. Holy activity in heaven is perfect rest. True rest to the mind of the child of God is rest on the wing, rest in motion, rest in service, not rest with the yoke off, but, with the yoke on. We are to enter upon this service voluntarily; we are to take his yoke upon us voluntarily. You observe, it does not say, “Bear my yoke when it is laid upon you, but take it.” Do not need to be told by the minister, “My dear brother, such-and-such a work you are bound to do,” but take up the yoke of your own accord. Do not merely submit to be the Lord’s servant, but seek his service. Ask, “What can I do?” Be desirous to do it; voluntarily, cheerfully, do all that lieth in you for the extension of his kingdom who has given you rest, and you shall find that the rest of your soul shall lie in your doing all you can for Jesus. Every active Christian will tell you he is never happier than when he has much to do; and, on the whole, if he communes with Jesus, never more at rest than when he has least leisure. Look not for your rest in the mere enjoyments and excitements of religion, but find your rest in wearing a yoke which you love, and which, for that reason, is easy to your neck.

But, my dear brother, you must also be willing to bear Christ’s burden. Now the burden of Christ is his cross, which every Christian must take up. Expect to be reproached, expect to meet with some degree of the scandal of the cross, for the offense of it never ceases. Persecution and reproach are a blessed burden; when your soul loves Jesus it is a light thing to suffer for him, and, therefore, never by any cowardly retirement or refusal to profess your faith, evade your share of this honorable load. Woe unto those who say, “I will never be a martyr.” No rest is sweeter than the martyr’s rest. Woe unto those who say, “We will go to heaven by night along a secret road, and so avoid the shame of the cross.” The rest of the Christian is found not in cowardice but in courage; it lies not in providing for ease but in the brave endurance of suffering for the truth. The restful spirit counts the reproach of Christ to be greater riches than all the treasures of Egypt; he falls in love with the cross, and counts the burden light, and so finds rest in service, and rest in suffering. Note that well.

Arrant Sluggards

21 Sunday Oct 2012

Posted by in Biblical Counseling, Charles Spurgeon, Discipleship, Numbers, Service

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

On August 5, 1886, Charles Spurgeon preached the sermon, “The Great Sin of Doing Nothing” (it is in volume 32, sermon no. 1916). In that sermon he speaks of the one attends service on Sunday, who drinks up the good of the Church and yet gives no service in return. However, in considering his rebuke, pay attention to the manner in which he defines the work to be done:

  “But if ye will not do so, behold, ye have sinned against the Lord: and be sure your sin will find you out.” — Numbers 32:23.

Alas, the tribe of Reuben is not dead, and the tribe of Gad has not passed away! Many who are of the household of faith are equally indisposed to exertion, equally fond of ease. Hear them say, “Thank God we are safe! We have passed from death unto life. We have named the name of Christ; we are washed in his precious blood, and therefore we are secure.” Then, with a strange inconsistency, they permit the evil of the flesh to crave carnal ease, and they cry, “Soul, thou hast much goods laid up for many years; take thine ease, eat, drink, and be merry.” Spiritual self-indulgence is a monstrous evil; yet we see it all around. On Sunday these loafers must be well fed. They look out for such sermons as will feed their souls. The thought does not occur to these people that there is something else to be done besides feeding. Soul-saving is pushed into the background. The crowds are perishing at their gates; the multitudes with their sins defile the air; the age is getting worse and worse, and man, by a process of evolution, is evolving a devil; and yet these people want pleasant things preached to them. They eat the fat and drink the sweet, and they crowd to the feast of fat things full of marrow, and of wines on the lees well refined — spiritual festivals are their delight: sermons, conferences, Bible-readings, and so forth, are sought after, but regular service in ordinary ways is neglected. Not a hand’s turn will they do. They gird on no armor, they grasp no sword, they wield no sling, they throw no stone. No, they have gotten their possession; they know they have, and they sit down in carnal security, satisfied to do nothing. They neither work for life, nor from life: they are arrant sluggards, as lazy as they are long. Nowhere are they at home except where they can enjoy themselves, and take things easy. They love their beds, but the Lord’s fields they will neither plough nor reap. This is the sin pointed out in the text —  “If ye do not go forth to the battles of the Lord, and contend for the Lord God and for his people, ye do sin against the Lord: and be sure your sin will find you out.” The sin of doing nothing is about the biggest of all sins, for it involves most of the others. The sin of sitting still while your brethren go forth to war breaks both tables of the law, and has in it a huge idolatry of self, which neither allows love to God or man. Horrible idleness! God save us from it!

This sin may be viewed under another aspect, as selfishness and unbrotherliness. Gad and Reuben ask to have their inheritance at once, and to make themselves comfortable in Bashan, on this side Jordan. What about Judah, Levi, Simeon, Benjamin, and all the rest of the tribes? How are they to get their inheritance? They do not care, but it is evident that Bashan is suitable for themselves with their multitude of cattle. Some of them reply, “You see, they must look to themselves, as the proverb hath it, ’Every man for himself, and God for us all.’” Did I not hear some one in the company say, “Am I my brother’s keeper?” I know that gentleman. I heard his voice years ago. His name is Cain, and I have this to say to him: it is true that he is not his brother’s keeper, but he is his brother’s killer. Every man is either the keeper of his brother, or the destroyer of his brother. Soul-murder can be wrought without an act or even a will; it can be, and is constantly, accomplished by neglect. Yonder perishing heathen — does not the Lord enquire, “Who slew all these?” The millions of this city unevangelized  — who is guilty of their blood? Are not idle Christians starving the multitude by refusing to hand out the bread of life? Is not this a grievous sin?