Tag Archives: Genesis

Translation and Notes: 1 Clement 10:4-5

11 Monday Feb 2013

Posted by in 1 Clement, Ante-Nicene, Genesis, Greek

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

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

καὶ πάλιν ἐν τῷ διαχωρισθῆναι αὐτὸν ἀπὸ Λὼτ εἴπεν αὐτῷ ὁ Θεός. + Ἀναβλέψας τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς σου, ἴδε ἀπὸ τοῦ τόπου, οὗ νῦν σὺ εἶ, πρὸς βορρᾶν καὶ λίβα καὶ ἀνατολὰς καὶ θάλασσαν· ὅτι πᾶσαν τὴν γῆν, ἥν σὺ ὁρᾷς, σοὶ δώσω αὐτὴν καὶ τῷ σπέρματί σου ἕως αἰῶνος· 5 καὶ ποιήσω τό σπέρμα σου ὡς τὴν ἄμμον τῆς γῆς εἰ δύναταί τις ἐξαριθμῆσαι τὴν ἄμμον τὴς γῆς, καὶ τὸ σπέρμα σου ἐξαριθμηθήσεται

Translation: And again, at the time of the separation from Lot, God said to him, Lift up your eyes and look about from where you stand, to the north and south, from the rising of the sun even to the sea – this is the place which I shall give to you and forever to your descendants; I will make your descendants as numerous as the sand of earth.  If one is able to count the sand of the earth, then will your descendants be numbered.

Kirsopp Lake:  4 And again, when he was separated from Lot, God said to him, “Lift up thine eyes and look from the place where thou art now, to the North and to the South and to the East and to the West; for all the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it and to thy seed for ever.  5 And I will make thy seed as the dust of the earth. If a man can number the dust of the earth thy seed shall also be numbered.”

Translation notes:

καὶ πάλιν ἐν τῷ διαχωρισθῆναι αὐτὸν ἀπὸ Λὼτ εἴπεν αὐτῷ ὁ Θεός

And again, in the division (in the to have been divided) he from Lot, he said to him, (that) is God (said)

And again, when God spoke to him to depart from Lot

ὁ Θεός:  Being in the nominative and being articular, God is plainly marked as the subject. Moreover, it matches the number of the verb “he said” εἴπεν.

αὐτῷ: that is, Abraham, the one to whom God spoke.

τῷ διαχωρισθῆναι:  infinitive (here an aorist passive infinitive) of indirect discourse. This is seen, in part, by being matched to a verb of perception or communication which is a marker for the infinitive of indirect discourse (Wallace, 603-605). The verb form marks this as the summary of the communication from God.  Wallace notes, “The general principle for these infinitives is th the infinitive of indirect discourse retains the tense of the direct discourse and usually represents either an imperative or a indicative” (Wallace, 604).

Ἀναβλέψας τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς σου: Lifting up the eyes of you (your eyes).

Ἀναβλέψας: aorist participle of attendant circumstance: 1) it is in the aorist; 2) the main verb (“see”) is aorist; 3) the mood of the main verb is imperatival; 4) the participle precedes the main verb; and 5) occurs in narrative.

τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς σου: the thing seen would be in the accusative (see, e.g., Matt. 14:19), the eyes, being moved are in the dative.

ἴδε ἀπὸ τοῦ τόπου: look from this place.

τοῦ: the article is deictic; that is, it refers to the particular place at hand. Translate as a demonstrative, this.

οὗ νῦν σὺ εἶ: where now you are.

Note: hou (the genitive of hos) means “where”; it marks a place. Ou (without the rough breathing) means no.

 

πρὸς βορρᾶν καὶ λίβα καὶ ἀνατολὰς καὶ θάλασσαν: to the north and south and rising (sun) (east) and sea (west).

ὅτι πᾶσαν τὴν γῆν: namely, all the land. This is an appositional use of the hoti: it elaborates the hen (that) of the next clause. Wallace, 458-4459.

ἥν σὺ ὁρᾷς: that you see

σοὶ δώσω αὐτὴν καὶ τῷ σπέρματί σου ἕως αἰῶνος: to you I shall give it and to the see of you until the ages.

σοὶ: to you, dative as indirect object.

δώσω αὐτὴν: I shall give it (that is the land; note feminine form)

καὶ τῷ σπέρματί σου: and to your seed (descendants). Dative of indirect object. The kai and indicates that the give to the descendants is parallel to the gift to Abraham.

ἕως αἰῶνος:

In other passages we have the expressions εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα, εἰς τοὺς αἰώνας, ἕως αἰῶνος, εἰς τοὺς αἰώνας τῶν αἰώνων; see, e.g., Luke 1:33, 55; John 12:34, 13:8; Rom. 9:5; Gal. 1:5; 1 Tim. 1:17. Some translators have rendered these passages literally, and without respect to their usage in the LXX; (e.g. ‘unto the age,’ ‘unto the ages,’ &c.). In 1 Tim. 1:17, God is called ‘the King of ages’ (A. V. King Eternal); whilst in Heb. 1:2, 11:3, He is said to have made ‘the ages’ (A. V. the worlds). The rendering of the A. V. is no doubt right in the first case, and probably in the second also. Ages and worlds bear the same relation to one another as time and space do, and the process of creating worlds was the means of bringing ages into being.

 

Robert Baker Girdlestone, Synonyms of the Old Testament: Their Bearing on Christian Doctrine. (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1998), 318.

That God should remember his commitment to Abraham is the theme of Exod 2:24; 32:13; Deut 9:27 and Ps 104 [105]:8–11, 42. His mercy to the patriarchs or David appears in 2 Sam 22:51; Ps 97 [98]:3; Mic 7:20. Appeal to what was spoken to the patriarchs is also found in Deut 7:8, 12; Josh 1:6; 5:6; etc In language, “mercy—just as he spoke to our fathers—to Abraham” is close to Mic 7:20, but not closer to LXX than MT while “mercy to … and to his seed forever” could echo 2 Sam 22:51 (for “forever” Luke has εἰς τὸναἰῶνα [only here in Luke-Acts] rather than LXX ἕως αίῶνος). The first allusion underlines the eschatological coloring of the Magnificat. The second may draw in a messianic note, but probably only reflects the Jewish application to the nation of OT promises to the royal line.

John Nolland, vol. 35A, Luke 1:1–9:20, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2002), 73.

καὶ ποιήσω τό σπέρμα σου: and I shall make the seed of you.

The kai (and) again draws a parallel, this time between the gift of the land and the extent of Abraham’s descendants.

ὡς τὴν ἄμμον τῆς γῆς εἰ δύναταί τις ἐξαριθμῆσαι τὴν ἄμμον τὴς γῆς: as the dust fo the earth – if you would be able anyone to number the dust of the earth.

ὡς τὴν ἄμμον: modifies “your seed” and thus matches the case (accusative).

Ammos, sand/dust is used idiomatically in the LXX fo something which cannot be numbered:

 

 

Gen 13:16

καὶ ποιήσω τὸ σπέρμα σου ὡς τὴν ἄμμον τῆς γῆς, εἰ δύναταί τις ἐξαριθμῆσαι τὴν ἄμμον τῆς γῆς, καὶ τὸ σπέρμα σου ἐξαριθμηθήσεται.

 

I will make your offspring as the dust of the earth, so that if one can count the dust of the earth, your offspring also can be counted.

 

Gen 22:17

ἦ μὴν εὐλογῶν εὐλογήσω σε καὶ πληθύνων πληθυνῶ τὸ σπέρμα σου ὡς τοὺς ἀστέρας τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καὶ ὡς τὴν ἄμμον τὴν παρὰ τὸ χεῖλος τῆς θαλάσσης, καὶ κληρονομήσει τὸ σπέρμα σου τὰς πόλεις τῶν ὑπεναντίων,

 

I will surely bless you, and I will surely multiply your offspring as the stars of heaven and as the sand that is on the seashore. And your offspring shall possess the gate of his enemies,

 

Gen 28:14

καὶ ἔσται τὸ σπέρμα σου ὡς ἡ ἄμμος τῆς γῆς καὶ πλατυνθήσεται ἐπὶ θάλασσαν καὶ ἐπὶ λίβα καὶ ἐπὶ βορρᾶν καὶ ἐπʼ ἀνατολάς, καὶ ἐνευλογηθήσονται ἐν σοὶ πᾶσαι αἱ φυλαὶ τῆς γῆς καὶ ἐν τῷ σπέρματί σου.

 

Your offspring shall be like the dust of the earth, and you shall spread abroad to the west and to the east and to the north and to the south, and in you and your offspring shall all the families of the earth be blessed.

 

Gen 32:13

σὺ δὲ εἶπας Καλῶς εὖ σε ποιήσω καὶ θήσω τὸ σπέρμα σου ὡς τὴν ἄμμον τῆς θαλάσσης, ἣ οὐκ ἀριθμηθήσεται ἀπὸ τοῦ πλήθους.

 

But you said, ‘I will surely do you good, and make your offspring as the sand of the sea, which cannot be numbered for multitude.’ ”

 

Gen 41:49

καὶ συνήγαγεν Ιωσηφ σῖτον ὡσεὶ τὴν ἄμμον τῆς θαλάσσης πολὺν σφόδρα, ἕως οὐκ ἠδύναντο ἀριθμῆσαι, οὐ γὰρ ἦν ἀριθμός.

 

And Joseph stored up grain in great abundance, like the sand of the sea, until he ceased to measure it, for it could not be measured.

 

Exod 2:12

περιβλεψάμενος δὲ ὧδε καὶ ὧδε οὐχ ὁρᾷ οὐδένα καὶ πατάξας τὸν Αἰγύπτιον ἔκρυψεν αὐτὸν ἐν τῇ ἄμμῳ.

 

He looked this way and that, and seeing no one, he struck down the Egyptian and hid him in the sand.

 

Josh 11:4

καὶ ἐξῆλθον αὐτοὶ καὶ οἱ βασιλεῖς αὐτῶν μετʼ αὐτῶν ὥσπερ ἡ ἄμμος τῆς θαλάσσης τῷ πλήθει καὶ ἵπποι καὶ ἅρματα πολλὰ σφόδρα.

 

And they came out with all their troops, a great horde, in number like the sand that is on the seashore, with very many horses and chariots.

 

Judg 7:12

καὶ Μαδιαμ καὶ Αμαληκ καὶ πάντες οἱ υἱοὶ ἀνατολῶν παρεμβεβλήκεισαν ἐν τῇ κοιλάδι ὡς ἀκρὶς εἰς πλῆθος, καὶ ταῖς καμήλοις αὐτῶν οὐκ ἦν ἀριθμός, ἀλλʼ ἦσαν ὥσπερ ἡ ἄμμος ἡ ἐπὶ τὸ χεῖλος τῆς θαλάσσης εἰς πλῆθος.

 

And the Midianites and the Amalekites and all the people of the East lay along the valley like locusts in abundance, and their camels were without number, as the sand that is on the seashore in abundance.

 

1 Kgdms 13:5

καὶ οἱ ἀλλόφυλοι συνάγονται εἰς πόλεμον ἐπὶ Ισραηλ, καὶ ἀναβαίνουσιν ἐπὶ Ισραηλ τριάκοντα χιλιάδες ἁρμάτων καὶ ἓξ χιλιάδες ἱππέων καὶ λαὸς ὡς ἡ ἄμμος ἡ παρὰ τὴν θάλασσαν τῷ πλήθει, καὶ ἀναβαίνουσιν καὶ παρεμβάλλουσιν ἐν Μαχεμας ἐξ ἐναντίας Βαιθων κατὰ νότου.

 

And the Philistines mustered to fight with Israel, thirty thousand chariots and six thousand horsemen and troops like the sand on the seashore in multitude. They came up and encamped in Michmash, to the east of Beth-aven.

 

2 Kgdms 17:11

ὅτι οὕτως συμβουλεύων ἐγὼ συνεβούλευσα, καὶ συναγόμενος συναχθήσεται ἐπὶ σὲ πᾶς Ισραηλ ἀπὸ Δαν καὶ ἕως Βηρσαβεε ὡς ἡ ἄμμος ἡ ἐπὶ τῆς θαλάσσης εἰς πλῆθος, καὶ τὸ πρόσωπόν σου πορευόμενον ἐν μέσῳ αὐτῶν,

 

But my counsel is that all Israel be gathered to you, from Dan to Beersheba, as the sand by the sea for multitude, and that you go to battle in person.

 

3 Kgdms 2:35a

Καὶ ἔδωκεν κύριος φρόνησιν τῷ Σαλωμων καὶ σοφίαν πολλὴν σφόδρα καὶ πλάτος καρδίας ὡς ἡ ἄμμος ἡ παρὰ τὴν θάλασσαν,

 

 

 

3 Kgdms 2:46a

Καὶ ἦν ὁ βασιλεὺς Σαλωμων φρόνιμος σφόδρα καὶ σοφός, καὶ Ιουδα καὶ Ισραηλ πολλοὶ σφόδρα ὡς ἡ ἄμμος ἡ ἐπὶ τῆς θαλάσσης εἰς πλῆθος, ἐσθίοντες καὶ πίνοντες καὶ χαίροντες,

 

 

 

3 Kgdms 5:9

Καὶ ἔδωκεν κύριος φρόνησιν τῷ Σαλωμων καὶ σοφίαν πολλὴν σφόδρα καὶ χύμα καρδίας ὡς ἡ ἄμμος ἡ παρὰ τὴν θάλασσαν,

 

And God gave Solomon wisdom and understanding beyond measure, and breadth of mind like the sand on the seashore,

 

Jdth 2:20

καὶ πολὺς ὁ ἐπίμικτος ὡς ἀκρὶς συνεξῆλθον αὐτοῖς καὶ ὡς ἡ ἄμμος τῆς γῆς, οὐ γὰρ ἦν ἀριθμὸς ἀπὸ πλήθους αὐτῶν.

 

 

 

1 Macc 11:1

Καὶ βασιλεὺς Αἰγύπτου ἤθροισεν δυνάμεις πολλὰς ὡς ἡ ἄμμος ἡ παρὰ τὸ χεῖλος τῆς θαλάσσης καὶ πλοῖα πολλὰ καὶ ἐζήτησε κατακρατῆσαι τῆς βασιλείας Ἀλεξάνδρου δόλῳ καὶ προσθεῖναι αὐτὴν τῇ βασιλείᾳ αὐτοῦ.

 

 

 

Ps 77:27

καὶ ἔβρεξεν ἐπʼ αὐτοὺς ὡσεὶ χοῦν σάρκας καὶ ὡσεὶ ἄμμον θαλασσῶν πετεινὰ πτερωτά,

 

he rained meat on them like dust, winged birds like the sand of the seas;

 

Ps 138:18

ἐξαριθμήσομαι αὐτούς, καὶ ὑπὲρ ἄμμον πληθυνθήσονται, ἐξηγέρθην καὶ ἔτι εἰμὶ μετὰ σοῦ.

 

If I would count them, they are more than the sand. I awake, and I am still with you.

 

Odes 7:36

οἷς ἐλάλησας πρὸς αὐτοὺς λέγων πληθῦναι τὸ σπέρμα αὐτῶν ὡς τὰ ἄστρα τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καὶ ὡς τὴν ἄμμον τὴν παρὰ τὸ χεῖλος τῆς θαλάσσης.

 

 

 

Prov 27:3

βαρὺ λίθος καὶ δυσβάστακτον ἄμμος, ὀργὴ δὲ ἄφρονος βαρυτέρα ἀμφοτέρων.

 

A stone is heavy, and sand is weighty, but a fool’s provocation is heavier than both.

 

Job 6:3

καὶ δὴ ἄμμου παραλίας βαρυτέρα ἔσται, ἀλλʼ ὡς ἔοικεν, τὰ ῥήματά μού ἐστιν φαῦλα.

 

For then it would be heavier than the sand of the sea; therefore my words have been rash.

 

Sirach 1:2

ἄμμον θαλασσῶν καὶ σταγόνας ὑετοῦ καὶ ἡμέρας αἰῶνος τίς ἐξαριθμήσει;

 

 

 

Sirach 18:10

ὡς σταγὼν ὕδατος ἀπὸ θαλάσσης καὶ ψῆφος ἄμμου, οὕτως ὀλίγα ἔτη ἐν ἡμέρᾳ αἰῶνος.

 

 

 

Sirach 22:15

ἄμμον καὶ ἅλα καὶ βῶλον σιδήρου εὔκοπον ὑπενεγκεῖν ἢ ἄνθρωπον ἀσύνετον.

 

 

 

Hos 2:1

Καὶ ἦν ὁ ἀριθμὸς τῶν υἱῶν Ισραηλ ὡς ἡ ἄμμος τῆς θαλάσσης, ἣ οὐκ ἐκμετρηθήσεται οὐδὲ ἐξαριθμηθήσεται, καὶ ἔσται ἐν τῷ τόπῳ, οὗ ἐρρέθη αὐτοῖς Οὐ λαός μου ὑμεῖς, ἐκεῖ κληθήσονται υἱοὶ θεοῦ ζῶντος.

 

Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be like the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured or numbered. And in the place where it was said to them, “You are not my people,” it shall be said to them, “Children of the living God.”

 

Hab 1:9

συντέλεια εἰς ἀσεβεῖς ἥξει ἀνθεστηκότας προσώποις αὐτῶν ἐξ ἐναντίας καὶ συνάξει ὡς ἄμμον αἰχμαλωσίαν.

 

They all come for violence, all their faces forward. They gather captives like sand.

 

Isa 10:22

καὶ ἐὰν γένηται ὁ λαὸς Ισραηλ ὡς ἡ ἄμμος τῆς θαλάσσης, τὸ κατάλειμμα αὐτῶν σωθήσεται, λόγον γὰρ συντελῶν καὶ συντέμνων ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ,

 

For though your people Israel be as the sand of the sea, only a remnant of them will return. Destruction is decreed, overflowing with righteousness.

 

Isa 48:19

καὶ ἐγένετο ἂν ὡς ἡ ἄμμος τὸ σπέρμα σου καὶ τὰ ἔκγονα τῆς κοιλίας σου ὡς ὁ χοῦς τῆς γῆς, οὐδὲ νῦν οὐ μὴ ἐξολεθρευθῇς, οὐδὲ ἀπολεῖται τὸ ὄνομά σου ἐνώπιόν μου.

 

your offspring would have been like the sand, and your descendants like its grains; their name would never be cut off or destroyed from before me.”

 

Jer 5:22

μὴ ἐμὲ οὐ φοβηθήσεσθε; λέγει κύριος, ἢ ἀπὸ προσώπου μου οὐκ εὐλαβηθήσεσθε; τὸν τάξαντα ἄμμον ὅριον τῇ θαλάσσῃ, πρόσταγμα αἰώνιον, καὶ οὐχ ὑπερβήσεται αὐτό, καὶ ταραχθήσεται καὶ οὐ δυνήσεται, καὶ ἠχήσουσιν τὰ κύματα αὐτῆς καὶ οὐχ ὑπερβήσεται αὐτό.

 

Do you not fear me? declares the Lord. Do you not tremble before me? I placed the sand as the boundary for the sea, a perpetual barrier that it cannot pass; though the waves toss, they cannot prevail; though they roar, they cannot pass over it.

 

Jer 15:8

ἐπληθύνθησαν χῆραι αὐτῶν ὑπὲρ τὴν ἄμμον τῆς θαλάσσης, ἐπήγαγον ἐπὶ μητέρα νεανίσκου ταλαιπωρίαν ἐν μεσημβρίᾳ, ἐπέρριψα ἐπʼ αὐτὴν ἐξαίφνης τρόμον καὶ σπουδήν.

 

I have made their widows more in number than the sand of the seas; I have brought against the mothers of young men a destroyer at noonday; I have made anguish and terror fall upon them suddenly.

 

Jer 26:22

φωνὴ ὡς ὄφεως συρίζοντος, ὅτι ἐν ἄμμῳ πορεύσονται, ἐν ἀξίναις ἥξουσιν ἐπʼ αὐτὴν ὡς κόπτοντες ξύλα.

 

“She makes a sound like a serpent gliding away; for her enemies march in force and come against her with axes like those who fell trees.

 

Dan 3:36

οἷς ἐλάλησας πρὸς αὐτοὺς λέγων πληθῦναι τὸ σπέρμα αὐτῶν ὡς τὰ ἄστρα τοῦ οὐρανοῦ καὶ ὡς τὴν ἄμμον τὴν παρὰ τὸ χεῖλος τῆς θαλάσσης.

 

 

 

 

εἰ δύναταί τις ἐξαριθμῆσαι: if one (anyone, tis) to number.

To number is a complementary infinitive (Wallace 598-599); it gives content to “to be able” which requires an additional action to make a complete thought. The preposition on “to count” does not seem to add any intensive force to the base verb “to count”. Perhaps it means something like “thoroughly count”, but such a sense seems to be limited. There are instances of it being used with very large numbers, (Herodotus, 2.143.2, “counting them out to the very large number”; 4.87.1, counting out 700,000 calvary; 7.59.2, Xeres counting his troops). The verb is used only in this sentence in the entire addition of the apostolic fathers.

καὶ τὸ σπέρμα σου ἐξαριθμηθήσεται: and (then) the seed of you (your descendants) shall be counted (future passive).

The Crisis of Word and Truth

17 Thursday Jan 2013

Posted by in Apologetics, Carl F Henry, Genesis, John

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

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

The Crisis of Word and Truth

NO FACT OF CONTEMPORARY Western life is more evident than its growing distrust of final truth and its implacable questioning of any sure word.[1]

The first essay in Henry’s six volumes, God Revelation and Authority is “The Crisis of Word and Truth”. He notes the conflict between two worldviews: The God of revelation who speaks versus a meaningless and incoherent “word”. The sound of words has remained and human beings still function and interact, but Word as a primary and stable truth – the Logos of God – that has come under attack.[2]

He wrote this essay without a discussion of deconstruction (my college copy of Spivak’s English version of Of Grammatology is dated 1974, 1976; the first printing of Henry’s essays are dated 1976) or the (for obvious reasons) the Internet. Thus, his discussions of both distance between meaning and words, as well as the ubiquity of media, not only remain true but have actually become more certain.

On one hand we have the Word of God. Christianity posits Spirit and Word as the primary constitutes of existence. First, God is spirit (John 4:24). As the Westminster Shorter Catechism has it:

Q: What is God?

A: God is a Spirit, infinite, eternal, and unchangeable, in his being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness, and truth.

John 1:1 famously explains “The Word was God.” The knowledge of God comes about because God speaks. Nothing would exist apart from the Speaking God: “God said, Let there be light” (Genesis 1:3). The material world of images comes after the Spirit and Word.[3] The world itself exists, because the Word of God upholds it, continually (John 1:3; Colossians 1:15-17; Hebrews 1:3).

On the other hand stands the cacophony of media. Now, Henry does not denigrate or despise the media because it is media. Rather the trouble lies in what it does. It has taken the pre-existing problem of meaning and world (which human beings attempt to escape; Romans 1:18). However, it has “indubitably widened and compounded the crisis of word and truth” (18).

Henry notes the common criticism that the nature of the media is such that it does not respond to matters of significance with significant attention.  He quotes Malcolm Muggeridge, “’the fact that the medium has no message. In the last resort, the media have nothing to say ….’” (18).

The media portray matters for the purpose of gaining attention and thus,

Final truth, changeless good, and the one true and living God are by default largely programed out of the real world. Despite occasional ethical commentary and some special coverage of religious events and moral issues, the media tend more to accommodate than to critique the theological and ethical ambiguities of our time. Their main devotion to what gratifies the viewing and reading audiences plays no small part in eclipsing God and fixed moral principles from contemporary life (18-19).

The barrage of immediate gratification removes the sense of shame and horror that should accompany the sight of such.  Public degradation engenders sports, not shame and sorrow. He again Muggeridge on the matter of “’accustoming us to the gradual deterioration of our values’” (19). While every age has thought itself (at least by some) to be the depths of depravity, it goes without saying that much which would have been unthinkable at the time of the essay would be unremarkable in public media today.[4]

Should I read this morning’s news, I would learn of extraordinary acts of pain and sorrow throughout the world. My view of the matter would be incessant, vivid, personal – and yet, there would be (and is) not easy matter of involvement. Thus, I come to human suffering (and glory) as peeping Tom. I cannot form an appropriate moral response – I cannot really do much. Hucksters will try to take my money. Politicians will use words to gain some immediate attention (and most often do nothing remotely useful).

This process affects human beings spiritually. It is a direct affront to the proclamation of God’s truth. It is an affront to the bare concept of “truth” – which ultimately lies with the primal temptation wherein the Serpent questions, word and meaning and logic:

4 But the serpent said to the woman, “You will not surely die. 5 For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” Genesis 3:4–5 (ESV)

While individual actors seek to turn truth word to manipulation and sales-pitch for personal gain (I pity the poor soul who takes political rhetoric at face value, much like one how gives a scorpion a ride[5]), the ultimate object is spiritual: it is an attack upon the very concept of revelation by God in Word – which is the heart of Christianity.

Some may think that little loss. However, the basis of Christian revelation is also the basis of what it is to be human:[6]

To strip words of any necessary or legitimate role as a revelatory resource denies not only the intelligibility of revelation, but also the very rationality of human existence. Nonverbal experience cannot supply today’s generation with fruitful alternatives to the spiritual emptiness of the times; the cavernous silence of a speechless world echoes not a single syllable of hope. To deverbalize an already depersonalized society is all the more to dehumanize it.

How can one engage in either true personal interaction or societal and corporate interaction when words are stripped of stability, and promise of its hold? Robert Frost ends his wonderful poem, “Stopping by the Woods on a Snowy Evening” with marvelous point,

            But I have promises to keep ….

What human interaction can there be without promise? Yes, human beings can live and breathe and die. Yes, by sheer force and violence a political entity can force itself along. But what humanity remains? What truth or beauty, what love or charm remain?

Henry ends with the proposition that it is the duty of the Christian to not succumb to the spirit of this age, but rather proclaim the “divine invasion” of the Logos, the truth of God, the prophetic Word.

Robert Frost reading, “Stopping by the Woods”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfOxdZfo0gs

 

[1] Carl Ferdinand Howard Henry, vol. 1, God, Revelation, and Authority (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 1999), 16-17.

[2] Although not discussed in this essay, Nietzsche’s arguments in Genealogy of Morals would certainly have an interesting bearing upon the point.

[3] This does require any Gnostic “fall” into matter. The physical world was created “very good.” The distress of the physical derives from sin (Romans 8:20). The redemption of humanity is not out of the physical world into a purely “spiritual” existence, as if the trouble were physicality. Rather, the redemption is to a resurrection, to a New Heavens and New Earth (1 Cor. 15:42-49; Rev. 21 & 22). Thus, Christianity differs strongly from either a Gnostic spite of the physical or a materialist’s denial of the spiritual.

[4] Some may point to matters of “racism” [I have word in quotations, because as a Christian, I must consider the matter of “races” itself suspect and repellant; there is a single human race; there are various cultural structures which people create, but these have no ground separate grounds of human value and being] as an area of advancement.  However, polite society has in some instances moved around certain discourse markers, the same nonsensical “racial” beliefs still exist. I remember being perplexed as a child that somehow George Washington Carver did not “belong” to me – even though he was a an American (as I was) and Christian (as was I) and a Scientist (which I longed to be), but that his skin color put him into a different and alien category – why is that primary to anything?

[6] As a Christian, I think it obvious that the correlative lies in the fundamental truth of the Christian claim.

Christopher Love, The Mortified Christian: Case Three: Will We Sin Again?

09 Wednesday Jan 2013

Posted by in Biblical Counseling, Christopher Love, Genesis, Mortification, Puritan

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

Love sets out a third “case of conscience”: “May a man whose lusts and corruptions are truly mortified by the Spirit of God commit and fall often into those sins that have been mortified?”

Love answers this in two parts: (1) Scripture does not record instances of one who has fallen into an obvious and gross sin, who then falls into that sin again. On this point, I must beg to disagree with Love.  Abraham bizarrely falls into cowardice concerning his wife, first with Pharaoh and later with Abimelech (Genesis 12 & 20).

Love does provide a good model for understanding the proper use of descriptive texts:  A descriptive text does not tell us everything about a topic – the specific cannot always be raised to a general.  For example, a miraculous work of through an Apostle (Acts 3), does not mean that all Christians will perform miraculous works of God.

Thus, Love quotes William Perkins, to the effect, “There is nothing in reason and experience that assure you that a corruption mortified, especially if it is an inward and secret sin, may not break forth again after you have repented of it” (101).  However, Love does not merely rest upon reason and experience (which are themselves no more than specific instances or conclusions drawn from specific instances): “There is nothing in the whole Bible against it that says expressly or by consequence [a logical deduction] that you cannot fall into the same sins after they are mortified.”  Then, as a pastor he wisely adds, “Therefore, this is something for your comfort.”

This does not mean that we should just shrug off a second or third (or nth fall) into sin.  To continue to fall into a sin threatens our heart – it makes it hard. It sets our conscience against, and like a determined detective, the conscience will hound us.  And finally, “I do not say that it is damnable, but it is a dangerous and deadly symptom, a sign of death upon you.

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

02 Wednesday Jan 2013

Posted by in Ecclesiastes, Genesis, John

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

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

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.

See How He Bows His Head

31 Monday Dec 2012

Posted by in Genesis, George Whitefield, Preaching

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , ,

See how he bows his head, and at length humanity gives up the ghost! Isaac is saved, but Jesus, the God of Isaac, dies; A ram is offered up in Isaac’s room, but Jesus has no substitute; Jesus must bleed, Jesus must die; God the Father provided this Lamb for himself from all eternity. He must be offered in time, or man must be damned for evermore. And now, where are your tears? Shall I say, refrain your voice from weeping? No; rather let me exhort you to look to him whom you have pierced, and mourn, as a woman mourneth for her first-born: for we have been the betrayers, we have been the murderers of this Lord of glory; and shall we not bewail those sins, which brought the blessed Jesus to the accursed tree? Having so much done, so much suffered for us, so much forgiven, shall we not love much! O! let us love Him with all our hearts, and minds, and strength, and glorify him in our souls and bodies, for they are his. Which leads me to a second inference I shall draw from the foregoing discourse.

Abraham’s Offering Up His Son Isaac
George Whitefield

Mystical Bedlam.2

28 Friday Dec 2012

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

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

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.

Michael Horton on the Covenantal Image of God

22 Saturday Dec 2012

Posted by in Genesis, Michael Horton, Psalms

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

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

Michael Horton (The Christian Faith) contrasts biblical anthropology with materialist/Decartes/enlightment understanding of the self on one side and a (neo)plantonic/Gnostic/pagan understanding on the other. Descartes, “arrived at his concept of the autonomous res cogitans (thinking thing) by abstracting himself from the world and his mind from his body in contemplative solitude” (379) [granted Descartes was not an absolute materialist in the strictest sense].  The materialist “locates human origins in primordial violence in the apparently meaningless lust for survival”. It reults in a sovereign, “a sovereign moral legislator and constructor of reality” (380).

 

The (neo)Plantonic/Gnostic worldview tends to pantheism (or panentheism) whereby human life follows from some break with a higher ideal, some sort of “primordial falling away from being caused by embodiment” (380); wherein the divine spark will make its way back through some means — such as secret “gnosis”.  The body exists as some sort of tomb which must be escaped.

 

Few persons actually hold a consistent philosophical position. The worldviews create various tensions and points of contradiction, and thus most people hold their positions loosely and move between the poles as needed.  Thus, someone like the “material magician” (perhaps Anaxagoras would fit the bill) mentioned in Screwtape Letters. A friend used the phrase “California Buddhism” to capture the reincarnation as a means to continued selfishness paradigm of California.

 

Tony Reincke in Lit! writes, “First, it’s important that we understand that each person’s worldview is assembled from many composite details….The worldview of an author – no matter how complementary or contradictory it appears – is informed by a collection of elements. This explains why at many points the Christian worldview can and will agree at times with the ingredients in a non-Christian worldvew” (58).

 

What these various worldviews hold in common “is what Charles Taylor calls disengagement — the tendency of modern anthropology not only toward individualism but toward a sense of selfhood that is inward and independent not only of God but of the world in which it lives. This trajectory toward the disengaged self surely begins already in the Platonic myth of the divine immortal soul striving to ascend above its imprisonment in the realm of appearances” (380).

 

This contrasts with the biblical worldview: God created Adam (the human being) into a relationship. The human being exists with a created spirit and body, a human being which partakes of the image of God, but is not a small bit of divinity (neo)Platonism, nor bare matter (materialism): “[T]he Bible places human beings in a dramatic narrative that defines their existence as inherently covenantal — fully engaged with God, with each other, and with nonhuman creation. Instead of drawing us deeper within ourselves, a convenantal anthropology draws us outward, where we find ourselves responsible to God and our neighbors. Since we were summoned into being by the powerful Word of the covenant Lord, this covenantal relationality is essential to our being human. There are not first autonomous individuals who then may (or may not) enter into covenantal relations” (380).

 

It is on this basis that Christians contend that certain moral standards exist independently of one’s determination to accept those standards are not. Meaning, ethics, exist inherently in the nature of the creation and are no more a matter of consent than gravity (Rom. 1:18; 2:15, 3:23, etc). Horton writes, “It is not, therefore, that unbelievers are no longer related to God…However faint, the sense of belonging to a covenant of creation is natural, a verbum internum ….”(385).

 

The Christian thus responds to the other human as one born with rights and obligations inherent in being a human being. The dignity which a Christian must confer about another human qua human derives from one’s bare existence. But such dignity derives from relationship of one as born into a status of relating to God and to man and to all Creation.

 

(The contention that such a statement is an “imposition” fails when given by a claimed position of autonomy: one’s “autonomy” can claim no knowledge beyond one’s immediate preference or taste. Moreover, by merely stating the position, the Christian does not “impose” anything.

 

One may assert that the Christian is position is “wrong”. As a Christian, I would unquestionably assert that any other comprehensive worldview is “wrong”.  However, the autonomous self, which seeks a position of not being “judged” cannot claim that the position is correct.)

 

 

Politics

 

Horton draws out an interesting implication of one’s covenantal status by fact of Creation:

 

So every human person is born into this world as an image-bearer of God, installed into an office that, from conception, one holds as a traitor.…Because every person is created in God’s image, he or she is a dignified bearer of rights and a responsible moral agent, accountable before God for his or her response to his command. This why human rights do not derive from the authority of the individual, the majority, or the state, but from God alone. (385)

 

An implication here is that rights cannot be taken from an individual by any institution.  This relates to the Reformed doctrines concerning freedom of conscience (a matter which took a substantial time to work out).

 

In addition, by depriving another being of the responsibilities inherent with existence in the status of an image bearer of God, the State (or other institution) dehumanizes another. I expect little from my dog and less from my fish than I do from my son, because my son is a human being and my fish is a fish. To expect less is to demean.

 

Environment

 

Commenting on the command to Adam to “work and keep” the Garden,  Horton notes that the command is given to Adam to care for God’s creation. The command of dominion in Genesis 1 & 2

 

is not an autonomous exploitation or violent domination but a mandate ‘to work …and keep’ (Gen. 2:15) the sanctuary [the Garden] in its holiness, driving the serpent from the Garden and extending God’s reign of righteousness, justice, and peace.

 

Because the creation is neither divine nor demonic, neither something to be worshiped nor something to be despised and destroyed, violence of the human vice-regent against creation can be understood only as an alliance with Satan. To say that ‘earth is the LORD’s and the fullness thereof’ (Ps. 24:1) is to say two things: that the earth is not God and that it is not ours (399).

 

Revelation 11:16 promises that the Lord God [the Creation title of God in Genesis 2] will “destor[y] the destroyers of the earth.”

Stupdenous Love.1 (Edward Taylor, Text and Notes)

30 Friday Nov 2012

Posted by in 2 Corinthians, Edward Taylor, Genesis, Meditation, Psalms, Puritan

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

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

Stupendous Love! All saints’ astonishment.!
Bright angels are black motes in this sun’s light.
Heav’n’s canopy the paintice to God’s tent
Can’t cover’t neither with its breadth, nor height.
Its glory doth all glory else out run,
Beams of bright glory to’t are motes i’th’sun.

The poem itself will speak of the blessing to be had by the life that receives the glory of God shone in the incarnate Son of God. In this introductory paragraph, Taylor plays off two understandings of the word “glory”. He contrasts the greater glory of God in Jesus Christ with the lesser glory of things created.

Jesus is more glorious than either the sunlight or even angels. To make the contrast, we must understand that there is a glory in the creation:”The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork.”Psalms 19:1

The sun and the stars stand at the beginning of God’s great glory in creation: “And God made the two great lights-the greater light to rule the day and the lesser light to rule the night-and the stars.”Genesis 1:16
(A wonderful sermon on this verse can be found here: http://media.calvarybiblechurch.org.s3.amazonaws.com/audio/sermon/2011/20111211.mp3)

Angels, likewise, are glorious in their beauty. For example, Matthew describes the angel who rolled away the stone from Jesus’ tomb, “His appearance was like lightning, and his clothing white as snow” (Matthew 28:3).

Jesus, with Moses and Elijah on the Mount of Transfiguration also have radiant glory:

2 And after six days Jesus took with him Peter and James and John, and led them up a high mountain by themselves. And he was transfigured before them,3 and his clothes became radiant, intensely white, as no one on earth could bleach them. 4 And there appeared to them Elijah with Moses, and they were talking with Jesus. Mark 9:2-4.

God himself dwells in light:

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

Yet, there is a greater glory of the Son which transcends even light. The references in the Psalms to the King and the King in glory are references to the Son who is the true king. That image is picked up in John to refer to Jesus’ coming as glorious.

1 O LORD, in your strength the king rejoices, and in your salvation how greatly he exults! 2 You have given him his heart’s desire and have not withheld the request of his lips. Selah 3 For you meet him with rich blessings; you set a crown of fine gold upon his head. 4 He asked life of you; you gave it to him, length of days forever and ever. 5 His glory is great through your salvation; splendor and majesty you bestow on him.6 For you make him most blessed forever; you make him glad with the joy of your presence. 7 For the king trusts in the LORD, and through the steadfast love of the Most High he shall not be moved. Psalm 21:1-7

7 Lift up your heads, O gates! And be lifted up, O ancient doors, that the King of glory may come in.
8 Who is this King of glory? The LORD, strong and mighty, the LORD, mighty in battle!
9 Lift up your heads, O gates! And lift them up, O ancient doors, that the King of glory may come in.
10 Who is this King of glory? The LORD of hosts, he is the King of glory! Selah Psalm 24:7-10

14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth.15 (John bore witness about him, and cried out, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me ranks before me, because he was before me.'”)16 And from his fullness we have all received, grace upon grace.17 For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.18 No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father’s side, he has made him known. John 1:14

And yet there was a veiling of the glory of the Son which the Son prays to be revealed. Jesus, in what is known as the High Priestly Prayer of John 17 prays:

20 “I do not ask for these only, but also for those who will believe in me through their word, 21 that they may all be one, just as you, Father, are in me, and I in you, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me. 22 The glory that you have given me I have given to them, that they may be one even as we are one, 23 I in them and you in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that you sent me and loved them even as you loved me. 24 Father, I desire that they also, whom you have given me, may be with me where I am, to see my glory that you have given me because you loved me before the foundation of the world. 25 O righteous Father, even though the world does not know you, I know you, and these know that you have sent me. 26 I made known to them your name, and I will continue to make it known, that the love with which you have loved me may be in them, and I in them.” John 17:20-25.

The sight of this glory is the gift of God:

7 Now if the ministry of death, carved in letters on stone, came with such glory that the Israelites could not gaze at Moses’ face because of its glory, which was being brought to an end,8 will not the ministry of the Spirit have even more glory?9 For if there was glory in the ministry of condemnation, the ministry of righteousness must far exceed it in glory.10 Indeed, in this case, what once had glory has come to have no glory at all, because of the glory that surpasses it.11 For if what was being brought to an end came with glory, much more will what is permanent have glory.

12 Since we have such a hope, we are very bold,13 not like Moses, who would put a veil over his face so that the Israelites might not gaze at the outcome of what was being brought to an end.14 But their minds were hardened. For to this day, when they read the old covenant, that same veil remains unlifted, because only through Christ is it taken away.15 Yes, to this day whenever Moses is read a veil lies over their hearts.16 But when one turns to the Lord, the veil is removed.17 Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom.18 And we all, with unveiled face, beholding the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from one degree of glory to another. For this comes from the Lord who is the Spirit.

1 Therefore, having this ministry by the mercy of God, we do not lose heart.2 But we have renounced disgraceful, underhanded ways. We refuse to practice cunning or to tamper with God’s word, but by the open statement of the truth we would commend ourselves to everyone’s conscience in the sight of God.3 And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled only to those who are perishing.4 In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.5 For what we proclaim is not ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, with ourselves as your servants for Jesus’ sake.6 For God, who said, “Let light shine out of darkness,” has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ. 2 Corinthians 3:7-4:6.

Thus, the joy of Taylor is both in the beauty of what he sees, but also in the gift: both of the glory of the Son and the sight of that glory.

It is the sight of and the desire for such sight which transforms the Christian:

1 See what kind of love the Father has given to us, that we should be called children of God; and so we are. The reason why the world does not know us is that it did not know him. 2 Beloved, we are God’s children now, and what we will be has not yet appeared; but we know that when he appears we shall be like him, because we shall see him as he is. 3 And everyone who thus hopes in him purifies himself as he is pure. 1 John 3:1-3

The reference to God’s tent is most particularly a reference to the sky. However, there seems to a recollection of the glory of God overwhelming the temple — which took over for the tent of meeting, the traveling tabernacle:

1 As soon as Solomon finished his prayer, fire came down from heaven and consumed the burnt offering and the sacrifices, and the glory of the LORD filled the temple.2 And the priests could not enter the house of the LORD, because the glory of the LORD filled the LORD’s house.3 When all the people of Israel saw the fire come down and the glory of the LORD on the temple, they bowed down with their faces to the ground on the pavement and worshiped and gave thanks to the LORD, saying, “For he is good, for his steadfast love endures forever.” 1 Chronicles 7:1-3

Whitefield’s Sermons: Seed of the Woman.1

15 Monday Oct 2012

Posted by in Church History, Genesis, George Whitefield, Preaching

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

Whitefield’s sermon “The Seed of the Woman and the Seed of the Serpent” provides a useful model for preaching on a narrative text. First, Whitefield notes the pertinent plot points. When considering an epistle (which seems to be the standard text seminary students are taught to teach), each individual verb, each clause or phrase may for the basis for the sermon point. Indeed, a single sentence may form the basis for a sermon.

Narrative functions in a fundamentally different manner. While the verbs or adjectives are plainly important, they should typically not form the basis of a sermon outline. A narrative reduces to a plot summary (again, there are exceptions to everything; this is a general rule). The narrative conveys information by means of the story. The shifts in the story form the basis of the outline.

Whitefield takes the first half Genesis 3 as his basic text. He breaks the story down into four basic parts:

1. The fall of mankind.

2.  The consequences of disobedience.

3.  The free grace of God.

4.  The continuing struggle.

 

These elements are based upon the primary shifts of movement in the story. The best way to gain the feel for such plot points is to (1) read narrative: short stories, novels, plays; (2) practice outlining the plot of stories.  The biblical stories function in the same basic manner as fiction or well-told history. 

Many preach poorly because they read and think so little. Extra-biblical literature first alerts one to the nature of human thinking: it teaches one who human beings actually consider the world.  Most popular culture will be so poorly done that it is difficult to extract much of value from the work. However, that does not mean that one should neglect such things. Yet, one should take the most time with the best.  Most popular culture will be derivative in the worst sense and thus there is little to learn from sustained exposure.

In addition, the best writers teach how to write and speak. There is no surer way to improve in writing than by improving in reading.

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

04 Thursday Oct 2012

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

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

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

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.